基于空间外溢效应的区域经济增长空间俱乐部趋同研究
|
摘要
近些年,围绕趋同假说展开的关于经济增长问题的讨论已经成为经济研究的前沿性问题。但是,在区域经济体的增长过程中,增长的动力不仅源于区域生产要素的禀赋状况,区域的地理位置及其邻居区域的经济绩效都会影响该区域自身的增长路径。本文以新古典经济增长理论和新经济地理学为理论基础,以区域空间外溢效应作为概念界定的基准,提出空间俱乐部趋同假说,在此基础上构建理论模型与经验研究框架。进而,综合运用探索性空间数据分析方法和空间计量经济学技术,在MATLAB、ArcGIS等软件的支撑下,以中国4个发展程度不同的经济区域作为研究对象,首先分别依次检验这4个区域内部是否具有显著的空间外溢效应,是否发生前文所定义的空间俱乐部趋同,如果发生,那么,符合哪种类型的空间趋同俱乐部,然后,进一步进行空间异质性分析,研究区域内部增长极的空间外溢效应,以明确异质性区域发生空间俱乐部趋同的可能原因,得到的主要结论如下:
(1)结合空间俱乐部趋同的经典定义和区域空间属性特征,本文给出了空间俱乐部趋同的定义,即指空间中地理位置邻近且初始条件和结构特征相似的一组区域的经济增长收敛于相同的稳态。这个概念强调了空间趋同俱乐部成员的空间属性,空间外溢效应是界定区域空间属性的基准。而空间外溢效应产生的直接原因是邻居区域的经济绩效。本文在充分考察理论与现实的基础上,将空间外溢效应的溢出路径分为3种类型:通过邻居区域人均收入增长率影响目标区域经济增长的空间外溢效应;通过邻居区域经济随机震荡影响目标区域经济增长的空间外溢效应;通过邻居区域的绝对人均收入水平影响目标区域经济增长的空间外溢效应。进而,考虑到不同发展程度空间趋同俱乐部内部空间外溢效应溢出路径差异的可能性,把空间趋同俱乐部又进一步的细化为以下6类型:邻居区域经济增长率水平引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域经济增长率水平引致的发展中空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域经济随机震荡引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域随机震荡引致的发展中空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域绝对收入水平引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域绝对收入水平引致的发展中空间趋同俱乐部。
(2)本文以新古典经济增长模型为框架构建了同质区域假设条件下的空间俱乐部趋同假说的理论模型,证明在存在空间外溢效应的情形下,从理论上不能无条件得出空间俱乐部趋同的结论,反而会受到相关参数的制约,这对于经验研究的启发是在现实世界中并非任何一个空间关联的区域组群内部均会发生空间俱乐部趋同,需要对其进行条件检验。进而,结合新经济地理学中的经典核心-外围模型,证明在异质性区域间无论是分散力还是聚集力占主导地位时,均从不同尺度支持本文提出的空间俱乐部趋同假说。
(3)本文选择两个发达区域——长江三角洲和珠江三角洲,和两个发展中区域——中原城市群和武汉城市群进行案例分析。结果表明,四个区域均表现为显著的空间自相关,因此可以首先确定在它们内部存在显著的空间外溢效应;两个发达地区的空间外溢效应溢出路径均表现为显著的绝对人均收入驱动,而两个发展中区域的溢出路径则表现为随机震荡驱动;在区域同质性假设下,空间俱乐部趋同假说检验结果表明,两个发达区域属于不同显著程度的邻居区域绝对收入水平引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部类型,而两个发展中区域属于不同显著程度的邻居区域随机震荡引致的欠发达空间趋同俱乐部类型;在考虑空间异质性的情形下,可以发现长江三角洲区域、珠江三角洲区域和中原城市群区域均表现为显著的核心-外围空间结构,武汉城市群呈现出的异质性区域结构特征并不十分明显;增长极的空间外溢效应分析表明,上述3个区域的空间外溢效应强度均显著高于非增长极的空间外溢效应,而武汉城市群仅表现为略高,从而证明异质性区域内部同样可以发生空间俱乐部趋同,其动力来自于增长极的强空间外溢效应。
In recent years, the discussion carried out around the convergence hypothesis of economic growth has become the forefront of issues. However, in the process of regional economic growth, the growth is driven not only from the regional production factors endowments, but geographical location of one region and the economic performance of its neighbors will affect its own growth path. In this paper, based on the neoclassical growth theory and new economic geography spatial club convergence is defined. The benchmarks of the concept are regional spatial spillover effects. After that theoretical models and empirical research framework are built. And then, the empirical research will be carried out using exploratory spatial data analysis and spatial econometric techniques, in the support of MATLAB, ArcGIS and other software. The objects of this paper are four economic regions of China with the different degree of development. Firstly the regions will be tested whether there are significant spatial spillover effects, and whether there has arisesd the spatial club convergence. If there is, which type of spatial convergence clubs they belong to? And then, in order to understand the reasons of spatial club convergence in the regions of heterogeneity, the analysis of spatial heterogeneity and the spatial spillover effects of growth poles will be carried out. The main conclusion is as follows:
(1) Combined with the classic definition of space club convergence and the regional spatial attributes, this paper put forward the definition of the spatial club convergence. This concept means that a group of regions will convergence at the same steady state if their locations are close and with the similar initial conditions and structural characteristics. This concept emphasizes the spatial properties of the members of the spatial convergence club. The spatial spillover effects are the benchmark to define the regional spatial properties. The direct cause of spatial spillover effects is the economic performance of its neighbors. Based on the theory and reality the spillover path of the spatial spillover effects is divided into 3 types: the spatial spillover effects through the affecting of the rate of regional per capita income growth of the neighbors; the spatial spillover effects through the affecting of the random shocks of the neighbors; the spatial spillover effects through the affecting of the level of per capita income of the neighbors. Furthermore, taking into account the possibility of the difference of the spillover path in different spatial convergence clubs the spatial convergence club will be divided into six types: developed spatial convergence club caused by the rate of regional per capita income growth of the neighbors; developing spatial convergence club caused by the rate of regional per capita income growth of the neighbors; developed spatial convergence club caused by the random shocks of the neighbors; developing spatial convergence club caused by the random shocks of the neighbors; developed spatial convergence club caused by the level of per capita income of the neighbors; developing spatial convergence club caused by the level of per capita income of the neighbors.
(2) In this paper, the theoretical model of spatial club convergence hypothesis is constructed within the framework of the neoclassical economic growth model of space under the assumptions of homogeneous regions. It is proved that in the presence of spatial spillover effects, we cannot get the conclusion of spatial club convergence unconditionally from the aspect of theory. It will be restricted by the relevant parameters. The illumination to the empirical study is that not all of groups of spatially associated regions will converge. It need be tested conditionally. And then, combined with the classical core - periphery model of the new economic geography, it is proved that the conclusions of that model will support the viewpoint of this paper from different aspect.
(3) It is chosen two developed regions - the Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta, and two developing regions– Zhongyuan urban agglomeration and Wuhan urban agglomeration as the cases in this paper. The conclusions are as follows. The four regions have showed significant spatial autocorrelation. Therefore it is firstly proved significant spatial spillover effect within them. The spillover path of the spatial spillover effects of the two developed regions is significantly driven by the level of per capita income of the neighbors. And the spillover path of the spatial spillover effects of the two developing regions is significantly driven by the random shocks of the neighbors. under the assumption of homogeneity the conclusions of the test of spatial club convergence hypothesis are the two developed regions belong to the developed spatial convergence club caused by the level of per capita income of the neighbors and the two developing regions belong to the developing spatial convergence club caused by the random shocks of the neighbors. In considering the case of spatial heterogeneity it can be found that a significant core - periphery structure are showed in the Yangtze River Delta, Pearl River Delta and the Zhongyuan urban agglomeration and not significant in wuhan urban agglomeration. The analysis of the spatial spillover effects of the growth poles proves that the spatial spillover effects of the growth poles are significantly higher than that of non-growth poles in the three regions and slightly higher in Wuhan urban agglomeration. So it is proved that the spatial club convergence can also occur within heterogeneous regions driven by the strong spatial spillover effects of growth poles.
(1)结合空间俱乐部趋同的经典定义和区域空间属性特征,本文给出了空间俱乐部趋同的定义,即指空间中地理位置邻近且初始条件和结构特征相似的一组区域的经济增长收敛于相同的稳态。这个概念强调了空间趋同俱乐部成员的空间属性,空间外溢效应是界定区域空间属性的基准。而空间外溢效应产生的直接原因是邻居区域的经济绩效。本文在充分考察理论与现实的基础上,将空间外溢效应的溢出路径分为3种类型:通过邻居区域人均收入增长率影响目标区域经济增长的空间外溢效应;通过邻居区域经济随机震荡影响目标区域经济增长的空间外溢效应;通过邻居区域的绝对人均收入水平影响目标区域经济增长的空间外溢效应。进而,考虑到不同发展程度空间趋同俱乐部内部空间外溢效应溢出路径差异的可能性,把空间趋同俱乐部又进一步的细化为以下6类型:邻居区域经济增长率水平引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域经济增长率水平引致的发展中空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域经济随机震荡引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域随机震荡引致的发展中空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域绝对收入水平引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部;邻居区域绝对收入水平引致的发展中空间趋同俱乐部。
(2)本文以新古典经济增长模型为框架构建了同质区域假设条件下的空间俱乐部趋同假说的理论模型,证明在存在空间外溢效应的情形下,从理论上不能无条件得出空间俱乐部趋同的结论,反而会受到相关参数的制约,这对于经验研究的启发是在现实世界中并非任何一个空间关联的区域组群内部均会发生空间俱乐部趋同,需要对其进行条件检验。进而,结合新经济地理学中的经典核心-外围模型,证明在异质性区域间无论是分散力还是聚集力占主导地位时,均从不同尺度支持本文提出的空间俱乐部趋同假说。
(3)本文选择两个发达区域——长江三角洲和珠江三角洲,和两个发展中区域——中原城市群和武汉城市群进行案例分析。结果表明,四个区域均表现为显著的空间自相关,因此可以首先确定在它们内部存在显著的空间外溢效应;两个发达地区的空间外溢效应溢出路径均表现为显著的绝对人均收入驱动,而两个发展中区域的溢出路径则表现为随机震荡驱动;在区域同质性假设下,空间俱乐部趋同假说检验结果表明,两个发达区域属于不同显著程度的邻居区域绝对收入水平引致的发达空间趋同俱乐部类型,而两个发展中区域属于不同显著程度的邻居区域随机震荡引致的欠发达空间趋同俱乐部类型;在考虑空间异质性的情形下,可以发现长江三角洲区域、珠江三角洲区域和中原城市群区域均表现为显著的核心-外围空间结构,武汉城市群呈现出的异质性区域结构特征并不十分明显;增长极的空间外溢效应分析表明,上述3个区域的空间外溢效应强度均显著高于非增长极的空间外溢效应,而武汉城市群仅表现为略高,从而证明异质性区域内部同样可以发生空间俱乐部趋同,其动力来自于增长极的强空间外溢效应。
In recent years, the discussion carried out around the convergence hypothesis of economic growth has become the forefront of issues. However, in the process of regional economic growth, the growth is driven not only from the regional production factors endowments, but geographical location of one region and the economic performance of its neighbors will affect its own growth path. In this paper, based on the neoclassical growth theory and new economic geography spatial club convergence is defined. The benchmarks of the concept are regional spatial spillover effects. After that theoretical models and empirical research framework are built. And then, the empirical research will be carried out using exploratory spatial data analysis and spatial econometric techniques, in the support of MATLAB, ArcGIS and other software. The objects of this paper are four economic regions of China with the different degree of development. Firstly the regions will be tested whether there are significant spatial spillover effects, and whether there has arisesd the spatial club convergence. If there is, which type of spatial convergence clubs they belong to? And then, in order to understand the reasons of spatial club convergence in the regions of heterogeneity, the analysis of spatial heterogeneity and the spatial spillover effects of growth poles will be carried out. The main conclusion is as follows:
(1) Combined with the classic definition of space club convergence and the regional spatial attributes, this paper put forward the definition of the spatial club convergence. This concept means that a group of regions will convergence at the same steady state if their locations are close and with the similar initial conditions and structural characteristics. This concept emphasizes the spatial properties of the members of the spatial convergence club. The spatial spillover effects are the benchmark to define the regional spatial properties. The direct cause of spatial spillover effects is the economic performance of its neighbors. Based on the theory and reality the spillover path of the spatial spillover effects is divided into 3 types: the spatial spillover effects through the affecting of the rate of regional per capita income growth of the neighbors; the spatial spillover effects through the affecting of the random shocks of the neighbors; the spatial spillover effects through the affecting of the level of per capita income of the neighbors. Furthermore, taking into account the possibility of the difference of the spillover path in different spatial convergence clubs the spatial convergence club will be divided into six types: developed spatial convergence club caused by the rate of regional per capita income growth of the neighbors; developing spatial convergence club caused by the rate of regional per capita income growth of the neighbors; developed spatial convergence club caused by the random shocks of the neighbors; developing spatial convergence club caused by the random shocks of the neighbors; developed spatial convergence club caused by the level of per capita income of the neighbors; developing spatial convergence club caused by the level of per capita income of the neighbors.
(2) In this paper, the theoretical model of spatial club convergence hypothesis is constructed within the framework of the neoclassical economic growth model of space under the assumptions of homogeneous regions. It is proved that in the presence of spatial spillover effects, we cannot get the conclusion of spatial club convergence unconditionally from the aspect of theory. It will be restricted by the relevant parameters. The illumination to the empirical study is that not all of groups of spatially associated regions will converge. It need be tested conditionally. And then, combined with the classical core - periphery model of the new economic geography, it is proved that the conclusions of that model will support the viewpoint of this paper from different aspect.
(3) It is chosen two developed regions - the Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta, and two developing regions– Zhongyuan urban agglomeration and Wuhan urban agglomeration as the cases in this paper. The conclusions are as follows. The four regions have showed significant spatial autocorrelation. Therefore it is firstly proved significant spatial spillover effect within them. The spillover path of the spatial spillover effects of the two developed regions is significantly driven by the level of per capita income of the neighbors. And the spillover path of the spatial spillover effects of the two developing regions is significantly driven by the random shocks of the neighbors. under the assumption of homogeneity the conclusions of the test of spatial club convergence hypothesis are the two developed regions belong to the developed spatial convergence club caused by the level of per capita income of the neighbors and the two developing regions belong to the developing spatial convergence club caused by the random shocks of the neighbors. In considering the case of spatial heterogeneity it can be found that a significant core - periphery structure are showed in the Yangtze River Delta, Pearl River Delta and the Zhongyuan urban agglomeration and not significant in wuhan urban agglomeration. The analysis of the spatial spillover effects of the growth poles proves that the spatial spillover effects of the growth poles are significantly higher than that of non-growth poles in the three regions and slightly higher in Wuhan urban agglomeration. So it is proved that the spatial club convergence can also occur within heterogeneous regions driven by the strong spatial spillover effects of growth poles.
引文
Abreu, M., Henri L.F. De Groot, and Raymond J.G.M. Florax , 2005, Space and Growth. Région et Développement 21: 13-40.
Adebanji A., Achia T., Ngetich R., Owino J., Wangombe A., 2008, Spatial Durbin Model for Poverty Mapping and Analysis. European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 194-204.
Aghion, P., Howitt, P., 1997, Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Andrada I P. and Timothy J., 2002, Testing Spatial Patten and Growth Spillover Effects in Cluster of Cities. Geographical Systems 8: 275-285.
Anselin L., 1988, Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Anselin L. and Rey S. J., 1997, Introduction to the Special Issue on Spatial Econometrics. International Regional Science Review 20(1-2): 1-7.
Anselin and Bera, 1998, Spatial Dependence in Linear Regression Models with an Introduction to Spatial Econometrics. Ullah A, Giles DEA (eds) Handbook of applied economic statistics, Marcel Dekker, New York: 237-289.
Anselin L., 2000, Spatial Econometrics. in Baltagi B.(Ed.)Companion to Econometrics, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Anselin, L., 2003, Spatial Externalities, Spatial Multipliers and Spatial Econometrics. International Regional Science Review 26 (2): 153-166.
Armstrong H., 1995, Convergence among Regions of the European Union, 1950-1990. Papers in Regional Science 74: 143-152.
Barro, R. J., 1991, Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries. Quarterly Journalof Economics 106: 407-443.
Barro,R. J. & X. Sala-I-Matin, 1991, Convergence across States and Regions. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: 107-182.
Barro, R. J. and X. Sala-i-Martin, 1992, Convergence. Journal of Political Economy 100: 223-251.
Barro, R. J., Mankiw N.G. and X. Sala-i-Martin, 1995, Capital Mobility in Neoclassical Models of Growth. American Economic Review 85: 103-115.
Baumol, William J., 1986, Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: What the Long Run Data Show? American Economic Review 76: 1072-85.
Baumont C., Cem Ertur and Julie Le Gallo, 2003, Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis of the Distribution of Regional Per Capita GDP in Europe, 1980-1995. Regional Science 82: 175-201.
Ben David D., 1994, Convergence Clubs and Diverging Economies. CEPR working paper 922.
Bernard, Andrew and Steven N. Durlauf, 1996, Interpreting Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis. Journal of Econometrics 71: 161-173.
Bernat, A., 1996, Does Manufacturing Matter? A Spatial Econometric View of Kaldor's Laws. Journal of Regional Science 36: 463-477.
Bode, E., 2002, Regional Economic Interaction and the Role of Growth Poles in East Germany’s Convergence Process, Paper prepared for presentation at the International Conference on Policy Modeling Brussels, July: 4-6.
Canova, Fabio and Albert Marcet, 1995, The Poor Stay Poor: Non-Convergence across Countries and Regions, Discussion Paper No. 1265, Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), London.
Carlino, G. A. and L. O. Mills, 1993, Are the US Regional Incomes Converging? A Time Series Analysis. Journal of Monetary Economics 32: 335-346.
Carlino G. and Mills L., 1996, Testing Neoclassical Convergence in Regional Incomes and Earnings, Regional Science and Urban Economics 26 (6): 565-590.
Carrington, Anca, 2003, A Divided Europe? Regional Convergence and Neighbourhood Spillover Effects. Kyklos 56 (3): 381-394.
Chatterji M. and Dewhurst J. H. Ll, 1996, Convergence Clubs and Relative Economic Performance in Great Britain: 1977-1991. Regional Studies 30 (1): 31-39.
Chua, Hak.B., 1993, On Spillovers and Convergence. PhD-Thesis, Harvard. Ciccone, Antonio and Robert E. Hall, 1996, Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity. American Economic Review 86(1): 54-70.
Coe D., Helpman E., 1995, International R&D Spillovers. European Economic Review 39: 859-887.
Dall'erba & Le Gallo, 2008, Regional Convergence and the Impact of European Structural Funds over 1989-1999:A Spatial Econometric Analysis. Papers in Regional Science 87(2): 219-244.
De la Fuente, Angel, 1997, The Empirics of Growth and Convergence: A Selective Review. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 21: 23-73.
De Long, Bradford J., 1988, Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: A Comment. American Economic Review 78: 1138-54.
Durlauf, Steven. and Paul A. Johnson, 1995, Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behavior. Journal of Applied Econometrics 10: 365-384.
Durlauf, Steven N. and Danny T. Quah, 1999, The New Empirics of Economic Growth. In John Taylor and Michael Woodford (eds.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, Vol. 1A, Amsterdam, North-Holland.
Egger Peter and Michael Pfaffermayr, 2006, Spatial Convergence. Papers in Regional Science 85: 199-215.
Ertur, Cem, Julie Le Gallo, and Catherine Baumont, 2006, The European RegionalConvergence Process, 1980-1995: Do Spatial Regimes and Spatial Dependence Matter?, International Regional Science Review 29 (1): 3-34.
Ertur,Cem & Wilfried, 2007, Growth,technological interdependence and spatial externalities: Theory and evidence. Journal of Applied Econometrics 22(6): 1033-1062.
Essletzbichler, J., Haydamack, B. W., Rigby, D. L., 1998, Regional dynamics of technical change in the US structural fabricated metals industry. Geoforum 29: 23-35.
Evans, Paul, 1996, Using Cross-country Variances to Evaluate Growth Theories. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 20: 1027-1049.
Evans, Paul and Georgios Karras, 1996, Convergence Revisited. Journal of Monetary Economics 37: 249-265.
Fingleton, Bernard and John S. L. McCombie, 1998, Increasing Returns and Economic Growth: Some Evidence for Manufacturing from the European Union Regions. Oxford Economic Papers 50 (1): 89-105.
Fingleton, Bernard, 2001, Theoretical Economic Geography and Spatial Econometrics: Dynamic Perspectives. Journal of Economic Geography 1 (2): 201-225.
Fingleton, Bernard and Enrique López-Bazo, 2006, Empirical Growth Models with Spatial Effect. Papers in Regional Science 85: 177-198.
Fischer, M. M.and C. Stirb?ck., 2006, Pan-European Regional Income Growth and Club-Convergence Insights from a Spatial Econometric Perspective. Annals of Regional Science 40: 693-721.
Friedman Milton, 1994, Do Old Fallacies Ever Die? Journal of Economic Literature 30: 2129-2132.
Fujita M, Krugman P and Venables A., 1999, The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Galor Oded, 1996, Convergence? Inference from Theoretical Models. Economic Journal 106: 1056-1069.
Glaeser, E., Kallal H., Scheinkman J. and Shleifer A., 1992, Growth in Cities, Journal of Political Economy 100: 1126-1152.
Grier, Kevin B. and Gordon Tullock, 1989, An Empirical Analysis of Cross-National Economic Growth, 1951-1980. Journal of Monetary Economics 24: 259-276.
Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, 1993, Solow and the States: Capital Accumulation, Productivity, and Economic Growth. National Tax Journal 46: 425-439.
Islam, Nazrul, 1995, Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 1127-1170.
Islam, Nazrul, 2003, What Have We Learnt from the Convergence Debate? Journal of Economic Surveys 17 (3): 309-362.
Knight Malcolm, Norman Loyaza and Delano Villanueva, 1993, Testing for Neoclassical Theory of Economic Growth. IMF Staff Papers 40: 512-541.
Kormendi, Roger C. and Philip G. Meguire, 1985, Macroeconomic Determinants of Growth: Cross-country Evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics 16: 141-163.
Krugman P., 1991, Increasing Returns and Economic Geography. Journal of Political Economy 99: 483-499.
Lall, S. V., Yilmaz, S., 2001, Regional Economic Convergence: Do Policy Instruments Make a Difference? The Annals of Regional Science 35: 153-166.
Laurini,Andrade & Pereira, 2005, Income Convergence Clubs for Brazilian Municipalities: A non-Parametric Analysis. Applied Economics 37: 2099-2118.
Lee Kevin, M. Hashem Pesaran, and Ron Smith, 1997, Growth and Convergence: A Multicountry Empirical Analysis of the Solow Growth Model. Journal of Applied Econometrics 12: 357-392.
LeSage J.,Pace R.K., 2009, Introduction to Spatial Econometrics. Chapman & Hall.
Levine, Ross and David Renelt, 1992, A Sensitivity Analysis of Cross Country Growth Regressions. American Economic Review 82(4): 942-963.
Li, Qing and David Papell, 1999, Convergence of International Output: Time Series Evidence for 16 OECD Countries. International Review of Economics and Finance 8: 267–80.
López-Bazo, E., Vayá, E., Mora, A. J., Suri?ach, J., 1998, Regional economic dynamics and convergence in the European Union. Annals of Regional Science 36: 1-28.
López-Bazo, Enrique, Esther Vayá, and Manuel Artis, 2004, Regional Externalities and Growth: Evidence from European Regions. Journal of Regional Science 44(1): 43-73.
Lowey, Michael B. and David H. Papell, 1996, Are US Regional Incomes Converging? Some Further Evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics 38: 587-598.
Lucas, R.E. JR., 1993, Making a Miracle. Econometrica 61(2): 251-272.
Mankiw, N. Gregory, Romer, David, and David Weil, 1992, A contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107: 407-37.
Martin, R., Sunley P., 1998, Slow convergence? The new endogenous growth theory and regional development. Economic geography 74(3): 201-207.
Martin, R., 2001, EMU versus the Regions? Regional Convergence and Divergence in Euro Land, Journal of Economic Geography 1(1): 51-80.
Miller Ronald I., 1995, Time Series Estimation of Convergence Rates, Department of Economics, University of Columbia.
Moreno, Ramon and Bharat Trehan, 1997, Location and the Growth of Nations. Journal of Economic Growth 2(4): 399-418.
Nijkamp, P., Poot, J., 1998, Spatial Perspectives on new theories of economic growth. Annals of Regional Science 32: 407-437.
Ord J.K., Getis A., 1995, Local Spatial Autocorrelation Statistics: Distributional Issues and All Application. Geographical Analysis, 27(4): 286-306.
Philippe De V. and Gilles S., 2005, Spatial externalities between Brazilian municipios and their neighbours. Paper provided by Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research in its series with number 123.
Pons-Novell J and Viladecans E., 1999, Kaldor's laws and spatial dependence: evidence for the European regions, Regional Studies 33: 443-451.
Quah, Danny, 1993a, Galton’s Fallacy and Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 95: 427-443.
Quah, Danny, 1993b, Empirical Cross-Section Dynamics in Economic Growth. European Economic Review 37: 426-434.
Quah, Danny, 1996a, Empirics for Economic Growth and Convergence. European Economic Review 40: 1353-75.
Quah, Danny, 1996b, Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics. Economic Journal 106: 1045-1055.
Quah, Danny, 1996c, Convergence Empirics Across Economies with (Some) Capital Mobility. Journal of Economic Growth 1: 95-124.
Ranajo J., Marquez M., Hewings G., Salinas M., 2008, Spatial Heterogeneity and Interregional Spillovers in the European Union: Do Cohesion Policies Encourage Convergence across Regions. European Economic Review, 52(3): 551-567.
Rey S and Montouri B., 1999, U.S. Regional Income Convergence: A Spatial Econometric Perspective. Regional Studies 33: 143-156.
Rey S., Janikas M. V., 2005, Regional Convergence, Inequality, and Space. Journal of Economic Geography 5: 155-176.
Rigby, D. L., Essletzbichler, J., 1997, Evolution, Process Variety, and Regional Trajectories of Technological Change in US Manufacturing. Economic Geography73: 269-284.
Rigby, D. L., Essletzbichler, J., 2002, Agglomeration economies and productivity differences in US cities. Journal of Economic Geography 2: 4007-4032.
Romer, Paul, 1994, Origins of Endogeneous Growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8: 3-22.
Rumayya, Wirya Wardaya and Erlangga Agustino Landiyanto, 2005, Club convergence & regional spillovers in East JAVA. Regional Economic Development 17: 1315-1445.
Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1996, Regional Cohesion: Evidence and Theories of Regional Growth and Convergence. European Economic Review 40: 1325-1352.
Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1997, I Just Ran Two Million Regressions. American Economic Review 87: 178-183.
Scitovsky, S., 1954, Two Concepts of External Economies. Journal of Political Economy 62: 143-151.
Solow RM., 1956, A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 70(1): 65-94.
Temple, Jonathan, 1999, The New Growth Evidence. Journal of Economic Literature 37: 112-156.
VayáE.,López-Bazo E.,Moreno R.,Suri?ach J., 1998, Growth and Externalities across Economies, Provided by Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 59.
Ying L., 2003, Understanding China’s Recent Growth Experience: a Spatial Econometric Perspective. The Annals of Regional Science 37: 613-628.
安虎森主编.空间经济学教程[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2006.
陈丽媛“.中部崛起”与湖北经济增长极的构建[J].统计与决策,2006,(11):47-49.
郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国全要素生产率的估算:1979-2004[J].经济研究,2005,(6):51-60.
郭腾云,徐勇.我国区域经济空间收敛研究[J].地理与地理信息科学,2005,(4):60-63.
何江,张馨之.中国区域经济增长及其收敛性:空间面板数据分析[J].南方经济,2006,(5):44-52.
雷辉.我国资本存量测算及投资效率的研究[J].经济学家,2009,(9):75-83.
李国平,陈晓玲.中国省区经济增长空间分布动态[J].地理学报,2007,62(10):1051-1062.
李小建,苗长虹.增长极理论分析及选择研究[J].地理研究,1993,12(3):45-55.
林光平、龙志和、吴梅.我国地区经济趋同的空间计量实证分析:1978-2002 [Z].2004年中国经济学年会会议论文.
刘朝明,董晖,韩斌.西部增长极与成渝经济区战略目标定位研究[J].经济学家,2006,(2):105-109.
刘生龙,张捷.空间经济视角下中国区域经济收敛性再检验[J].财经研究,2009,35(12):16-26. 马国霞,徐勇,田玉军.京津冀都市圈经济增长收敛机制的空间分析[J].地理研究,2007, 26(5):590-598.
苗长虹,王海江.河南省城市的经济联系方向与强度——兼论中原城市群的形成与对外联系[J].地理研究,2006, 25(2):222-232.
潘竟虎,石培基.甘肃省区域经济增长俱乐部空间趋同分析[J].西北师范大学学报(自然科学版),2007,(6):84-90.
蒲英霞,马荣华,葛莹,黄杏元.基于空间马尔科夫链的江苏区域趋同时空演变[J].地理学报,2005,(5):817-826.
覃成林,唐永.河南经济增长俱乐部趋同研究[J].地理研究,2007,(3):548-557.
覃成林,张伟丽.区域经济增长俱乐部趋同研究评述[J].经济学动态,2008,(3):101-106.
沈坤荣,马俊.中国经济增长的“俱乐部收敛”特征及其成因研究[J].经济研究,2002,(1):33-39
汤学兵,陈秀山.我国八大区域的经济收敛性及其影响因素分析[J].中国人民大学学报,2007,(1):106-113
王发曾,刘静玉.我国城市群整合发展的基础与实践[J].地理科学进展,2006,26(5),88-99
王小鲁,樊纲等.中国经济增长的可持续性——跨世纪的回顾与展望[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2000.
吴玉鸣.中国省域经济增长趋同的空间计量经济分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2006,(12):101-108.
项云帆,王少平.基于空间Panel Data的中国区域人均GDP收敛分析[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2007,7(5):77-82
颜鹏飞,孙波.中观经济研究:增长极和区域经济发展理论的再思考[J].经济评论,2003,(3):62-66.
姚士谋,王书国,陈爽,陈振光.区域发展中“城市群现象”的空间系统探索[J].经济地理,2006,26(5):726-730.
张晓旭,冯宗宪.中国人均GDP的空间相关与地区收敛:1978-2003[J].经济学(季刊),2008,7(2):399-414.
Adebanji A., Achia T., Ngetich R., Owino J., Wangombe A., 2008, Spatial Durbin Model for Poverty Mapping and Analysis. European Journal of Social Sciences 5(4): 194-204.
Aghion, P., Howitt, P., 1997, Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Andrada I P. and Timothy J., 2002, Testing Spatial Patten and Growth Spillover Effects in Cluster of Cities. Geographical Systems 8: 275-285.
Anselin L., 1988, Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Anselin L. and Rey S. J., 1997, Introduction to the Special Issue on Spatial Econometrics. International Regional Science Review 20(1-2): 1-7.
Anselin and Bera, 1998, Spatial Dependence in Linear Regression Models with an Introduction to Spatial Econometrics. Ullah A, Giles DEA (eds) Handbook of applied economic statistics, Marcel Dekker, New York: 237-289.
Anselin L., 2000, Spatial Econometrics. in Baltagi B.(Ed.)Companion to Econometrics, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Anselin, L., 2003, Spatial Externalities, Spatial Multipliers and Spatial Econometrics. International Regional Science Review 26 (2): 153-166.
Armstrong H., 1995, Convergence among Regions of the European Union, 1950-1990. Papers in Regional Science 74: 143-152.
Barro, R. J., 1991, Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries. Quarterly Journalof Economics 106: 407-443.
Barro,R. J. & X. Sala-I-Matin, 1991, Convergence across States and Regions. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: 107-182.
Barro, R. J. and X. Sala-i-Martin, 1992, Convergence. Journal of Political Economy 100: 223-251.
Barro, R. J., Mankiw N.G. and X. Sala-i-Martin, 1995, Capital Mobility in Neoclassical Models of Growth. American Economic Review 85: 103-115.
Baumol, William J., 1986, Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: What the Long Run Data Show? American Economic Review 76: 1072-85.
Baumont C., Cem Ertur and Julie Le Gallo, 2003, Exploratory Spatial Data Analysis of the Distribution of Regional Per Capita GDP in Europe, 1980-1995. Regional Science 82: 175-201.
Ben David D., 1994, Convergence Clubs and Diverging Economies. CEPR working paper 922.
Bernard, Andrew and Steven N. Durlauf, 1996, Interpreting Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis. Journal of Econometrics 71: 161-173.
Bernat, A., 1996, Does Manufacturing Matter? A Spatial Econometric View of Kaldor's Laws. Journal of Regional Science 36: 463-477.
Bode, E., 2002, Regional Economic Interaction and the Role of Growth Poles in East Germany’s Convergence Process, Paper prepared for presentation at the International Conference on Policy Modeling Brussels, July: 4-6.
Canova, Fabio and Albert Marcet, 1995, The Poor Stay Poor: Non-Convergence across Countries and Regions, Discussion Paper No. 1265, Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR), London.
Carlino, G. A. and L. O. Mills, 1993, Are the US Regional Incomes Converging? A Time Series Analysis. Journal of Monetary Economics 32: 335-346.
Carlino G. and Mills L., 1996, Testing Neoclassical Convergence in Regional Incomes and Earnings, Regional Science and Urban Economics 26 (6): 565-590.
Carrington, Anca, 2003, A Divided Europe? Regional Convergence and Neighbourhood Spillover Effects. Kyklos 56 (3): 381-394.
Chatterji M. and Dewhurst J. H. Ll, 1996, Convergence Clubs and Relative Economic Performance in Great Britain: 1977-1991. Regional Studies 30 (1): 31-39.
Chua, Hak.B., 1993, On Spillovers and Convergence. PhD-Thesis, Harvard. Ciccone, Antonio and Robert E. Hall, 1996, Productivity and the Density of Economic Activity. American Economic Review 86(1): 54-70.
Coe D., Helpman E., 1995, International R&D Spillovers. European Economic Review 39: 859-887.
Dall'erba & Le Gallo, 2008, Regional Convergence and the Impact of European Structural Funds over 1989-1999:A Spatial Econometric Analysis. Papers in Regional Science 87(2): 219-244.
De la Fuente, Angel, 1997, The Empirics of Growth and Convergence: A Selective Review. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 21: 23-73.
De Long, Bradford J., 1988, Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: A Comment. American Economic Review 78: 1138-54.
Durlauf, Steven. and Paul A. Johnson, 1995, Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behavior. Journal of Applied Econometrics 10: 365-384.
Durlauf, Steven N. and Danny T. Quah, 1999, The New Empirics of Economic Growth. In John Taylor and Michael Woodford (eds.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, Vol. 1A, Amsterdam, North-Holland.
Egger Peter and Michael Pfaffermayr, 2006, Spatial Convergence. Papers in Regional Science 85: 199-215.
Ertur, Cem, Julie Le Gallo, and Catherine Baumont, 2006, The European RegionalConvergence Process, 1980-1995: Do Spatial Regimes and Spatial Dependence Matter?, International Regional Science Review 29 (1): 3-34.
Ertur,Cem & Wilfried, 2007, Growth,technological interdependence and spatial externalities: Theory and evidence. Journal of Applied Econometrics 22(6): 1033-1062.
Essletzbichler, J., Haydamack, B. W., Rigby, D. L., 1998, Regional dynamics of technical change in the US structural fabricated metals industry. Geoforum 29: 23-35.
Evans, Paul, 1996, Using Cross-country Variances to Evaluate Growth Theories. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 20: 1027-1049.
Evans, Paul and Georgios Karras, 1996, Convergence Revisited. Journal of Monetary Economics 37: 249-265.
Fingleton, Bernard and John S. L. McCombie, 1998, Increasing Returns and Economic Growth: Some Evidence for Manufacturing from the European Union Regions. Oxford Economic Papers 50 (1): 89-105.
Fingleton, Bernard, 2001, Theoretical Economic Geography and Spatial Econometrics: Dynamic Perspectives. Journal of Economic Geography 1 (2): 201-225.
Fingleton, Bernard and Enrique López-Bazo, 2006, Empirical Growth Models with Spatial Effect. Papers in Regional Science 85: 177-198.
Fischer, M. M.and C. Stirb?ck., 2006, Pan-European Regional Income Growth and Club-Convergence Insights from a Spatial Econometric Perspective. Annals of Regional Science 40: 693-721.
Friedman Milton, 1994, Do Old Fallacies Ever Die? Journal of Economic Literature 30: 2129-2132.
Fujita M, Krugman P and Venables A., 1999, The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Galor Oded, 1996, Convergence? Inference from Theoretical Models. Economic Journal 106: 1056-1069.
Glaeser, E., Kallal H., Scheinkman J. and Shleifer A., 1992, Growth in Cities, Journal of Political Economy 100: 1126-1152.
Grier, Kevin B. and Gordon Tullock, 1989, An Empirical Analysis of Cross-National Economic Growth, 1951-1980. Journal of Monetary Economics 24: 259-276.
Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, 1993, Solow and the States: Capital Accumulation, Productivity, and Economic Growth. National Tax Journal 46: 425-439.
Islam, Nazrul, 1995, Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 1127-1170.
Islam, Nazrul, 2003, What Have We Learnt from the Convergence Debate? Journal of Economic Surveys 17 (3): 309-362.
Knight Malcolm, Norman Loyaza and Delano Villanueva, 1993, Testing for Neoclassical Theory of Economic Growth. IMF Staff Papers 40: 512-541.
Kormendi, Roger C. and Philip G. Meguire, 1985, Macroeconomic Determinants of Growth: Cross-country Evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics 16: 141-163.
Krugman P., 1991, Increasing Returns and Economic Geography. Journal of Political Economy 99: 483-499.
Lall, S. V., Yilmaz, S., 2001, Regional Economic Convergence: Do Policy Instruments Make a Difference? The Annals of Regional Science 35: 153-166.
Laurini,Andrade & Pereira, 2005, Income Convergence Clubs for Brazilian Municipalities: A non-Parametric Analysis. Applied Economics 37: 2099-2118.
Lee Kevin, M. Hashem Pesaran, and Ron Smith, 1997, Growth and Convergence: A Multicountry Empirical Analysis of the Solow Growth Model. Journal of Applied Econometrics 12: 357-392.
LeSage J.,Pace R.K., 2009, Introduction to Spatial Econometrics. Chapman & Hall.
Levine, Ross and David Renelt, 1992, A Sensitivity Analysis of Cross Country Growth Regressions. American Economic Review 82(4): 942-963.
Li, Qing and David Papell, 1999, Convergence of International Output: Time Series Evidence for 16 OECD Countries. International Review of Economics and Finance 8: 267–80.
López-Bazo, E., Vayá, E., Mora, A. J., Suri?ach, J., 1998, Regional economic dynamics and convergence in the European Union. Annals of Regional Science 36: 1-28.
López-Bazo, Enrique, Esther Vayá, and Manuel Artis, 2004, Regional Externalities and Growth: Evidence from European Regions. Journal of Regional Science 44(1): 43-73.
Lowey, Michael B. and David H. Papell, 1996, Are US Regional Incomes Converging? Some Further Evidence. Journal of Monetary Economics 38: 587-598.
Lucas, R.E. JR., 1993, Making a Miracle. Econometrica 61(2): 251-272.
Mankiw, N. Gregory, Romer, David, and David Weil, 1992, A contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 107: 407-37.
Martin, R., Sunley P., 1998, Slow convergence? The new endogenous growth theory and regional development. Economic geography 74(3): 201-207.
Martin, R., 2001, EMU versus the Regions? Regional Convergence and Divergence in Euro Land, Journal of Economic Geography 1(1): 51-80.
Miller Ronald I., 1995, Time Series Estimation of Convergence Rates, Department of Economics, University of Columbia.
Moreno, Ramon and Bharat Trehan, 1997, Location and the Growth of Nations. Journal of Economic Growth 2(4): 399-418.
Nijkamp, P., Poot, J., 1998, Spatial Perspectives on new theories of economic growth. Annals of Regional Science 32: 407-437.
Ord J.K., Getis A., 1995, Local Spatial Autocorrelation Statistics: Distributional Issues and All Application. Geographical Analysis, 27(4): 286-306.
Philippe De V. and Gilles S., 2005, Spatial externalities between Brazilian municipios and their neighbours. Paper provided by Ibero-America Institute for Economic Research in its series with number 123.
Pons-Novell J and Viladecans E., 1999, Kaldor's laws and spatial dependence: evidence for the European regions, Regional Studies 33: 443-451.
Quah, Danny, 1993a, Galton’s Fallacy and Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 95: 427-443.
Quah, Danny, 1993b, Empirical Cross-Section Dynamics in Economic Growth. European Economic Review 37: 426-434.
Quah, Danny, 1996a, Empirics for Economic Growth and Convergence. European Economic Review 40: 1353-75.
Quah, Danny, 1996b, Twin Peaks: Growth and Convergence in Models of Distribution Dynamics. Economic Journal 106: 1045-1055.
Quah, Danny, 1996c, Convergence Empirics Across Economies with (Some) Capital Mobility. Journal of Economic Growth 1: 95-124.
Ranajo J., Marquez M., Hewings G., Salinas M., 2008, Spatial Heterogeneity and Interregional Spillovers in the European Union: Do Cohesion Policies Encourage Convergence across Regions. European Economic Review, 52(3): 551-567.
Rey S and Montouri B., 1999, U.S. Regional Income Convergence: A Spatial Econometric Perspective. Regional Studies 33: 143-156.
Rey S., Janikas M. V., 2005, Regional Convergence, Inequality, and Space. Journal of Economic Geography 5: 155-176.
Rigby, D. L., Essletzbichler, J., 1997, Evolution, Process Variety, and Regional Trajectories of Technological Change in US Manufacturing. Economic Geography73: 269-284.
Rigby, D. L., Essletzbichler, J., 2002, Agglomeration economies and productivity differences in US cities. Journal of Economic Geography 2: 4007-4032.
Romer, Paul, 1994, Origins of Endogeneous Growth. Journal of Economic Perspectives 8: 3-22.
Rumayya, Wirya Wardaya and Erlangga Agustino Landiyanto, 2005, Club convergence & regional spillovers in East JAVA. Regional Economic Development 17: 1315-1445.
Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1996, Regional Cohesion: Evidence and Theories of Regional Growth and Convergence. European Economic Review 40: 1325-1352.
Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1997, I Just Ran Two Million Regressions. American Economic Review 87: 178-183.
Scitovsky, S., 1954, Two Concepts of External Economies. Journal of Political Economy 62: 143-151.
Solow RM., 1956, A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 70(1): 65-94.
Temple, Jonathan, 1999, The New Growth Evidence. Journal of Economic Literature 37: 112-156.
VayáE.,López-Bazo E.,Moreno R.,Suri?ach J., 1998, Growth and Externalities across Economies, Provided by Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia in its series Working Papers in Economics with number 59.
Ying L., 2003, Understanding China’s Recent Growth Experience: a Spatial Econometric Perspective. The Annals of Regional Science 37: 613-628.
安虎森主编.空间经济学教程[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2006.
陈丽媛“.中部崛起”与湖北经济增长极的构建[J].统计与决策,2006,(11):47-49.
郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国全要素生产率的估算:1979-2004[J].经济研究,2005,(6):51-60.
郭腾云,徐勇.我国区域经济空间收敛研究[J].地理与地理信息科学,2005,(4):60-63.
何江,张馨之.中国区域经济增长及其收敛性:空间面板数据分析[J].南方经济,2006,(5):44-52.
雷辉.我国资本存量测算及投资效率的研究[J].经济学家,2009,(9):75-83.
李国平,陈晓玲.中国省区经济增长空间分布动态[J].地理学报,2007,62(10):1051-1062.
李小建,苗长虹.增长极理论分析及选择研究[J].地理研究,1993,12(3):45-55.
林光平、龙志和、吴梅.我国地区经济趋同的空间计量实证分析:1978-2002 [Z].2004年中国经济学年会会议论文.
刘朝明,董晖,韩斌.西部增长极与成渝经济区战略目标定位研究[J].经济学家,2006,(2):105-109.
刘生龙,张捷.空间经济视角下中国区域经济收敛性再检验[J].财经研究,2009,35(12):16-26. 马国霞,徐勇,田玉军.京津冀都市圈经济增长收敛机制的空间分析[J].地理研究,2007, 26(5):590-598.
苗长虹,王海江.河南省城市的经济联系方向与强度——兼论中原城市群的形成与对外联系[J].地理研究,2006, 25(2):222-232.
潘竟虎,石培基.甘肃省区域经济增长俱乐部空间趋同分析[J].西北师范大学学报(自然科学版),2007,(6):84-90.
蒲英霞,马荣华,葛莹,黄杏元.基于空间马尔科夫链的江苏区域趋同时空演变[J].地理学报,2005,(5):817-826.
覃成林,唐永.河南经济增长俱乐部趋同研究[J].地理研究,2007,(3):548-557.
覃成林,张伟丽.区域经济增长俱乐部趋同研究评述[J].经济学动态,2008,(3):101-106.
沈坤荣,马俊.中国经济增长的“俱乐部收敛”特征及其成因研究[J].经济研究,2002,(1):33-39
汤学兵,陈秀山.我国八大区域的经济收敛性及其影响因素分析[J].中国人民大学学报,2007,(1):106-113
王发曾,刘静玉.我国城市群整合发展的基础与实践[J].地理科学进展,2006,26(5),88-99
王小鲁,樊纲等.中国经济增长的可持续性——跨世纪的回顾与展望[M].北京:经济科学出版社,2000.
吴玉鸣.中国省域经济增长趋同的空间计量经济分析[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2006,(12):101-108.
项云帆,王少平.基于空间Panel Data的中国区域人均GDP收敛分析[J].中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2007,7(5):77-82
颜鹏飞,孙波.中观经济研究:增长极和区域经济发展理论的再思考[J].经济评论,2003,(3):62-66.
姚士谋,王书国,陈爽,陈振光.区域发展中“城市群现象”的空间系统探索[J].经济地理,2006,26(5):726-730.
张晓旭,冯宗宪.中国人均GDP的空间相关与地区收敛:1978-2003[J].经济学(季刊),2008,7(2):399-414.
© 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 |