公共财政支持高新技术产业发展方法与政策研究
|
摘要
20世纪80年代以来,发达国家将高新技术产业做为重点推动的关键性产业,取得了不菲的成果。对发展中国家而言,高新技术产业是实现新型工业化、产业结构升级和有限赶超的有效路径。不过,高新技术产业的高投入、高风险和外部性等特征,常常导致高新技术产业研发私人投入水平低于社会最优水平,存在市场失灵,由此,政府介入,特别是公共财政介入高新技术产业发展是一种必然的、合理的选择。对于中国而言,特别是在当前世界金融危机背景下,研究公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的方法、政策工具、力度、规模和政策绩效,具有较强的理论和现实意义。本文将在探讨公共财政支持高新技术产业发展理论依据的基础上,研究公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策工具,为加速我国高新技术产业健康发展提供科学依据。文章主要从三个方面展开分析。
文章第一部分从理论的角度研究公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的依据和方法。文章首先探讨了高新技术产业的特征和发展过程;接着论述高新技术产业在经济增长中的重要作用,以及高新技术产业改造传统产业的机制与路径;最后,文章重点讨论了公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策工具,特别是各种政策工具的作用与特征。通过这些分析我们认为,公共财政支持高新技术产业发展可以有效矫正高新技术产业私人投入不足等市场失灵,并且,财政补贴、税收优惠、金融支持和政府购买等政策工具是解决这些问题的有效手段。
文章第二部分从历史经验的视角研究了世界主要发达国家公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的经验,以及公共财政支持高新技术产业在中国的发展历程与政策绩效。世界主要发达国家在高新技术产业发展方面具有领先优势,我们首先分析了世界主要发达国家在财政补贴、税收优惠、金融支持和政府购买等支持高新技术产业发展的具体方法、手段、力度和范围,总结其成功经验。高新技术产业具有区域集聚的特征,由此,我们还分析了这些国家支持高新技术产业的区域发展政策;接着,文章总结了发达国家政策实践对中国公共财政政策制定方面的借鉴与启示。为了探寻中国高新技术产业的发展特征,文章运用随机前沿生产函数测算了中国高新技术产业五大行业的技术进步效率。最后,文章在分析公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的主要政策工具及其政策绩效的基础上,运用面板数据模型,分别测算了1991～2006年、1991～1995年、1996～2001年和2001～2006年公共财政在高新技术产业发展中的作用。实证结果表明,在1991～2006年的16年间,公共财政对高新技术产业研发投入每增加一个百分点,可以使高新技术产业产出增加1.577%,其中1996～2000年的财政支持贡献最大。结果还发现,公共财政在高新技术产业发展中的作用仅次于企业研发投入。可见,加大公共财政对高新技术产业的研发投入意义重大。
经济学研究的目的在于为现实政策制定提供指南。文章第三部分重点探讨了完善我国公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策建议。文章首先分析了我国公共财政支持高新技术产业发展方面存在的问题,主要体现在:①相关法律体系不健全,致使财政支持政策缺乏连续性和规范性;②公共财政激励政策大多以区域瞄准为主,产业瞄准相对较弱;③税收优惠政策以直接优惠为主;④各种政策激励措施缺乏灵活性,没有针对经济发展不同阶段做出快捷的适用性调整。接着,文章提出了今后政策调整的具体建议:①完善公共财政投入机制,转变支持方式。不断拓宽研发资金渠道,积极建立与完善以政府投入为主导、企业投入为主体的全社会研发投入体系,根据高新技术的特点,摸索新的支持方式,形成层次分明、重点突出、整体协调的多元化财政支持政策体系;②集中力量,重点支持。改变过去点多面广、分散支持的作法,集中资金支持企业技术创新的薄弱环节;③继续加大财政投资的规模,增加政府对科研开发的专项要素投入,提高高新技术产业的要素生产率;④注重产业优惠和区域优惠的综合应用,营造良好的高科技行业发展环境,提高政策激励的瞄准效率;⑤税收优惠政策逐步实现间接优惠为主。
通过上述研究,本文的贡献在于:①从政策实践的角度,提出了改善我国公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策建议和具体操作工具;②文章分析和比较了财政补贴、税收优惠、金融支持和政府采购等政策工具支持高新技术产业发展的理论依据,以及四种政策作用效果和作用方式上的差异;③文章测算了我国高新技术产业五大行业的全要素生产率、前沿技术进步与技术变化效率,以及各行业之间存在差异的原因,为财政支持方向提供了依据。
Since 1980s, new high-tech industry has become the key industry emphasized in most developed economies. For developing countries, building new high-tech industry is a short cut to industrialization, upgrade of industrial structure, and catch-up to developed economies. High investment, high risk, externality, and so forth are the characteristics of new high-tech industry and notwithstanding, more often than not, private sector's R&D investment in new high-tech industry are less than that of social optimum, and thus the intervention of government, especially the infusion of public spending is an inevitable and sound choice. In this paper, I aim to provide a scientific foundation to the acceleration of development of high tech industry in China, by exploring effectiveness of public finance policies to high tech industry; investigate the impact of various policy tools, including combination of policy and its scale, on the R&D behavior of high tech industries. This kind of research is crucial for the development of China, especially under the current international financial crisis.
This study is composed of three parts: The first part is a description of the theoretical foundation of public finance supports toward the development of new high-tech industry. First, I explore the characteristics and developing stages of new high-tech industry; second, I compare the role that high-tech industry plays in economic growth with that of traditional industry, and how the high-tech industry can help in improving the development of traditional industry. Finally, an in depth analysis is made to discusses the mechanism that public spending can do to enhance the improvement of new high-tech industry, especially highlights the characteristics of effects of all kinds of policy instruments. By the analysis, we conclude that aiding the development of new high-tech industry through public finance can at least partially correct market failure, resulted from underinvestment of private sector, in new high-tech industry. Moreover, sophisticated application of such policy tools, such as grant-in-aid, tax preference, financial supports, and governmental purchases, can be an effective remedy.
In the second part of the paper, in addition to the review of the past efforts of China aimed to the development of high-tech industry, I examine the experiences of the main developed countries on their support of development of new high-tech industry. With developed countries' leading position in the development of new high-tech industry, we investigate their secretes of success in terms of public finance policies. Since regional agglomeration also plays an important part in the success of development of high-tech industry, we analyze the development policies in encouraging agglomeration in these countries. Subsequently, I summarize the lessons from these countries as a guide to our public finance policy-making.
To keep track of development of new high-tech industry in China, and its main factors affecting the chance of success, I calculate technical progress efficiency of the five largest industries in new high-tech industry in China through the stochastic frontier production function. Finally, by using panel data, I analyze the impacts of public finance policies on the high-tech industry for the 4 main periods since "reform and opening": 1991 to 2006, 1991 to 1995, 1996 to 2001, and 2001 to 2006 respectively. The empirical results show that output of new high-tech industry would rise by 1.577% if a 1% increase in investment in new high-tech industry by public spending in the sixteen years period from 1991 to 2006, while contribution from public finance to the development of new high-tech industry is the largest from 1996 to 2000. The empirical results also suggest that the role that public finance policies plays in the in the development of new high-tech industry is only second to firms' own R&D investment. Therefore, it is of great importance to increase the public investments to R&D in new high-tech industry.
The pivotal aim of economics research lies in providing guidance for policy-making. The third part of the paper puts forth public finance policy suggestions in the development of new high-tech industry of China. Currently, there are some problems lies in the policy support of new high-tech industry remains to be solved: first, the incomplete law system regarding industry development cause the stimulating polices not continual or its effect not measurable. Second, most policies are aiming at development of geographical regions not industries. Third, tax preference gives priority to direct favor. Fourth, inflexible policies aiming to stimulate the development of policies are in their nature unable to adapt to the quick changing economic environment. Due to these concerns I propose the following suggestions to the public fiance policies making in the future: First, improve the infusion mechanism of public finance policies, widen R&D fund channels with the same emphasis of private and governmental sectors, and identify the characteristics of high-tech industry and design finance policy accordingly. Second, choose the right industry to support, and thus concentrate the resource to make the supports most effective. Third, expand the scale of governmental investment and invest in the focused industry project and thus promote the productivity of the new high-tech industry. Fourth, focus on both regional and industrial development, and utilize the complementarities among them to create an ideal development environment for new high-tech industry.
By the former analysis, the contribution of the paper lies in the following: first, from the perspective of policy application, it has provided a operational suggestion to improve the public finance policy that aims to support the progress of high-tech industry. Second, A theoretical analysis and comparison of policy effectiveness is made between public expenditure, tax benefit, financial subsidy, and government purchase. Third, To provide a foundation for future direction of public spending, this paper has provided a measure, for the five largest sub-industry categories of high-tech industry, of the full factor production rate, the frontier technical progress, the efficiency of technological change, and also the reason why there is a variance for each measure among different industries.
文章第一部分从理论的角度研究公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的依据和方法。文章首先探讨了高新技术产业的特征和发展过程;接着论述高新技术产业在经济增长中的重要作用,以及高新技术产业改造传统产业的机制与路径;最后,文章重点讨论了公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策工具,特别是各种政策工具的作用与特征。通过这些分析我们认为,公共财政支持高新技术产业发展可以有效矫正高新技术产业私人投入不足等市场失灵,并且,财政补贴、税收优惠、金融支持和政府购买等政策工具是解决这些问题的有效手段。
文章第二部分从历史经验的视角研究了世界主要发达国家公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的经验,以及公共财政支持高新技术产业在中国的发展历程与政策绩效。世界主要发达国家在高新技术产业发展方面具有领先优势,我们首先分析了世界主要发达国家在财政补贴、税收优惠、金融支持和政府购买等支持高新技术产业发展的具体方法、手段、力度和范围,总结其成功经验。高新技术产业具有区域集聚的特征,由此,我们还分析了这些国家支持高新技术产业的区域发展政策;接着,文章总结了发达国家政策实践对中国公共财政政策制定方面的借鉴与启示。为了探寻中国高新技术产业的发展特征,文章运用随机前沿生产函数测算了中国高新技术产业五大行业的技术进步效率。最后,文章在分析公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的主要政策工具及其政策绩效的基础上,运用面板数据模型,分别测算了1991～2006年、1991～1995年、1996～2001年和2001～2006年公共财政在高新技术产业发展中的作用。实证结果表明,在1991～2006年的16年间,公共财政对高新技术产业研发投入每增加一个百分点,可以使高新技术产业产出增加1.577%,其中1996～2000年的财政支持贡献最大。结果还发现,公共财政在高新技术产业发展中的作用仅次于企业研发投入。可见,加大公共财政对高新技术产业的研发投入意义重大。
经济学研究的目的在于为现实政策制定提供指南。文章第三部分重点探讨了完善我国公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策建议。文章首先分析了我国公共财政支持高新技术产业发展方面存在的问题,主要体现在:①相关法律体系不健全,致使财政支持政策缺乏连续性和规范性;②公共财政激励政策大多以区域瞄准为主,产业瞄准相对较弱;③税收优惠政策以直接优惠为主;④各种政策激励措施缺乏灵活性,没有针对经济发展不同阶段做出快捷的适用性调整。接着,文章提出了今后政策调整的具体建议:①完善公共财政投入机制,转变支持方式。不断拓宽研发资金渠道,积极建立与完善以政府投入为主导、企业投入为主体的全社会研发投入体系,根据高新技术的特点,摸索新的支持方式,形成层次分明、重点突出、整体协调的多元化财政支持政策体系;②集中力量,重点支持。改变过去点多面广、分散支持的作法,集中资金支持企业技术创新的薄弱环节;③继续加大财政投资的规模,增加政府对科研开发的专项要素投入,提高高新技术产业的要素生产率;④注重产业优惠和区域优惠的综合应用,营造良好的高科技行业发展环境,提高政策激励的瞄准效率;⑤税收优惠政策逐步实现间接优惠为主。
通过上述研究,本文的贡献在于:①从政策实践的角度,提出了改善我国公共财政支持高新技术产业发展的政策建议和具体操作工具;②文章分析和比较了财政补贴、税收优惠、金融支持和政府采购等政策工具支持高新技术产业发展的理论依据,以及四种政策作用效果和作用方式上的差异;③文章测算了我国高新技术产业五大行业的全要素生产率、前沿技术进步与技术变化效率,以及各行业之间存在差异的原因,为财政支持方向提供了依据。
Since 1980s, new high-tech industry has become the key industry emphasized in most developed economies. For developing countries, building new high-tech industry is a short cut to industrialization, upgrade of industrial structure, and catch-up to developed economies. High investment, high risk, externality, and so forth are the characteristics of new high-tech industry and notwithstanding, more often than not, private sector's R&D investment in new high-tech industry are less than that of social optimum, and thus the intervention of government, especially the infusion of public spending is an inevitable and sound choice. In this paper, I aim to provide a scientific foundation to the acceleration of development of high tech industry in China, by exploring effectiveness of public finance policies to high tech industry; investigate the impact of various policy tools, including combination of policy and its scale, on the R&D behavior of high tech industries. This kind of research is crucial for the development of China, especially under the current international financial crisis.
This study is composed of three parts: The first part is a description of the theoretical foundation of public finance supports toward the development of new high-tech industry. First, I explore the characteristics and developing stages of new high-tech industry; second, I compare the role that high-tech industry plays in economic growth with that of traditional industry, and how the high-tech industry can help in improving the development of traditional industry. Finally, an in depth analysis is made to discusses the mechanism that public spending can do to enhance the improvement of new high-tech industry, especially highlights the characteristics of effects of all kinds of policy instruments. By the analysis, we conclude that aiding the development of new high-tech industry through public finance can at least partially correct market failure, resulted from underinvestment of private sector, in new high-tech industry. Moreover, sophisticated application of such policy tools, such as grant-in-aid, tax preference, financial supports, and governmental purchases, can be an effective remedy.
In the second part of the paper, in addition to the review of the past efforts of China aimed to the development of high-tech industry, I examine the experiences of the main developed countries on their support of development of new high-tech industry. With developed countries' leading position in the development of new high-tech industry, we investigate their secretes of success in terms of public finance policies. Since regional agglomeration also plays an important part in the success of development of high-tech industry, we analyze the development policies in encouraging agglomeration in these countries. Subsequently, I summarize the lessons from these countries as a guide to our public finance policy-making.
To keep track of development of new high-tech industry in China, and its main factors affecting the chance of success, I calculate technical progress efficiency of the five largest industries in new high-tech industry in China through the stochastic frontier production function. Finally, by using panel data, I analyze the impacts of public finance policies on the high-tech industry for the 4 main periods since "reform and opening": 1991 to 2006, 1991 to 1995, 1996 to 2001, and 2001 to 2006 respectively. The empirical results show that output of new high-tech industry would rise by 1.577% if a 1% increase in investment in new high-tech industry by public spending in the sixteen years period from 1991 to 2006, while contribution from public finance to the development of new high-tech industry is the largest from 1996 to 2000. The empirical results also suggest that the role that public finance policies plays in the in the development of new high-tech industry is only second to firms' own R&D investment. Therefore, it is of great importance to increase the public investments to R&D in new high-tech industry.
The pivotal aim of economics research lies in providing guidance for policy-making. The third part of the paper puts forth public finance policy suggestions in the development of new high-tech industry of China. Currently, there are some problems lies in the policy support of new high-tech industry remains to be solved: first, the incomplete law system regarding industry development cause the stimulating polices not continual or its effect not measurable. Second, most policies are aiming at development of geographical regions not industries. Third, tax preference gives priority to direct favor. Fourth, inflexible policies aiming to stimulate the development of policies are in their nature unable to adapt to the quick changing economic environment. Due to these concerns I propose the following suggestions to the public fiance policies making in the future: First, improve the infusion mechanism of public finance policies, widen R&D fund channels with the same emphasis of private and governmental sectors, and identify the characteristics of high-tech industry and design finance policy accordingly. Second, choose the right industry to support, and thus concentrate the resource to make the supports most effective. Third, expand the scale of governmental investment and invest in the focused industry project and thus promote the productivity of the new high-tech industry. Fourth, focus on both regional and industrial development, and utilize the complementarities among them to create an ideal development environment for new high-tech industry.
By the former analysis, the contribution of the paper lies in the following: first, from the perspective of policy application, it has provided a operational suggestion to improve the public finance policy that aims to support the progress of high-tech industry. Second, A theoretical analysis and comparison of policy effectiveness is made between public expenditure, tax benefit, financial subsidy, and government purchase. Third, To provide a foundation for future direction of public spending, this paper has provided a measure, for the five largest sub-industry categories of high-tech industry, of the full factor production rate, the frontier technical progress, the efficiency of technological change, and also the reason why there is a variance for each measure among different industries.
引文
[1]Ahmed,P.K..Culture and Climate for Innovation..European Journal of Innovation Management,1998,1(1):30-43
[2]Aigner,J.,Lovell,K.and Schmidt,P..Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models,Journal of Econometric,1977,6:21-37
[3]Andreas Panagopoulos..the Role of Sequential Innovations and R&D Workers in Limiting Scale Effects.The Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics,2005,16(2):207-216
[4]Arrow,K.J..Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions.In:R.R.Nelson.The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity:Economic and Social Factors.Princeton,NJ:Princeton University Press,1962
[5]Arrow,Kenneth J..The Economic Implication of Learning by Doing,Review of Economic Studies,1962,29:155-173
[6]Ayse Banu Goktan..The Role of Strategy in The Innovation Process:A Stage Approach.PQDD,2005:1-207
[7]Battese,E..Frontier Production Functions and Technical Efficiency:A Survey of Empirical Application in Agricultural Economics,Agricultural Economics,1992,7:185-208
[8]Battese,E.and Coelli,T..Frontier Production Functions,Technical Efficiency and Panel Data:With Application to Paddy Farmers in India,Journal of Productivity Analysis,1992,3:153-169
[9]Battese,E.and Coelli,T..A Model of Technical Inefficiency Effects in Stochastic Frontier Production for Panel Data,Empirical Economics,1995,20:325-332
[10]Bessen,J..Patent and the Diffusion of Technical Information.In:Working Paper.Research on Innovation.Boston:Boston University School of Law,2004
[11] Bhattacharya S, D Mookherjee. Portfolio Choice in Research and Development. Rand Journal of Economics, 1986,17: 549-605
[12] Bronwyn Hall, John Van Reenen. How Effective are Fiscal Incentives for R&D? A Review of the Evidence. Research Policy, 2000,29: 449-469
[13] Cabral, L.M.B. R&D Competition when Firms Choose Variance. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 2003,12(1): 139-150
[14] Chen, Chin-Tai, Chen-Fu Chien, Ming-Han Lin and Jung-Te Wang. Using DEA to Evaluate R&D Performance of the Computers and Peripherals Firms in Taiwan, International Journal of Business, 2004, 9
[15] Coelli T J.. A Guide to DEAP Version.2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (Computer) Program. Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis (CEPA) Working Papers, 1996, 8
[16] Conceicao Vedovello.. Firms' R&D Activity and Intensity and the University- Enterprise Partnerships. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 1998, 58: 215-226
[17] Dasgupta, P., E. Maskin.. The Simple Economics of Research Portfolios. Economic Journal, 1987, 97: 581-595
[18] Denicolo V., L.A.Franzoni.. Patents, Secrets and the First Inventor Defense. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 2004,13(3): 517-538
[19] Doris Schartinger, Christian Rammera, Manfred M. Fischer, Josef Frohlich.. Knowledge Interactions between Universities and Industry in Austria: Sectoral Patterns and Determinants. Research Policy, 2002, 31: 303-328
[20] Eirik Gaard Kristiansen. R&D and Buyer's Waiting Option. The Journal of Industrial Economics March, 2006, [V(1): 31-42
[21] Eugenio J. Miravete, Jose C. Pernias.. Innovation Complementary and Scale of Production. The Journal of Industrial Economics March, 2006, L(1): 1-30
[22] Fishman Arthur, Rafael Rob.. Product Innovation by a Durable Good Monopoly. Rand Journal of Economics,2000,31(2):237-253
[23]Greve H.R..A Behavioral Theory of R&D Expenditures and Innovations:Evidence from Shipbuilding.Academy of Management Journal,2003,46(6):685-702
[24]Golany B,F Y Phillips and J J Rousseau.Models for Improved Effectiveness Based on DEA Efficiency Results.IIE Transactions,1993,25
[25]Hans Lofsten,Peter Lindelof..R&D Networks and Product Innovation Patterns-academic and Non-academic New Technology-based Firms on Science Parks.Technovation,2005,25:1025-1037
[26]Harold Z.Daniela,Donald J.Hempelb,Narasimhan Srinivasan..A model of Value Assessment in Collaborative R&D Programs,Industrial Marketing Management,2002,31:653-664
[27]Harun Bulut.Three Essays on the Economics of Innovation.PQDD,2005:1-145
[28]Heiko A.Gerlach,Thomas Ronde,Konrad Stahl..Project Choice and Risk in R&D.The Journal of Industrial Economics,2005,3:53-82
[29]Herbert I.Fusfeld,Carmela S.Haklisch..University-industry Research Interactions -A Guide to the Proceedings.Technology in Society,1983,5(3):157-163
[30]Heydebreck,P.,Klofsten,M..Innovation Support for New Technology-based Firms:the Swedish Teknopol Approach.R&D Management,2000,30:89-100
[31]Hong Liu,Yunzhong Jiang..Technology Transfer from Higher Education Institutions to Industry in China:Nature and Implications.Technovation,2001,21:175-188
[32]Hurley R.f..Group Culture and its Effect on Innovative Productivity.Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,1995,12:57-75
[33]Kessler E.H,Chakrabarti A.K..Innovation Speed:A Conceptual Model of Context,Antecedents,and Outcomes.Academy of Management Review,1996,21(4):1143-1191
[34]Krugman,P.R..A Model of Innovation,Technology Transfer,and the World Distribution of Income. Journal of Political Economy, 1979, 87: 253-266
[35] Larry Huston, Nabil Sakkab.. Connect & Develop: Inside Proctor & Gamble's New Model for Innovation. Harvard Business Review, 2006, 3: 58-66
[36] Lau Kam-Tim, Brada Joseff C. Technological Progress and Technical Efficiency in Chinese Industrial Growth: A Frontier Production Function Approach. China Economic Review, 1990,1:114-124
[37] Loury Glenn. Market Structure and Innovation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 93, 3:395-410
[38] Madhouse, William D.. Alternative Methods for Measuring Productivity Growth. NBER Working Paper 8095,2001
[39] Mansfield, E.. Tax Policy and Innovation. Science, 1982,12: 1365-1371
[40] Mansfield, E.. The R&D Tax Credit and Other Technology Policy Issues. The American Economic Review. 1986, 76(2): 190-194
[41] Marco Ceccagnoli.. Firm Heterogeneity, Imitation and the Incentives for Cost Reducing R&D Effort. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 2005,3(1): 83-100
[42] Mark Gottfredson, Keith Aspinall. Innovation Versus Complexity: What is Too Much of a Good Thing. Harvard Business Review, 2005,11: 62-71
[43] Martin, S., Scott, J.. the Nature of Innovation Market Failure and the Design of Public Support for Private Innovation. Research Policy, 2000,29: 437-447
[44] McGrath R.G, Tsai M.H, Venkatraman, MacMillan, I.C.. Innovation, Competitive Advantage and Rent: A model and a Test. Management Science, 1996, 42(3): 389-403
[45] Merchant, J., the Role of Governments in a Market Economy: Future Strategies for the High-tech Industry in America. Production Economics, 1997(52): 117-131
[46] Nathan Rosenberg, Richard R. Nelson., American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry. Research Policy, 1994, 23(3): 323-348
[47] Nardhaus W.. Invention, Growth and Welfare. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1969
[48] OECD. Tax Incentives for Research and Development: Trends and Issues. OECD Science Technology Industry, 2002: 1-37
[49] Parthasarthy R., Hammond J. Product Innovation Input and Outcome: Moderating Effects of the Innovation Process. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2002,19: 75-91
[50] Reinganum, Jennifer. Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly: Reply. American Economic Review, 1984, 74(1): 243-246
[51] Reinhilde Veugelersa, T, Bruno Cassimana. R&D Cooperation between Firms and Universities, Some Empirical Evidence from Belgian Manufacturing. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2005,23: 355-379
[52] R. M. Davies. Industry-university Collaborations: a Necessity for the Future. Journal of Dentistry, 1996,24(2): 3-5
[53] Robert J.W. Tijssen. Universities and Industrially Relevant Science: Towards Measurement Models and Indicators of Entrepreneurial Orientation. Research Policy, 2006,35:1569-1585
[54] Robert J. Barro, Xavier Sala-i-Martin. Economic Growth. 1995, McGraw-Hill, Inc
[55] Romer, Paul M.. Increasing Return and Long-Run Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 1986, 94: 1002-1037
[56] Rose Sheinin.. Canadian Science Policy -The Role of the Universities. Technology in Society, 1989,11(2): 267-287
[57] Robert J.W. Tijssen.. Universities and Industrially Relevant Science, towards Measurement Models and Indicators of Entrepreneurial Orientation. Research Policy, 2006,35:1569-1585
[58] Schumpeter J.. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926
[59] Schumpeter, J. A.. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1934
[60]Schumpeter,J.A..Theory of Economic Development.Oxford University Press,1961
[61]Scotchmer,S..Innovation and Incentives.Cambridge,MA:the MIT Press.2004
[62]Song M.,Xie J..Does Innovativeness Moderate the Relationship between cross Functional Integration and Product Performance?.Journal of International Marketing,2000,8(4):61-89
[63]Solow,Robert M..A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.Quarterly Journal of Ecomomics,1956,70:65-94
[64]Tassey,G..Choosing Government R&D Policies:Tax Incentives vs.Direct Funding.Review of Industrial Organization,1996,11:579-600
[65]Tsongas,E.G..Full Likelihood Inference in Normal Grammar Stochastic Frontier Models,Journal of Productivity Analysis,2000,13:179-201
[66]Tsongas,E.G..Stochastic Frontier Models with Random Coefficients.Journal of Applied Econometrics,2002,17:127-147
[67]Van Pottelsberghe B.,Nysten S.and Megally E..Evaluation of Current Incentives for Business R&D in Belgium.CEB Working Paper,2003
[68]Yu-Feng Ma,Yeoung-Jai Goo..Technical Efficiency and Productivity Change in China's High and New-Technology Industry Development Zones.Asian Business &Management,2005,4
[69]Zhang,Anming,Yimin Zhang and Ronald Zhao.A Study of the R&D Efficiency and Productivity of Chinese Firms.Journal of Comparative Economics,2003,31
[70]北京师范大学经济与资源管理研究所课题组.信息技术产业对国民经济影响程度的分析.经济研究,2001,12:17-26
[71]毕颖.高新技术产业的政府政策扶持与我国政府的政策取向.河北经贸大学学报,2000,3
[72]陈广汉,蓝宝江.研发支出、竞争程度与我国区域创新能力研究,经济学家, 2007,3:101-105
[73]陈慧琴.技术引进与技术进步研究.北京:经济管理出版社,1997
[74]陈晓光.教育、创新与经济增长.经济研究,2006,10:18-29
[75]丛明.促进高新技术产业发展的税收政策取向.上海投资,2003,11
[76]戴晨,刘怡.税收优惠与财政补贴对企业R&D影响的比较分析.经济科学,2008,3:58-71
[77]董雪兵,史晋川.累计创新框架下的知识产权保护研究,经济研究,2006,5:97-105
[78]国家经贸委投资与规划司考察组.公共财政与企业技术进步:国际经验.企业技术进步,2002,3
[79]国家计委高技术产业发展司.中国高技术产业发展报告:“十五”重大问题研究.北京:中国计划出版社,2001
[80]国家统计局.中国高技术产业统计年鉴(2007).北京:中国统计出版社,2007
[81]韩松,王稳.几种技术效率测量方法的比较研究.中国软科学,2004,4
[82]胡卫.研究与开发产出知识品与科技财政的职能定位.探索,2004,1:82-85
[83]黄跃胜.中国中小企业技术创新政策与创新模式研究.长沙:中南大学博士论文数据库,2002
[84]金碚.高技术在中国产业发展中的地位和作用.中国工业经济,2003,12:5-10
[85]孔翔.Robert Marks.万广华.国有企业全要素生产率变化及其决定因素:1991-1994.经济研究,1999,7:40-48
[86]李军.中国高技术产业园区评价理论分析与指标体系.数量经济技术经济研究,2002,5:68-73
[87]李珂.高新技术产业发展的财税政策.经济论坛,2004,6:79-80
[88]李丽青.企业R&D投入与国家税收政策研究.西安:西北大学博士论文数据库,2006:24-42
[89]李丽青.中外激励企业R&D投入的税收优惠政策比较及思考.科学与科学技术管理,2005,1:22-25
[90]李明智,王娅莉.我国高技术产业全要素生产率及其影响因素的定量分析.科技管理研究,2005,6
[91]李新春,宋宇,蒋年云.高科技创业的地区差异.中国社会科学,2004,3:17-30
[92]李一峰,张利华,刘玉兰.国家863计划成果产业化基地投入产出效率分析.科研管理,2004,7
[93]刘富铀.企业技术创新的投入收益与激励研究.天津:天津大学博士论文数据库,2003:52-53
[94]柳剑平,郑绪涛,喻美辞.税收、补贴与R&D溢出效应分析.数量经济与技术经济研究,2005,12:81-90
[95]刘树林,吴赐联.高技术园区技术效率与规模指数--基于DEA的实证研究.统计与信息论坛,2006,5
[96]柳卸林.21世纪的中国技术创新系统.北京:北京大学出版社,2000
[97]罗伯特·J.巴罗.宏观经济学现代观点.上海:上海三联出版社,2008
[98]罗伟,连燕华,方新.技术创新与政府政策.北京:人民出版社.1996
[99]吕薇.高新技术产业政策与实践.北京:中国发展出版社,2003
[100]邵一华.马庆国.中国高技术产业与传统产业要素重配置效应分析.科研管理,2001,3
[101]沈爱华.推进我国高新技术产业发展的对策思考.华东经济管理,2003,2:29-30
[102]盛昭瀚.朱乔.吴广谋.DEA理论、方法与应用.北京:科学出版社,1996
[103]史丹,李晓斌.高技术产业发展的影响因素及其数据检验.中国工业经济,2004,12:32-39
[104]宿泽民.政府科技拨款资助对我国企业R&D支出的影响研究.广州:暨南大学硕士论文数据库.2007
[105]孙健夫.支持高新技术产业发展的公共财政政策研究.河北大学学报,2004,1
[106]魏权龄.数据包络分析.北京:科学出版社,2004
[107]吴宝.公共科技支出对企业创新投入的影响:对中国的实证分析.杭州:浙江工业大学,2006
[108]吴晓晖,程华.国外R&D税收激励研究现状及思考.科技进步与对策,2005,11:25-27
[109]吴秀波.税收激励对R&D投资的影响:实证分析与政策工具选拔.研究与发展管理,2003,1:36-41
[110]吴延兵.R&D存量、知识函数与生产效率.经济学季刊,2006,7:1129-1155
[111]萧延高,唐小我.我国高新技术产业化的战略地位与政策环境分析.电子科技大学学报,2000,2
[112]谢芬芳.改进高新技术产业税收优惠政策的思考.湖南社会科学,2002,3:66-68
[113]熊彼特.经济发展理论.北京:商务印书馆,1990
[114]许玉明.中国高技术产业的科技进步贡献率分析.中国西部科技,2005,9
[115]许治,师萍.基于DEA方法的我国科技投入相对效率评价.科学学研究,2005,4:481-484
[116]姚洋.章奇.中国工业企业技术效率分析.经济研究,2001,10
[117]袁宁.高新技术产业化中的技术转移机制.科技管理研究,2004,6:54-56
[118]曾方.技术创新中的政府行为--理论框架和实证分析.上海:复旦大学图书馆博士论文数据库,2003:16-22
[119]张国初.前沿生产函数要素使用效率的全要素生产率.数量经济技术经济研究,1996,9:32-341
[120]张鸿.促进高新技术产业发展的科技税收优惠政策研究.科学管理研究,2001,4:62-68
[121]张培刚.张建华.发展经济学教程.北京:经济科学出版社,2008
[122]张平.公共财政体制下产业技术创新政策的选择.中国科技论坛,2003,11
[123]张雄.OECD国家激励研发支出的税收政策及借鉴.涉外税务,2004,12:62-67
[124]章卫民,劳剑东,李湛.我国科技型中小企业的政策支持体系及阶段性特征.上海经济研究,2007,12:12-18
[125]郑玉歆.张晓.张思奇.技术效率,技术进步及其对生产率的贡献:沿海工业企业调查的初步分析.数量经济技术经济研究,1995,12:20-271
[126]郑玉歆.全要素生产率的测度及经济增长方式的阶段性规律:由东亚经济增长 方式的争论谈起.经济研究,1999,5:55-61
[127]朱平芳,徐伟民.政府的科技激励政策对大中型工业企业R&D投入及其专利产出的影响--上海市的实证研究.经济研究,2003,6:45-54
[128]朱有为,徐康宁.中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究.中国工业经济,2006,11
[2]Aigner,J.,Lovell,K.and Schmidt,P..Formulation and Estimation of Stochastic Frontier Production Function Models,Journal of Econometric,1977,6:21-37
[3]Andreas Panagopoulos..the Role of Sequential Innovations and R&D Workers in Limiting Scale Effects.The Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics,2005,16(2):207-216
[4]Arrow,K.J..Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions.In:R.R.Nelson.The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity:Economic and Social Factors.Princeton,NJ:Princeton University Press,1962
[5]Arrow,Kenneth J..The Economic Implication of Learning by Doing,Review of Economic Studies,1962,29:155-173
[6]Ayse Banu Goktan..The Role of Strategy in The Innovation Process:A Stage Approach.PQDD,2005:1-207
[7]Battese,E..Frontier Production Functions and Technical Efficiency:A Survey of Empirical Application in Agricultural Economics,Agricultural Economics,1992,7:185-208
[8]Battese,E.and Coelli,T..Frontier Production Functions,Technical Efficiency and Panel Data:With Application to Paddy Farmers in India,Journal of Productivity Analysis,1992,3:153-169
[9]Battese,E.and Coelli,T..A Model of Technical Inefficiency Effects in Stochastic Frontier Production for Panel Data,Empirical Economics,1995,20:325-332
[10]Bessen,J..Patent and the Diffusion of Technical Information.In:Working Paper.Research on Innovation.Boston:Boston University School of Law,2004
[11] Bhattacharya S, D Mookherjee. Portfolio Choice in Research and Development. Rand Journal of Economics, 1986,17: 549-605
[12] Bronwyn Hall, John Van Reenen. How Effective are Fiscal Incentives for R&D? A Review of the Evidence. Research Policy, 2000,29: 449-469
[13] Cabral, L.M.B. R&D Competition when Firms Choose Variance. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 2003,12(1): 139-150
[14] Chen, Chin-Tai, Chen-Fu Chien, Ming-Han Lin and Jung-Te Wang. Using DEA to Evaluate R&D Performance of the Computers and Peripherals Firms in Taiwan, International Journal of Business, 2004, 9
[15] Coelli T J.. A Guide to DEAP Version.2.1: A Data Envelopment Analysis (Computer) Program. Centre for Efficiency and Productivity Analysis (CEPA) Working Papers, 1996, 8
[16] Conceicao Vedovello.. Firms' R&D Activity and Intensity and the University- Enterprise Partnerships. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 1998, 58: 215-226
[17] Dasgupta, P., E. Maskin.. The Simple Economics of Research Portfolios. Economic Journal, 1987, 97: 581-595
[18] Denicolo V., L.A.Franzoni.. Patents, Secrets and the First Inventor Defense. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 2004,13(3): 517-538
[19] Doris Schartinger, Christian Rammera, Manfred M. Fischer, Josef Frohlich.. Knowledge Interactions between Universities and Industry in Austria: Sectoral Patterns and Determinants. Research Policy, 2002, 31: 303-328
[20] Eirik Gaard Kristiansen. R&D and Buyer's Waiting Option. The Journal of Industrial Economics March, 2006, [V(1): 31-42
[21] Eugenio J. Miravete, Jose C. Pernias.. Innovation Complementary and Scale of Production. The Journal of Industrial Economics March, 2006, L(1): 1-30
[22] Fishman Arthur, Rafael Rob.. Product Innovation by a Durable Good Monopoly. Rand Journal of Economics,2000,31(2):237-253
[23]Greve H.R..A Behavioral Theory of R&D Expenditures and Innovations:Evidence from Shipbuilding.Academy of Management Journal,2003,46(6):685-702
[24]Golany B,F Y Phillips and J J Rousseau.Models for Improved Effectiveness Based on DEA Efficiency Results.IIE Transactions,1993,25
[25]Hans Lofsten,Peter Lindelof..R&D Networks and Product Innovation Patterns-academic and Non-academic New Technology-based Firms on Science Parks.Technovation,2005,25:1025-1037
[26]Harold Z.Daniela,Donald J.Hempelb,Narasimhan Srinivasan..A model of Value Assessment in Collaborative R&D Programs,Industrial Marketing Management,2002,31:653-664
[27]Harun Bulut.Three Essays on the Economics of Innovation.PQDD,2005:1-145
[28]Heiko A.Gerlach,Thomas Ronde,Konrad Stahl..Project Choice and Risk in R&D.The Journal of Industrial Economics,2005,3:53-82
[29]Herbert I.Fusfeld,Carmela S.Haklisch..University-industry Research Interactions -A Guide to the Proceedings.Technology in Society,1983,5(3):157-163
[30]Heydebreck,P.,Klofsten,M..Innovation Support for New Technology-based Firms:the Swedish Teknopol Approach.R&D Management,2000,30:89-100
[31]Hong Liu,Yunzhong Jiang..Technology Transfer from Higher Education Institutions to Industry in China:Nature and Implications.Technovation,2001,21:175-188
[32]Hurley R.f..Group Culture and its Effect on Innovative Productivity.Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,1995,12:57-75
[33]Kessler E.H,Chakrabarti A.K..Innovation Speed:A Conceptual Model of Context,Antecedents,and Outcomes.Academy of Management Review,1996,21(4):1143-1191
[34]Krugman,P.R..A Model of Innovation,Technology Transfer,and the World Distribution of Income. Journal of Political Economy, 1979, 87: 253-266
[35] Larry Huston, Nabil Sakkab.. Connect & Develop: Inside Proctor & Gamble's New Model for Innovation. Harvard Business Review, 2006, 3: 58-66
[36] Lau Kam-Tim, Brada Joseff C. Technological Progress and Technical Efficiency in Chinese Industrial Growth: A Frontier Production Function Approach. China Economic Review, 1990,1:114-124
[37] Loury Glenn. Market Structure and Innovation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 93, 3:395-410
[38] Madhouse, William D.. Alternative Methods for Measuring Productivity Growth. NBER Working Paper 8095,2001
[39] Mansfield, E.. Tax Policy and Innovation. Science, 1982,12: 1365-1371
[40] Mansfield, E.. The R&D Tax Credit and Other Technology Policy Issues. The American Economic Review. 1986, 76(2): 190-194
[41] Marco Ceccagnoli.. Firm Heterogeneity, Imitation and the Incentives for Cost Reducing R&D Effort. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 2005,3(1): 83-100
[42] Mark Gottfredson, Keith Aspinall. Innovation Versus Complexity: What is Too Much of a Good Thing. Harvard Business Review, 2005,11: 62-71
[43] Martin, S., Scott, J.. the Nature of Innovation Market Failure and the Design of Public Support for Private Innovation. Research Policy, 2000,29: 437-447
[44] McGrath R.G, Tsai M.H, Venkatraman, MacMillan, I.C.. Innovation, Competitive Advantage and Rent: A model and a Test. Management Science, 1996, 42(3): 389-403
[45] Merchant, J., the Role of Governments in a Market Economy: Future Strategies for the High-tech Industry in America. Production Economics, 1997(52): 117-131
[46] Nathan Rosenberg, Richard R. Nelson., American Universities and Technical Advance in Industry. Research Policy, 1994, 23(3): 323-348
[47] Nardhaus W.. Invention, Growth and Welfare. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1969
[48] OECD. Tax Incentives for Research and Development: Trends and Issues. OECD Science Technology Industry, 2002: 1-37
[49] Parthasarthy R., Hammond J. Product Innovation Input and Outcome: Moderating Effects of the Innovation Process. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2002,19: 75-91
[50] Reinganum, Jennifer. Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly: Reply. American Economic Review, 1984, 74(1): 243-246
[51] Reinhilde Veugelersa, T, Bruno Cassimana. R&D Cooperation between Firms and Universities, Some Empirical Evidence from Belgian Manufacturing. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 2005,23: 355-379
[52] R. M. Davies. Industry-university Collaborations: a Necessity for the Future. Journal of Dentistry, 1996,24(2): 3-5
[53] Robert J.W. Tijssen. Universities and Industrially Relevant Science: Towards Measurement Models and Indicators of Entrepreneurial Orientation. Research Policy, 2006,35:1569-1585
[54] Robert J. Barro, Xavier Sala-i-Martin. Economic Growth. 1995, McGraw-Hill, Inc
[55] Romer, Paul M.. Increasing Return and Long-Run Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 1986, 94: 1002-1037
[56] Rose Sheinin.. Canadian Science Policy -The Role of the Universities. Technology in Society, 1989,11(2): 267-287
[57] Robert J.W. Tijssen.. Universities and Industrially Relevant Science, towards Measurement Models and Indicators of Entrepreneurial Orientation. Research Policy, 2006,35:1569-1585
[58] Schumpeter J.. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926
[59] Schumpeter, J. A.. The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,1934
[60]Schumpeter,J.A..Theory of Economic Development.Oxford University Press,1961
[61]Scotchmer,S..Innovation and Incentives.Cambridge,MA:the MIT Press.2004
[62]Song M.,Xie J..Does Innovativeness Moderate the Relationship between cross Functional Integration and Product Performance?.Journal of International Marketing,2000,8(4):61-89
[63]Solow,Robert M..A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.Quarterly Journal of Ecomomics,1956,70:65-94
[64]Tassey,G..Choosing Government R&D Policies:Tax Incentives vs.Direct Funding.Review of Industrial Organization,1996,11:579-600
[65]Tsongas,E.G..Full Likelihood Inference in Normal Grammar Stochastic Frontier Models,Journal of Productivity Analysis,2000,13:179-201
[66]Tsongas,E.G..Stochastic Frontier Models with Random Coefficients.Journal of Applied Econometrics,2002,17:127-147
[67]Van Pottelsberghe B.,Nysten S.and Megally E..Evaluation of Current Incentives for Business R&D in Belgium.CEB Working Paper,2003
[68]Yu-Feng Ma,Yeoung-Jai Goo..Technical Efficiency and Productivity Change in China's High and New-Technology Industry Development Zones.Asian Business &Management,2005,4
[69]Zhang,Anming,Yimin Zhang and Ronald Zhao.A Study of the R&D Efficiency and Productivity of Chinese Firms.Journal of Comparative Economics,2003,31
[70]北京师范大学经济与资源管理研究所课题组.信息技术产业对国民经济影响程度的分析.经济研究,2001,12:17-26
[71]毕颖.高新技术产业的政府政策扶持与我国政府的政策取向.河北经贸大学学报,2000,3
[72]陈广汉,蓝宝江.研发支出、竞争程度与我国区域创新能力研究,经济学家, 2007,3:101-105
[73]陈慧琴.技术引进与技术进步研究.北京:经济管理出版社,1997
[74]陈晓光.教育、创新与经济增长.经济研究,2006,10:18-29
[75]丛明.促进高新技术产业发展的税收政策取向.上海投资,2003,11
[76]戴晨,刘怡.税收优惠与财政补贴对企业R&D影响的比较分析.经济科学,2008,3:58-71
[77]董雪兵,史晋川.累计创新框架下的知识产权保护研究,经济研究,2006,5:97-105
[78]国家经贸委投资与规划司考察组.公共财政与企业技术进步:国际经验.企业技术进步,2002,3
[79]国家计委高技术产业发展司.中国高技术产业发展报告:“十五”重大问题研究.北京:中国计划出版社,2001
[80]国家统计局.中国高技术产业统计年鉴(2007).北京:中国统计出版社,2007
[81]韩松,王稳.几种技术效率测量方法的比较研究.中国软科学,2004,4
[82]胡卫.研究与开发产出知识品与科技财政的职能定位.探索,2004,1:82-85
[83]黄跃胜.中国中小企业技术创新政策与创新模式研究.长沙:中南大学博士论文数据库,2002
[84]金碚.高技术在中国产业发展中的地位和作用.中国工业经济,2003,12:5-10
[85]孔翔.Robert Marks.万广华.国有企业全要素生产率变化及其决定因素:1991-1994.经济研究,1999,7:40-48
[86]李军.中国高技术产业园区评价理论分析与指标体系.数量经济技术经济研究,2002,5:68-73
[87]李珂.高新技术产业发展的财税政策.经济论坛,2004,6:79-80
[88]李丽青.企业R&D投入与国家税收政策研究.西安:西北大学博士论文数据库,2006:24-42
[89]李丽青.中外激励企业R&D投入的税收优惠政策比较及思考.科学与科学技术管理,2005,1:22-25
[90]李明智,王娅莉.我国高技术产业全要素生产率及其影响因素的定量分析.科技管理研究,2005,6
[91]李新春,宋宇,蒋年云.高科技创业的地区差异.中国社会科学,2004,3:17-30
[92]李一峰,张利华,刘玉兰.国家863计划成果产业化基地投入产出效率分析.科研管理,2004,7
[93]刘富铀.企业技术创新的投入收益与激励研究.天津:天津大学博士论文数据库,2003:52-53
[94]柳剑平,郑绪涛,喻美辞.税收、补贴与R&D溢出效应分析.数量经济与技术经济研究,2005,12:81-90
[95]刘树林,吴赐联.高技术园区技术效率与规模指数--基于DEA的实证研究.统计与信息论坛,2006,5
[96]柳卸林.21世纪的中国技术创新系统.北京:北京大学出版社,2000
[97]罗伯特·J.巴罗.宏观经济学现代观点.上海:上海三联出版社,2008
[98]罗伟,连燕华,方新.技术创新与政府政策.北京:人民出版社.1996
[99]吕薇.高新技术产业政策与实践.北京:中国发展出版社,2003
[100]邵一华.马庆国.中国高技术产业与传统产业要素重配置效应分析.科研管理,2001,3
[101]沈爱华.推进我国高新技术产业发展的对策思考.华东经济管理,2003,2:29-30
[102]盛昭瀚.朱乔.吴广谋.DEA理论、方法与应用.北京:科学出版社,1996
[103]史丹,李晓斌.高技术产业发展的影响因素及其数据检验.中国工业经济,2004,12:32-39
[104]宿泽民.政府科技拨款资助对我国企业R&D支出的影响研究.广州:暨南大学硕士论文数据库.2007
[105]孙健夫.支持高新技术产业发展的公共财政政策研究.河北大学学报,2004,1
[106]魏权龄.数据包络分析.北京:科学出版社,2004
[107]吴宝.公共科技支出对企业创新投入的影响:对中国的实证分析.杭州:浙江工业大学,2006
[108]吴晓晖,程华.国外R&D税收激励研究现状及思考.科技进步与对策,2005,11:25-27
[109]吴秀波.税收激励对R&D投资的影响:实证分析与政策工具选拔.研究与发展管理,2003,1:36-41
[110]吴延兵.R&D存量、知识函数与生产效率.经济学季刊,2006,7:1129-1155
[111]萧延高,唐小我.我国高新技术产业化的战略地位与政策环境分析.电子科技大学学报,2000,2
[112]谢芬芳.改进高新技术产业税收优惠政策的思考.湖南社会科学,2002,3:66-68
[113]熊彼特.经济发展理论.北京:商务印书馆,1990
[114]许玉明.中国高技术产业的科技进步贡献率分析.中国西部科技,2005,9
[115]许治,师萍.基于DEA方法的我国科技投入相对效率评价.科学学研究,2005,4:481-484
[116]姚洋.章奇.中国工业企业技术效率分析.经济研究,2001,10
[117]袁宁.高新技术产业化中的技术转移机制.科技管理研究,2004,6:54-56
[118]曾方.技术创新中的政府行为--理论框架和实证分析.上海:复旦大学图书馆博士论文数据库,2003:16-22
[119]张国初.前沿生产函数要素使用效率的全要素生产率.数量经济技术经济研究,1996,9:32-341
[120]张鸿.促进高新技术产业发展的科技税收优惠政策研究.科学管理研究,2001,4:62-68
[121]张培刚.张建华.发展经济学教程.北京:经济科学出版社,2008
[122]张平.公共财政体制下产业技术创新政策的选择.中国科技论坛,2003,11
[123]张雄.OECD国家激励研发支出的税收政策及借鉴.涉外税务,2004,12:62-67
[124]章卫民,劳剑东,李湛.我国科技型中小企业的政策支持体系及阶段性特征.上海经济研究,2007,12:12-18
[125]郑玉歆.张晓.张思奇.技术效率,技术进步及其对生产率的贡献:沿海工业企业调查的初步分析.数量经济技术经济研究,1995,12:20-271
[126]郑玉歆.全要素生产率的测度及经济增长方式的阶段性规律:由东亚经济增长 方式的争论谈起.经济研究,1999,5:55-61
[127]朱平芳,徐伟民.政府的科技激励政策对大中型工业企业R&D投入及其专利产出的影响--上海市的实证研究.经济研究,2003,6:45-54
[128]朱有为,徐康宁.中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究.中国工业经济,2006,11
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |