中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的经济效应研究
|
摘要
20世纪90年代中期以来,经济全球化条件下生产技术与信息技术的发展使得国际产业分工进一步细化,逐渐从产业间分工、产业内分工发展到了产品内分工,产品生产在空间上得以分离,国际垂直专业化分工日益盛行。在国际垂直专业化分工这种生产与贸易模式下,不同的生产环节与工序对生产要素有着不同的需求,对处于生产价值链不同地位的国家也存在差异化的经济影响。中国凭借低成本制造优势广泛参与到了国际垂直专业化生产分工体系当中,大规模的从事国际垂直专业化分工生产对中国社会就业、工资、工业企业技术进步和产业升级等的影响是巨大和深远的,但这一影响的效果却并不确定。而且,中国已经越来越多地受到其他具有相同比较优势和要素察赋、处于类似经济发展阶段的国家或地区(如墨西哥、印度以及越南等东南亚国家)的挑战。在这种经济背景下,就中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的经济效应进行分析,对于中国更好的参与国际垂直专业化分工,实现分工利益,促进国内产业升级及提升产业竞争力具有重要的意义。
本文在对国内外学者有关国际垂直专业化分工研究文献进行概括总结的基础上,根据中国的分工及贸易现实改进了国际垂直专业化分工的测算方法,对中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的程度进行了更为准确的测算,并进一步分析了参与国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构、熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资收入差距、技术进步以及产业竞争力的影响机理。通过理论分析与实证分析相结合,考察国际垂直专业化分工对中国经济的影响机理及产生的经济效应,得到了一些具有启发性和参考价值的结论。这对于准确把握中国参与国际垂直专业化分工现状,明确国际垂直专业化分工对中国经济影响的途径及程度,制定经济发展政策具有重要的意义。本文创新点可以概括为：
第一,根据中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的特点,改进中国国际垂直专业化分工程度的测算方法。应用改进的PA方法①,对中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的程度进行了更为准确的测算。
第二,分析认为Feenstra&Hanson(1995)就国际垂直专业化分工对发展中国家劳动力市场就业结构影响的分析假设,不适合分析国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力就业结构影响问题。本文假设发达国家转移出去的生产环节,在发展中国家未必就是熟练劳动力密集型的高技术生产环节,同时不同技术水平产业的国际垂直专业化分工,对劳动力市场就业结构产生的影响也存在差异。在此假设基础上根据中国劳动力市场就业结构特点,探寻了国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构影响的理论机理。
第三,根据中国目前非熟练劳动力资源丰富,存在大量农村剩余劳动力的现状,本文假定中国非熟练劳动力的供给曲线应是由不同供给弹性决定的一条折线,而不是一条向右上方倾斜的线,熟练劳动力的供给线则为一条正常的斜率为正的线。在此基础上探讨了国际垂直专业化分工对中国熟练劳动力和非熟练劳动力工资收入的影响机理。
第四,在Goh(2005)模型分析的基础上改进其假设,假定不同技术水平产业的研发投入成本函数存在差异,分中低技术产业和高技术产业分别分析了国际垂直专业化分工对技术转移和技术溢出的影响。
第五,根据理论及实证分析结论,有针对性的提出在国际垂直专业化分工生产过程中实现中国分工利益及促进中国产业升级的有指导意义的政策建议。
本文的主要研究结论为：
第一,通过PA方法和HIY方法对中国分产业和总体VS值的测算分析发现,近十几年来,中国不同产业和总体的VS值都有了较大幅度的增长。其中,中国高技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度相比中低技术产业较高,这与高技术产业产品生产易于分割、发达国家更多的外包高技术产业产品的低技术生产环节有关。中低技术产业因产品生产环节较少,且大多数中间产品都可以在国内完成生产,垂直专业化生产程度相对较低。同时,PA方法测算的分产业和总体的VS值都要高于HIY方法测算的VS值。就中国与其他有代表性的发展中国家和发达国家的对比分析发现,发达大国的国际垂直专业化分工程度相对较低,新兴市场经济体及发达小国的国际垂直专业化分工程度相对较高。在发展中国家中,由于中国对外贸易的快速增长及提倡大力发展来料加工、进料加工、来件装配等加工贸易,印度、巴西等国与中国相比国际垂直专业化分工程度相对较低。
第二,就国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构和工资收入差距影响的理论机制分析表明,当产业为中低技术产业时,非熟练劳动力的需求较高,而垂直专业化程度相对较低,这对熟练劳动力的就业可能会产生消极影响。当产业为高技术产业时,中国从事从发达国家转移来的低技术生产环节的生产,这些生产环节在中国并不一定都属于高技术环节,可能相当一部分仍属于技术水平低的非熟练劳动力密集型环节,因此使得中国熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力的需求都有所增加。同时,对中国这样一个非熟练劳动力资源丰富,存在大量农村剩余劳动力的发展中国家来讲,非熟练劳动力的供给曲线将不会是一条向右上方倾斜的线,而是由不同供给弹性决定的一条折线,熟练劳动力的供给线则为一条正常的斜率为正的线。因此,国际垂直专业化分工对劳动力市场就业结构的影响效应,并不必然会反映在熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资的差距上,即中低技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力的工资收入差距未必缩小,高技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力的工资收入差距未必扩大。
实证分析发现国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构产生了重要的影响,中国工业部门参与国际垂直专业化分工,总体上降低了对熟练劳动力的相对需求,非熟练劳动力的相对需求增加,对中低技术产业的回归结果表明这一影响更为显著。而对高技术产业的分析显示,国际垂直专业化分工增加了对熟练劳动力的相对需求,降低了非熟练劳动力的相对需求,但劳动力需求变动的百分比相对于全部产业和中低技术产业要小。就国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力工资收入差距的分析表明,国际垂直专业化分工会缩小中低技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资差距,而会轻微拉大高技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资差距。国际垂直专业化分工对熟练劳动力相对需求和相对工资收入的实证分析结论与理论分析相吻合。
第三,通过对中国全要素生产率的测算分析发现,近十几年来中国各产业的全要素生产率基本呈上升趋势,中低技术产业中采掘业、原材料冶炼加工及基础性生产产业的全要素生产率较高,其他中低技术产业相对较低,高技术产业的全要素生产率较高。就全要素生产率的构成来看,中国绝大多数产业全要素生产率的进步更多的体现在技术变化上,技术效率指数普遍偏低,高技术产业的技术变化增长更为明显。国际垂直专业化分工对全要素生产率及其分解的技术进步和技术效率大都产生了负向影响,只有中低技术产业对技术进步的影响为正。就全要素生产率而言,高技术产业的负向影响更为明显,就技术效率而言,中低技术产业的负向影响更为明显,这与前面的理论分析一致。分析表明目前中国参与国际垂直专业化分工并没有明显获取技术溢出的好处,只有中低技术产业因技术水平相对较低,国际垂直专业化分工对其技术进步起到了一定的促进作用。
第四,国际垂直专业化分工对中国产业竞争力产生了重要的影响,国际垂直专业化分工对产品出口竞争力指数产生了正向影响,且对中低技术产业的影响高于对高技术产业的影响。这说明虽然中国高技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度较高,但对净出口的增加效应反而较小,中国劳动密集型的产品出口仍然占有重要的地位,高技术产业因国际垂直专业化分工生产增加,而使产品净出口值增加的效应并不明显。国际垂直专业化分工净附加值指数的回归系数为正值,并且高技术产业的回归系数要明显高于中低技术产业的回归系数,表明高技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度较高,技术水平高,产业关联效应强,因此对国际垂直专业化分工净附加值指数的增加效应明显。中低技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度较低,同时生产环节的技术含量较低,对其他产业的关联拉动作用相对较弱,因此对国际垂直专业化净附加值的增加效应较小。
Since the mid-1990s, international division of labor is further refined with the development of production and information technology, gradually shifting from inter-industry division of labor and division of labor within the industry to intra-product specialization. Production can be separated in space and international vertical specialization is becoming increasingly popular. In the production and trade patterns of international vertical specialization, different production processes have different needs to production factors and have different economic impact on countries in different status of value chain. With low-cost manufacturing advantages, China comprehensively participates in international vertical specialization production, which has enormous impact on problems of employment, wages, enterprises'technological progress and industrial upgrading in China. However, the effect of the impact is still uncertain. Moreover, China has been increasingly challenged by other countries or regions which developed at a similar stage with the same comparative advantages (such as Mexico, India, Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries). In this economic context, it is of great significance to analyze the economic effects of China's participation in international vertical specialization for China better participating in international vertical specialization, promoting domestic industrial upgrading and enhancing industrial competitiveness.
Based on the review of domestic and foreign scholar's papers on international vertical specialization, this paper improves the calculation method of international vertical specialization according to China's reality, and does more accurate calculation of the degree of china's international vertical specialization. What's more, further analysis is made of international vertical specialization's influence on employment structure of labor market, relative wage gap between skilled and unskilled labors, technological progress and industrial competitiveness. Through the combination of theoretical analysis and empirical analysis, this paper analysis of the mechanism of international vertical specialization's impact on China's economic and the economic benefit it produced, some instructive conclusions are reached. Which is of great significance for grasping China's international vertical specialization status, clearing the way and degree of international vertical specialization'influence on the economy of China, and formulating economic development policies. The innovative points of this paper can be summarized as follows:
First, according to the characteristics of China's participation in international vertical specialization, this paper improves China's international vertical specialization measurement method. What's more, it makes more accurate estimation at the degree of China's participation in international vertical specialization through improved PA method.
Second, according to the characteristics of China's labor market, we think that Feenstra&Hanson's assume of international vertical specialization's impact on developing country's labor market is not suitable for analysis the impact of international vertical specialization on China's employment structure. This paper assumes that the production processes transferred from developed countries may not belong to high-tech sectors. At the same time, the industries have different technology level also have different impact on the employment structure.Based on this assumption, we analysis the mechanism of vertical specialization's impact on employment structure of the labor market.
Third, China as a developing country has abundant non-skilled labor and a large number of rural surplus labor forces, so the non-skilled labor supply curve will not be a line tilt to the right. Instead, it is broken line determined by different supply elasticity. The skilled labor supply curve will be a normal line of positive slope. Based on this assumption, this paper analyse the mechanism of vertical specialization's impact on wage gap of non-skilled labor and skilled labor.
Fourth, based on Goh's model, this paper improved its hypothesis, assuming that different industry has diffenent R&D cost function.Then, analysis the impact of international vertical specialization on technology transfer and technology spillover in low-tech industry and high-tech industry respectively.
Fifth, based on the conclutions made by theoretical analysis and empirical analysis on china's international vertical specialization, this paper proposes some policy suggestions on realizing division interest and promoting China's industrial upgrading during particapite in international vertical specialization.
The main conclusions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
First, the calculation of China's overall and sub-sector international vertical specialization through PA method and HIY method illustrated that China's overall and sub-sector international vertical specialization have a substantial growth in the last decades. The high-technology industry's degree of international vertical specialization is higher than that of the low-technology industries. This is because high-technology industry's product is easy to segment and developed countries outsource more low-technology products of high-technology industries. The low-technology industry sectors have less production processes and most of their processes can be completed domestically, so the degree of their international vertical specialization is relatively low. Meanwhile, the overall and sub-sector degree of international vertical specialization measured by PA method is higher than that by HIY methods. Comparing to other typical developing and developed countries, we find that the big developed countries has relatively low degree of international vertical specialization, while the emerging economic countries and small developed countries have relatively high degree of international vertical specialization. In developing countries, due to the rapid growth of China's foreign trade and the policies of encouraging developing processing trade, China's degree of international vertical specialization is higher than that of the India and Brazil.
Second, the analysis of the mechanism of international vertical specialization's impact on employment structure of the labor market and income gap in China shows that the demand for unskilled labor is relatively higher in the low-technology industries with a low degree of international vertical specialization. This may have a negative impact on the employment of skilled labor. When the industry is high-technology industries, China engages in the low-technology production processes transferred from developed countries. These production processes in China may not belong to high-tech sectors. A considerable part of these production processes may still belong to unskilled labor-intensive processes, which makes the demand on skilled labor and unskilled labor increased together in China. In addition, China as a developing country has abundant non-skilled labor and a large number of rural surplus labor forces, so the non-skilled labor supply curve will not be a line tilt to the right. Instead, it is a broken line determined by different supply elasticity. The skilled labor supply curve will be a normal line of positive slope. Therefore, the impact of international vertical specialization on the employment structure will not necessarily reflect in the relative wage gap between skilled and unskilled labor, namely the wages gap between the skilled and unskilled labor may not narrow in the low-technology industry and it may not expand in high-technology industry.
Empirical analysis finds that the international vertical specialization has a significant impact on China's labor market. The Industry Sector's participating in international vertical specialization generally reduces the relative demand for skilled labor and increases unskilled labor's demand. The regression results of the low-technology industry show that this effect is more significant. However, the analysis on high-tech industries shows that vertical specialization increases the demand for skilled labor and reduces the relative demand for unskilled labor, but the change rate in labor demand is smaller than that of the overall and the low-technology industries. The analysis on wage gap between skilled labor and unskilled labor shows that international vertical specialization narrows the wage gap in the low-technology industries but slight widens the wage gap in the high-technology industries. The empirical analysis conforms to the theoretical analysis.
Third, the measurement of China's total factor productivity shows that most of the industries'total factor productivity is in the upward trend. The mining and processing industry, metals smelting and pressing industry in the low-technology industry have higher total factor productivity, while other industries have relatively low total factor productivity and high-technology industry has one. The structure of total factor productivity shows that the growth of total factor productivity in most industries stems is embodied in the function of technical progress, and the influence in that of the high-technology industry is more obvious, while technical efficiency index is low. International vertical specialization has a negative impact on total factor productivity, technical progress and technical efficiency, except the influence on low-tech industry's technical progress. As to the total factor productivity, high-technology industry's negative influence is more obvious, while as to technical efficiency, low-technology industry's negative influence is more obvious, which conforms to the theoretical analysis. Analysis indicates that China's participation in the vertical specialization is not significantly beneficial from the technical spillovers. Only because the low technology industry has low level of technology, it benefits from the international vertical specialization.
Fourth, International vertical specialization has important influence on China's industrial competitiveness. It also has positive impact on trade competitive power Index, and the influence on low-technology industry is higher than high-technology industry. This shows that although China's high-technology industry has a high degree of international vertical specialization, the effect on net exports is small and labor-intensive products'export is still in an important position. The increase of international vertical specialization in high-technology industry has less influence on net export. International vertical specialization has positive impact on net value-added international vertical specialization index, while the influence on high-technology industry was significantly higher than on low-technology industry. This shows that high-technology industry's technology level and the degree of international vertical specialization is high, which has strong industrial linkage effects, so the growth of net value-added index of international vertical specialization is obvious. Meanwhile low-technology industry's technology level and the degree of international vertical specialization is low, which has weak industrial linkage effects, so the growth of net value-added index of international vertical specialization is not obvious.
本文在对国内外学者有关国际垂直专业化分工研究文献进行概括总结的基础上,根据中国的分工及贸易现实改进了国际垂直专业化分工的测算方法,对中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的程度进行了更为准确的测算,并进一步分析了参与国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构、熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资收入差距、技术进步以及产业竞争力的影响机理。通过理论分析与实证分析相结合,考察国际垂直专业化分工对中国经济的影响机理及产生的经济效应,得到了一些具有启发性和参考价值的结论。这对于准确把握中国参与国际垂直专业化分工现状,明确国际垂直专业化分工对中国经济影响的途径及程度,制定经济发展政策具有重要的意义。本文创新点可以概括为：
第一,根据中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的特点,改进中国国际垂直专业化分工程度的测算方法。应用改进的PA方法①,对中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的程度进行了更为准确的测算。
第二,分析认为Feenstra&Hanson(1995)就国际垂直专业化分工对发展中国家劳动力市场就业结构影响的分析假设,不适合分析国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力就业结构影响问题。本文假设发达国家转移出去的生产环节,在发展中国家未必就是熟练劳动力密集型的高技术生产环节,同时不同技术水平产业的国际垂直专业化分工,对劳动力市场就业结构产生的影响也存在差异。在此假设基础上根据中国劳动力市场就业结构特点,探寻了国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构影响的理论机理。
第三,根据中国目前非熟练劳动力资源丰富,存在大量农村剩余劳动力的现状,本文假定中国非熟练劳动力的供给曲线应是由不同供给弹性决定的一条折线,而不是一条向右上方倾斜的线,熟练劳动力的供给线则为一条正常的斜率为正的线。在此基础上探讨了国际垂直专业化分工对中国熟练劳动力和非熟练劳动力工资收入的影响机理。
第四,在Goh(2005)模型分析的基础上改进其假设,假定不同技术水平产业的研发投入成本函数存在差异,分中低技术产业和高技术产业分别分析了国际垂直专业化分工对技术转移和技术溢出的影响。
第五,根据理论及实证分析结论,有针对性的提出在国际垂直专业化分工生产过程中实现中国分工利益及促进中国产业升级的有指导意义的政策建议。
本文的主要研究结论为：
第一,通过PA方法和HIY方法对中国分产业和总体VS值的测算分析发现,近十几年来,中国不同产业和总体的VS值都有了较大幅度的增长。其中,中国高技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度相比中低技术产业较高,这与高技术产业产品生产易于分割、发达国家更多的外包高技术产业产品的低技术生产环节有关。中低技术产业因产品生产环节较少,且大多数中间产品都可以在国内完成生产,垂直专业化生产程度相对较低。同时,PA方法测算的分产业和总体的VS值都要高于HIY方法测算的VS值。就中国与其他有代表性的发展中国家和发达国家的对比分析发现,发达大国的国际垂直专业化分工程度相对较低,新兴市场经济体及发达小国的国际垂直专业化分工程度相对较高。在发展中国家中,由于中国对外贸易的快速增长及提倡大力发展来料加工、进料加工、来件装配等加工贸易,印度、巴西等国与中国相比国际垂直专业化分工程度相对较低。
第二,就国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构和工资收入差距影响的理论机制分析表明,当产业为中低技术产业时,非熟练劳动力的需求较高,而垂直专业化程度相对较低,这对熟练劳动力的就业可能会产生消极影响。当产业为高技术产业时,中国从事从发达国家转移来的低技术生产环节的生产,这些生产环节在中国并不一定都属于高技术环节,可能相当一部分仍属于技术水平低的非熟练劳动力密集型环节,因此使得中国熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力的需求都有所增加。同时,对中国这样一个非熟练劳动力资源丰富,存在大量农村剩余劳动力的发展中国家来讲,非熟练劳动力的供给曲线将不会是一条向右上方倾斜的线,而是由不同供给弹性决定的一条折线,熟练劳动力的供给线则为一条正常的斜率为正的线。因此,国际垂直专业化分工对劳动力市场就业结构的影响效应,并不必然会反映在熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资的差距上,即中低技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力的工资收入差距未必缩小,高技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力的工资收入差距未必扩大。
实证分析发现国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力市场就业结构产生了重要的影响,中国工业部门参与国际垂直专业化分工,总体上降低了对熟练劳动力的相对需求,非熟练劳动力的相对需求增加,对中低技术产业的回归结果表明这一影响更为显著。而对高技术产业的分析显示,国际垂直专业化分工增加了对熟练劳动力的相对需求,降低了非熟练劳动力的相对需求,但劳动力需求变动的百分比相对于全部产业和中低技术产业要小。就国际垂直专业化分工对中国劳动力工资收入差距的分析表明,国际垂直专业化分工会缩小中低技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资差距,而会轻微拉大高技术产业熟练劳动力与非熟练劳动力相对工资差距。国际垂直专业化分工对熟练劳动力相对需求和相对工资收入的实证分析结论与理论分析相吻合。
第三,通过对中国全要素生产率的测算分析发现,近十几年来中国各产业的全要素生产率基本呈上升趋势,中低技术产业中采掘业、原材料冶炼加工及基础性生产产业的全要素生产率较高,其他中低技术产业相对较低,高技术产业的全要素生产率较高。就全要素生产率的构成来看,中国绝大多数产业全要素生产率的进步更多的体现在技术变化上,技术效率指数普遍偏低,高技术产业的技术变化增长更为明显。国际垂直专业化分工对全要素生产率及其分解的技术进步和技术效率大都产生了负向影响,只有中低技术产业对技术进步的影响为正。就全要素生产率而言,高技术产业的负向影响更为明显,就技术效率而言,中低技术产业的负向影响更为明显,这与前面的理论分析一致。分析表明目前中国参与国际垂直专业化分工并没有明显获取技术溢出的好处,只有中低技术产业因技术水平相对较低,国际垂直专业化分工对其技术进步起到了一定的促进作用。
第四,国际垂直专业化分工对中国产业竞争力产生了重要的影响,国际垂直专业化分工对产品出口竞争力指数产生了正向影响,且对中低技术产业的影响高于对高技术产业的影响。这说明虽然中国高技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度较高,但对净出口的增加效应反而较小,中国劳动密集型的产品出口仍然占有重要的地位,高技术产业因国际垂直专业化分工生产增加,而使产品净出口值增加的效应并不明显。国际垂直专业化分工净附加值指数的回归系数为正值,并且高技术产业的回归系数要明显高于中低技术产业的回归系数,表明高技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度较高,技术水平高,产业关联效应强,因此对国际垂直专业化分工净附加值指数的增加效应明显。中低技术产业的国际垂直专业化分工程度较低,同时生产环节的技术含量较低,对其他产业的关联拉动作用相对较弱,因此对国际垂直专业化净附加值的增加效应较小。
Since the mid-1990s, international division of labor is further refined with the development of production and information technology, gradually shifting from inter-industry division of labor and division of labor within the industry to intra-product specialization. Production can be separated in space and international vertical specialization is becoming increasingly popular. In the production and trade patterns of international vertical specialization, different production processes have different needs to production factors and have different economic impact on countries in different status of value chain. With low-cost manufacturing advantages, China comprehensively participates in international vertical specialization production, which has enormous impact on problems of employment, wages, enterprises'technological progress and industrial upgrading in China. However, the effect of the impact is still uncertain. Moreover, China has been increasingly challenged by other countries or regions which developed at a similar stage with the same comparative advantages (such as Mexico, India, Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries). In this economic context, it is of great significance to analyze the economic effects of China's participation in international vertical specialization for China better participating in international vertical specialization, promoting domestic industrial upgrading and enhancing industrial competitiveness.
Based on the review of domestic and foreign scholar's papers on international vertical specialization, this paper improves the calculation method of international vertical specialization according to China's reality, and does more accurate calculation of the degree of china's international vertical specialization. What's more, further analysis is made of international vertical specialization's influence on employment structure of labor market, relative wage gap between skilled and unskilled labors, technological progress and industrial competitiveness. Through the combination of theoretical analysis and empirical analysis, this paper analysis of the mechanism of international vertical specialization's impact on China's economic and the economic benefit it produced, some instructive conclusions are reached. Which is of great significance for grasping China's international vertical specialization status, clearing the way and degree of international vertical specialization'influence on the economy of China, and formulating economic development policies. The innovative points of this paper can be summarized as follows:
First, according to the characteristics of China's participation in international vertical specialization, this paper improves China's international vertical specialization measurement method. What's more, it makes more accurate estimation at the degree of China's participation in international vertical specialization through improved PA method.
Second, according to the characteristics of China's labor market, we think that Feenstra&Hanson's assume of international vertical specialization's impact on developing country's labor market is not suitable for analysis the impact of international vertical specialization on China's employment structure. This paper assumes that the production processes transferred from developed countries may not belong to high-tech sectors. At the same time, the industries have different technology level also have different impact on the employment structure.Based on this assumption, we analysis the mechanism of vertical specialization's impact on employment structure of the labor market.
Third, China as a developing country has abundant non-skilled labor and a large number of rural surplus labor forces, so the non-skilled labor supply curve will not be a line tilt to the right. Instead, it is broken line determined by different supply elasticity. The skilled labor supply curve will be a normal line of positive slope. Based on this assumption, this paper analyse the mechanism of vertical specialization's impact on wage gap of non-skilled labor and skilled labor.
Fourth, based on Goh's model, this paper improved its hypothesis, assuming that different industry has diffenent R&D cost function.Then, analysis the impact of international vertical specialization on technology transfer and technology spillover in low-tech industry and high-tech industry respectively.
Fifth, based on the conclutions made by theoretical analysis and empirical analysis on china's international vertical specialization, this paper proposes some policy suggestions on realizing division interest and promoting China's industrial upgrading during particapite in international vertical specialization.
The main conclusions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
First, the calculation of China's overall and sub-sector international vertical specialization through PA method and HIY method illustrated that China's overall and sub-sector international vertical specialization have a substantial growth in the last decades. The high-technology industry's degree of international vertical specialization is higher than that of the low-technology industries. This is because high-technology industry's product is easy to segment and developed countries outsource more low-technology products of high-technology industries. The low-technology industry sectors have less production processes and most of their processes can be completed domestically, so the degree of their international vertical specialization is relatively low. Meanwhile, the overall and sub-sector degree of international vertical specialization measured by PA method is higher than that by HIY methods. Comparing to other typical developing and developed countries, we find that the big developed countries has relatively low degree of international vertical specialization, while the emerging economic countries and small developed countries have relatively high degree of international vertical specialization. In developing countries, due to the rapid growth of China's foreign trade and the policies of encouraging developing processing trade, China's degree of international vertical specialization is higher than that of the India and Brazil.
Second, the analysis of the mechanism of international vertical specialization's impact on employment structure of the labor market and income gap in China shows that the demand for unskilled labor is relatively higher in the low-technology industries with a low degree of international vertical specialization. This may have a negative impact on the employment of skilled labor. When the industry is high-technology industries, China engages in the low-technology production processes transferred from developed countries. These production processes in China may not belong to high-tech sectors. A considerable part of these production processes may still belong to unskilled labor-intensive processes, which makes the demand on skilled labor and unskilled labor increased together in China. In addition, China as a developing country has abundant non-skilled labor and a large number of rural surplus labor forces, so the non-skilled labor supply curve will not be a line tilt to the right. Instead, it is a broken line determined by different supply elasticity. The skilled labor supply curve will be a normal line of positive slope. Therefore, the impact of international vertical specialization on the employment structure will not necessarily reflect in the relative wage gap between skilled and unskilled labor, namely the wages gap between the skilled and unskilled labor may not narrow in the low-technology industry and it may not expand in high-technology industry.
Empirical analysis finds that the international vertical specialization has a significant impact on China's labor market. The Industry Sector's participating in international vertical specialization generally reduces the relative demand for skilled labor and increases unskilled labor's demand. The regression results of the low-technology industry show that this effect is more significant. However, the analysis on high-tech industries shows that vertical specialization increases the demand for skilled labor and reduces the relative demand for unskilled labor, but the change rate in labor demand is smaller than that of the overall and the low-technology industries. The analysis on wage gap between skilled labor and unskilled labor shows that international vertical specialization narrows the wage gap in the low-technology industries but slight widens the wage gap in the high-technology industries. The empirical analysis conforms to the theoretical analysis.
Third, the measurement of China's total factor productivity shows that most of the industries'total factor productivity is in the upward trend. The mining and processing industry, metals smelting and pressing industry in the low-technology industry have higher total factor productivity, while other industries have relatively low total factor productivity and high-technology industry has one. The structure of total factor productivity shows that the growth of total factor productivity in most industries stems is embodied in the function of technical progress, and the influence in that of the high-technology industry is more obvious, while technical efficiency index is low. International vertical specialization has a negative impact on total factor productivity, technical progress and technical efficiency, except the influence on low-tech industry's technical progress. As to the total factor productivity, high-technology industry's negative influence is more obvious, while as to technical efficiency, low-technology industry's negative influence is more obvious, which conforms to the theoretical analysis. Analysis indicates that China's participation in the vertical specialization is not significantly beneficial from the technical spillovers. Only because the low technology industry has low level of technology, it benefits from the international vertical specialization.
Fourth, International vertical specialization has important influence on China's industrial competitiveness. It also has positive impact on trade competitive power Index, and the influence on low-technology industry is higher than high-technology industry. This shows that although China's high-technology industry has a high degree of international vertical specialization, the effect on net exports is small and labor-intensive products'export is still in an important position. The increase of international vertical specialization in high-technology industry has less influence on net export. International vertical specialization has positive impact on net value-added international vertical specialization index, while the influence on high-technology industry was significantly higher than on low-technology industry. This shows that high-technology industry's technology level and the degree of international vertical specialization is high, which has strong industrial linkage effects, so the growth of net value-added index of international vertical specialization is obvious. Meanwhile low-technology industry's technology level and the degree of international vertical specialization is low, which has weak industrial linkage effects, so the growth of net value-added index of international vertical specialization is not obvious.
引文
[1]Sanyal, K. K. and Jones, R. W. The Theory of Trade in Middle Products[J].American Economic Review,1982,72(1):16-31.
[2]Dixit,A.K. and Grossman,G.M.Trade and Protection with Multistage Production[J].The Review of Economic Studies,1982,49(4):583-594.
[3]Hanson, G.H.Localization Economies, Vertical Organization, and Trade[J].American Economic Review,1996,86(5):266-78.
[4]Arndt,S.W.Globalization and the Open Economy[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,1997:8(1):71-79.
[5]Campa,J. and Goldberg,L.S.The Evolving External Orientation of Manufacturing: A Profile of Four Countries[J]. Economic Policy Review,1997,3(2):53-81.
[6]Ishii, J. and Yi, K.M.The Growth of World Trade[C]. Federal Reserve Bank of New York Working Paper No.9718,1997.
[7]Feenstra,Robert C.,Integration of Trade and Disintegration of Production in the Global Economy[J]. Journal of Economic Perspective,1998,12(4):31-50.
[8]Deardorff, A.V. Fragmentation Across Cones[C].University of Michigan Working Papers No.427,1998.
[9]Hummels,D.,Rapoport, D.and Yi,K.M.. Vertical Specialization and the Changing Nature of World Trade [J]. Economic Policy Review,1998,(6):79-99.
[10]Arndt, S.W. and Kierzkowski, H. Fragmentation:New Production Patterns in the World Economy[M]. London:Oxford University Press,2001.
[11]Deardorff, A.V. Fragmentation in Simple Trade Models[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2001,12(2):121-137.
[12]Egger, H. and Egger, P.Cross-border Sourcing and Outward Processing in EU Manufacturing [J]. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 2001:12(3):243-256.
[13]Hummels, D., Ishii,J. and Yi,K.M.The Nature and Growth of Vertical Specialization in World Trade [J]. Journal of International Economics,2001,54 (1):75-96.
[14]Grossman,G. and Helpman, E. Integration versus Outsourcing in Industry Equilibrium [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,2002,117(1):85-120.
[15]Yi, K.M.Can Vertical Specialization Explain the Growth of World Trade?[J] Journal of Political Economy,2003, 111(1):52-102.
[16]Grossman,G.M. and Helpman,E.Managerial Incentives and the International Organization of Production, Journal of International Economics, 2004,63(2):237-262.
[17]Antras,P. and Helpman, E.Global Sourcing[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 2004,112(3):552-580.
[18]Deardorff, A.V.Gains from Trade and Fragmentation[C]. University of Michigan Working Papers No.543,2005.
[19]Deardorff, A.V.Ricardian Comparative Advantage with Intermediate Inputs [J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 2005,16(1):11-34.
[20]Jones, R., Kierzkowski, H. and Lurong, C. What Does Evidence Tell Us About Fragmentation and Outsourcing? [J]. International Review of Economics and Finance,2005,14(3):305-316.
[21]Feenstra,R.C. and Hanson G.H.Ownership and Control in Outsourcing to China: Estimating the Property-Rights Theory of the Firm[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,2005,120(2):729-761.
[22]Spencer,B.J.International Outsourcing and Incomplete Contracts [J].NBER working paper.No.11418,2005.
[23]Grossman,G. and Helpman, E.Outsourcing in a Global Economy [J].Review of Economic Studies,2005,72 (1):135-159.
[24]Swenson,D.L.Overseas Assembly and Country Sourcing Choices[J]. Journal of International Economics,2005,66(1):107-130,
[25]Dean,J.M.,Fung,K.C. and Wang,Z.Measuring the Vertical Specialization in Chinese Trade[C] U.S. International Trade Commission Working Paper No.2007-01-A,2007.
[26]Koopman, R.,Wang, Z. and Wei, S.J. How Much of Chinese Exports is Really Made in China?Assessing Domestic Value-added When Processing Trade is Pervasive[C].NBER Working Paper No.14109,2008.
[27]Dean, J.M., Fung, K.C. and Wang, Z.How Vertically Specialized is Chinese Trade?[C]. BOFIT Discussion Paper No.31,2008.
[28]Grossman,G.M. and Rossi-Hansberg,E.Trading Tasks:A Simple Theory of Offshoring[J]. American Economic Review,2008,98(5):1978-1997.
[29]Amador, J. and Cabral,S. Vertical Specialization Across the World:A Relative Measure[J]. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 2009,20(3):267-280.
[30]Wang,Z., Powers, W. and Wei,S.J. Value Chains in East Asian Production Networks:An International Input-Output Mode Based Analysis[C]. U.S. International Trade Commission Working Paper No.2009-10-C,2009.
[31]Meng, B., Yamano, N. and Webb. C. Vertical Specialization Indicator Based on Supply-driven Input-Output Model [C].IDE Discussion Paper No.270,2010.
[32]Feenstra,R.C. and Hanson G.H.Globalization,Outsourcing and Wage Inequality [J].The American Economic Review,1996,86(2):240-245.
[33]Feenstra,R.C. and Hanson,G.H.The Impact of Outsourcing and High-Technology Capital on Wages:Estimates for the United States,1979-1990[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1999,114(3):907-940..
[34]Anderton, B. and Brenton, P.Outsourcing and Low-skilled Workers in the UK[J].Bulletin of Economic Research,1999,51(4):267-285.
[35]Glass,A.J. and Saggi,K.Innovation and Wage Effects of International Outsourcing[J]. European Economic Review,2001,45(1):67-86.
[36]Egger, P.,Pfaffermayr,M. and Weber, A. Sectoral Adjustment of Employment: The Impact of Outsourcing and Trade at the Micro Level[C]. Institute for Advanced Studies of Vienna Working Paper No.145,2003.
[37]Kahn,V.S.The Role of Globalization in the within-industry Shift Away from Unskilled Workers in France [C]. NBER Working Papers No.9716,2003.
[38]Baily, M.N. and Lawrence, R.Z.What Happened to the Great U.S. Job Machine? The Role of Trade and Electronic Offshoring[J]. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,2004,35(2):211-284.
[39]Hijzen, A., Gorg,H. and Hine, R.C.International Outsourcing and the Skill Structure of Labour Demand in the United Kingdom[J].The Economic Journal,2005,115 (506):860-878.
[40]Hsieh, C.T. and Woo,K.T.The Impact of Outsourcing to China on Hong Kong's Labor Market[J].The American Economic Review,2005,95(5):1673-1687.
[41]Helg, R. and Tajoli. L. Patterns of International Fragmentation of Production and Implications for the Labour Markets [J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2005,16(1):233-254.
[42]Geishecker, I. and Gorg, H. Do Unskilled Workers Always Lose From Fragmentation[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2005,16(1):81-92.
[43]Koskela, E. and Stenbacka, R.Equilibrium Unemployment with Outsourcing and Wage Solidarity Under Labour Market Imperfections[C].CESifo Working Paper Series No.1988,2007.
[44]Geishecker, I. and Gorg H. Winners and Losers:A Micro-level Analysis of International Outsourcing and Wages[J].Canadian Journal of Economics, 2008,41(1):243-270.
[45]Geisbecker,I.The Impact of International Outsourcing on Individual Employment Security[J]. Labour Econom ics,2008,15(3):291-314.
[46]Egger, H. and Kreickemeier, H,U.International Fragmentation:Boon or Bane for Domestic Employment [J]. European Economic Review,2008,52(1):116-132.
[47]Hummels,D,et al.The Wage and Employment Effects of Outsourcing:Evidence from Danish Matched Worker-Firm Data[C].Working Paper,2009.
[48]Munch,J.R.Whose Job Goes Abroad? International Outsourcing and Individual Job Separations[J], S candinavian Journal of Economics,2010,112(2):339-360.
[49]Dedrick, J, et al.Who Profits from Innovation in Global Value Chains? A Study of the iPod and Notebook PCs[J].Industrial and Corporate Change,2010,19(1): 81-116.
[50]Konig, J. and Koskela, E.Does International Outsourcing Really Lower Workers' Income?[J].Journal of Labor Research,2011,32(1):21-38.
[51]Egger, P. and Pfaffermayr, M. and Wolfmayr,Y.A.The International Fragmentation of Austrian Manufacturing:The Effects of Outsourcing on Productivity and Wages[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2001,12(3):257-272.
[52]Pack, H. and Saggi,K.Vertical Technology Transfer via International Outsourcing[J].Journal of Development Economics,2001,65(2):389-415.
[53]Gorg, H., Hanley, A. and Strobl, E.Outsourcing, Foreign Ownership, Exporting and Productivity:An Empirical Inves tigation with Plant Level Data[C].The University of Nottingham Working Paper No.08,2004.
[54]Girma, S. and G6rg,H.Outsourcing, Foreign Ownership, and Productivity: Evidence from UK Establishment-level Data [J].Review of International Economics,2004,12(5):817-832.
[55]Amighini, A.China in the International Fragmentation of Production:Evidence from the ICT Industry [J]. The European Journal of Comparative Economics,2005,2(2):203-219.
[56]Amiti, M. and Wei, S.J.Service Offshoring,Productivity and Employment: Evidence From the US [C].IMF Working Paper No.238,2005
[57]Goh, A.T.Knowledge Diffusion, Input Supplier's Technological Effort and Technology Transfer via Vertical Relationships[J].Journal of International Economics,2005,66:527-540.
[58]Egger, P. and Egger, H.International Outsourcing and the Productivity of Low-skilled Labor in the EU[J].Economic Inquiry,2006,44(1):98-108.
[59]Dluhosch, B. Intra-industry Trade and the Gains From Fragmentation[J].The North American Journal of Economi cs and Finance,2006,17(1):49-64.
[60]Olsen, K.B.Productivity Impacts of Offshoring and Outsourcing:A Review [C]. OECD Working Paper No.1,2006.
[61]Jabbour, L. and Mucchiellli, J.L.Technology Transfer through Vertical Linkages: The Case of the Spanish Manufacturing Industry [J]. Journal of Applied Economics,2007,X(1):115-1360.
[62]Gorg, H.,Hanley, A.and Strobl, E.Productivity Effects of International Outsourcing:Evidence from Plant-Level Data [J].Canadian Journal of Economics,2008,41(2):670-688.
[63]Ehmcke, J.S.The Impact of Outsourcing on Total Factor Productivity-Evidence from Matched Firm Level Data[C].Working Paper,2010.
[64]Jung,J. and Mercenier,J. Offshore Outsourcing, Technology Upgrading and Welfare in a Two-Sector North-South Model[C] Working Paper,2010.
[65]Kose, M.A. and Yi, K.M.International Trade and Business Cycles:Is Vertical Specialization the Missing Link?[J]. The American Economic Review, 200I,91(2):371-375.
[66]Samuelson,P.A.Where Ricardo and Mill Rebut and Confirm Arguments of Mainstream Economists Supporting Globalization [J] Journal of Economic Perspectives,2004,18(3):135-146.
[67]Chen, H., Kondratowicz, M. and Yi, K.M.Vertical Specialization and Three Facts about U.S. International Trade[J]. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2005,16 (1):35-59.
[68]Kimura, F.,Takahashi,Y. and Hayakawa, K. Fragmentation and Parts and Components Trade:Comparison between East Asia and Europe[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2007,18(1):23-40.
[69]Horgos,D.Labor Market Effects of International Outsourcing:How Measurement Matters[J]. International Review of Economics and Finance,2009,18(4):611-623.
[70]Hwang, Y.S. Song, J. and Kim.S.E.Vertical Specialization and Trade Growth in Northeast Asia[J]. China and World Economy,2011,19(2):109-126.
[71]Bems, R., Johnson, R.C. and Yi,K.M.Vertical Linkages and the Collapse of Global Trade[J]. American Economic Review,2011,101(3):308-312.
[72]邹薇,庄子银.分工、交易与经济增长[J].中国社会科学,1996,(3).
[73]刘志彪,刘晓昶.垂直专业化：经济全球化中的贸易和生产模式[J].经济理论与经济管理,2001,(10)
[74]卢锋.产品内分工[J].经济学(季刊),2004,(4).
[75]吴福象.经济全球化中制造业垂直分离的研究[J].财经科学,2005,(3)
[76]田文.产品内贸易的定义、计量及比较分析[J].财贸经济,2005,(5)
[77]李晓华.产业组织的垂直解体与网络化[J].中国工业经济,2005,(7)
[78]刘志彪,吴福象.贸易一体化与生产非一体化——基于经济全球化两个重要假说的实证研究[J].中国社会科学,2006,(2).
[79]北京大学中国经济研究中心课题组.中国出口贸易中的垂直专门化与中美贸易[J].世界经济,2006,(5)
[80]胡昭玲.国际垂直专业化分工与贸易：研究综述[J].南开经济研究,2006,(5).
[81]曾铮.产品内分工理论的历史沿承及其范式擅变[J].首都经济贸易大学学报,2007,(1)
[82]胡昭玲,张蕊.中国制造业参与产品内国际分工的影响因素分析[J].世界经济研究,2008,(3).
[83]林季红.国际生产非一体化论析[J].厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(5)
[84]王中华,梁俊伟.国际垂直专业化、贸易分工模式与福利[J].山西财经大学学报,2008,(8)
[85]赵明亮.分工理论：从古希腊思想到新国际体系的研究述评[J].产经评论,2010,(3).
[86]赵明亮,臧旭恒.垂直专业化分工测度及经济效应研究述评[J].经济理论与经济管理,2011,(9)
[87]鲍晓华,张莉.中国制造业外包水平的测度[J].统计研究,2011, (4)
[88]戴魁早.中国高技术产业垂直专业化影响因素研究——基于各产业和各地区面板协整的实证检验[J].财经研究,2011,(5)
[89]盛斌,马涛.中间产品贸易对中国劳动力需求变化的影响：基于工业部门动态面板数据的分析[J].世界经济,2008,(3).
[90]宗毅君.国际产品内分工与工资收入——基于中国工业行业面板数据的经验研究[J].财贸经济,2008,(4).
[91]王中华,梁俊伟.中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的收入差距效应[J].经济评论,2008,(4)
[92]孙宇.国际服务外包、结构转型与扩大就业[J].宏观经济研究,2009(2).
[93]顾磊.国际外包与我国城乡收入差距关系的实证研究：1981-2007[J].国际贸易问题,2009,(2).
[94]唐宜红,马风涛.国际垂直专业化对中国劳动力就业结构的影响[J].财贸经济,2009,(4)
[95]王中华,等.国际垂直专业化与工资收入差距——基于工业行业数据的实证分析[J].财经研究,2009,(7)
[96]籍艳丽,席艳乐.产品内分工对相对就业的影响——基于中国制造业面板数据的实证分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2009,(12).
[97]陈仲常,马红旗.我国制造业不同外包形式的就业效应研究——基于动态劳动需求模型的实证检验[J].中国工业经济,2010,(4).
[98]张亚斌,艾洪山.国际垂直专业化与工薪差距：理论研究与经验分析[J].经济学动态,2010,(6).
[99]黄春媛.国际外包的劳动力市场效应：研究综述[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(6).
[100]徐毅.外包与工资差距——基于工业行业数据的经验研究[J].世界经济研究,2011,(1).
[101]戴魁早.垂直专业化的工资增长效应——理论与中国高技术产业的经验分析[J].中国工业经济,2011,(3).
[102]臧旭恒,赵明亮.垂直专业化分工与劳动力市场就业结构——基于中国工业行业面板数据的分析[J].中国工业经济,2011,(6).
[103]赵明亮,臧旭恒.垂直专业化分工与中国劳动力工资收入差距[J].东岳论丛,2011,(9).
[104]韦畅.外包对承接国的效应分析及中国承接外包水平的实证研究[D].浙江大学博士学位论文,2005.
[105]王洪庆.我国加工贸易的技术溢出效应研究[J].世界经济研究,2006,(7).
[106]张纪.产品内国际分工：动因、机制与效应研究[D].上海社会科学院博士 学位论文,2007.
[107]胡昭玲.产品内国际分工对中国工业生产率的影响分析[J].中国工业经济,2007,(6)
[108]姚洋,张晔.中国出口品国内技术含量升级的动态研究——来自全国及江苏省、广东省的证据[J].中国社会科学,2008,(2).
[109]盛斌,马涛.中国工业部门垂直专业化与国内技术含量的关系研究[J].世界经济研究,2008,(5)
[110]刘海云,唐玲.国际外包的生产率效应及产业差异——基于中国工业行业的经验研究[J].中国工业经济,2009,(8).
[111]张秋菊,孙赫.跨国外包的承接对我国工业产业技术进步的影响[J].国际贸易问题,2009,(8).
[112]王中华,等.中国工业参与国际国际垂直专业化分工的技术进步效应分析[J].中央财经大学学报,2009,(9)
[113]黄烨菁.国际外包对承接方的技术效应——基于微观机制的分析[J].上海经济研究,2009,(9).
[114]唐玲.国际外包与生产率——基于中国工业行业的实证分析[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2010.
[115]孟祺,隋杨.垂直专业化与全要素生产率——基于工业行业的面板数据分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2010,(1)
[116]刘庆林,等.国际生产分割的生产率效应[J].经济研究,2010,(2)
[117]汪丽,贺书锋.中国制造业国际外包与生产率增长——基于服务外包和实物外包的双重度量[J].上海经济研究,2010,(3).
[118]张杰,等.外包与技术转移：基于发展中国家异质性模仿的分析[J].经济学(季刊)2010,(4)
[119]孙文远,姜德波.产品内国际分工的劳动生产率效应——基于长三角与珠三角的经验研究[J].产业经济研究,2010,(4).
[120]于明超,陈柳.垂直专业化与中国企业技术创新[J].当代经济科学,2011,(1).
[121]肖文,殷宝庆.垂直专业化的技术进步效应——基于27个制造产业面板 数据的实证分析[J].科学学研究,2011,(3)
[122]郭炳南,魏润卿.国际垂直专业化分工与中国工业行业技术进步——基于DEA方法的面板数据分析[J].经济问题探索,2011,(11).
[123]张小蒂,孙景蔚.基于国际垂直专业化分工的中国产业国际竞争力分析[J].世界经济,2006,(5)
[124]马风涛,刘辉群.垂直专业化、出口商品复杂度与国内含量——基于中国工业部门的视角[J].云南财经大学学报,2011,(2).
[125]符正平.论企业集群的产生条件与形成机制[J].中国工业经济,2002,(10).
[126]青木昌彦,安藤晴彦.模块时代,新产业结构的本质[M].上海：上海远东出版社,2003.
[127]金碚.世界分工体系中的中国制造业[J].中国工业经济,2003,(5).
[128]张辉.全球价值链理论与我国产业发展研究[J].中国工业经济,2004,(5).
[129]本多光雄.国际分工与产业集聚[J].产业经济评论,2005,(2).
[130]刘德学,等.全球生产网络、知识扩散与加工贸易升级[J].经济问题探索,2005,(12).
[131]刘志彪.全球化背景下中国制造业升级的路径与品牌战略[J].财经问题研究,2005,(5)
[132]刘志彪,张杰.全球代工体系下发展中国家俘获型网络的形成、突破与对策一基于GVC与NVC的比较视角[J].中国工业经济,2005,(8).
[133]梁宏.产业集群及其竞争力研究,哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)[J].2005,(1)
[134]梁琦,詹亦军.产业集聚、技术进步和产业升级：来自长三角的证据[J].产业经济评论,2005,(2).
[135]李海舰,原磊.基于价值链层面的利润转移研究[J].中国工业经济,2005,(6).
[136]张辉.全球价值链下地方产业集群转型和升级[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2006.
[137]刘德学.全球生产网络与加工贸易升级[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2006.
[138]王文平,谈正达.产业集群中知识共享深度与知识型企业的创新资源投入关系研究[J].产业经济评论,2006,(1).
[139]符正平.论企业集群升级战略[J].产业经济评论,2006,(1).
[140]谭力文,马海燕.全球外包下的中国企业价值链重构[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(2)
[141]吴延兵.中国工业产业创新水平及影响因素——面板数据的实证分析[J].产业经济评论,2006,(2).
[142]臧旭恒,何青松.试论产业集群租金与产业集群演进[J].中国工业经济,2007,(3).
[143]张小蒂,朱勤.论全球价值链中我国企业创新与市场势力构建的良性互动[J].中国工业经济,2007,(5).
[144]杨蕙馨,等.产业链纵向关系与分工制度安排的选择及整合[J].中国工业经济,2007,(9)
[145]江静,刘志彪.全球化进程中的收益分配不均与中国产业升级[J].经济理论与经济管理,2007,(7).
[146]张明志.国际外包对发展中国家产业升级影响的机理分析[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(1).
[147]高越,高峰.国际垂直专业化分工及我国的分工地位[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(3).
[148]杨继军,等.承接国际服务外包与长三角产业结构升级[J].南京社会科学[J].2008,(5).
[149]林敏华.产品内分工对中国产业升级促进作用的途径分析[J].云南财经大学学报,2009,(5).
[150]李淑梅.国际垂直专业化分工下的制造业产业升级[J].社会科学家,2009,(12).
[151]丁蕾.科研投入、制造业基础与发展中国家加工贸易的产业升级[J].产业经济评论,2010,(1).
[152]巫强,刘志彪.双边交易平台下构建国家价值链的条件、瓶颈与突破——基于山寨手机与传统手机产业链与价值链的比较分析[J].中国工业经济, 2010, (3).
[153]马涛,刘仕国.产品内分工下中国进口结构与增长的二元边际——基于引力模型的动态面板数据分析[J].南开经济研究,2010,(4).
[154]杨文芳.国际外包的承接对我国经济效应的实证分析[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2010.
[155]张会清.新国际分工、全球生产网络与中国制造业发展[D].华东师范大学博士学位论文,2010.
[156]张明志,李敏.国际垂直专业化分工下的中国制造业产业升级及实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2011,(1).
[157]郭炳南,等.国际垂直专业化分工与中国经济增长——基于一般贸易模式的比较[J].云南财经大学学报,2011,(2).
[158]刘友金,胡黎明.产品内分工、价值链重组与产业转移——兼论产业转移过程中的大国战略[J].中国软科学,2011,(3).
[159]金碚.中国工业的转型升级[J].中国工业经济,2011,(7).
[160]张纪.产品内分工条件下中国新型工业化模式探索[J].现代经济探讨,2011,(11).
[161]梁运文,张帅.垂直专业化下中国制造业竞争力层次传导效应[J].财经研究,2011,(12).
[162]吕新军.国际外包及其对产业竞争力的影响——基于中国工业产业的实证分析[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2011.
[163]赵明亮,杨蕙馨.经济全球化条件下的国际生产网络与发展中国家价值链的重构[J].产业经济评论,2012,(1).
[164]臧旭恒,等.产业经济学(第四版)[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2007.
[165]杨蕙馨.产业组织理论[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2007.
[166]刘春生.全球生产网络的构建与中国的战略选择[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[167]卜国琴.全球生产网络与中国产业升级研究研究[M].广州：暨南大学出版社,2009.
[168]宗毅君.国际产品内分工与中国经济[M].上海：上海三联书店出版社, 2010.
[169]丁永建.面向全球产业价值链的中国制造业升级[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.
[2]Dixit,A.K. and Grossman,G.M.Trade and Protection with Multistage Production[J].The Review of Economic Studies,1982,49(4):583-594.
[3]Hanson, G.H.Localization Economies, Vertical Organization, and Trade[J].American Economic Review,1996,86(5):266-78.
[4]Arndt,S.W.Globalization and the Open Economy[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,1997:8(1):71-79.
[5]Campa,J. and Goldberg,L.S.The Evolving External Orientation of Manufacturing: A Profile of Four Countries[J]. Economic Policy Review,1997,3(2):53-81.
[6]Ishii, J. and Yi, K.M.The Growth of World Trade[C]. Federal Reserve Bank of New York Working Paper No.9718,1997.
[7]Feenstra,Robert C.,Integration of Trade and Disintegration of Production in the Global Economy[J]. Journal of Economic Perspective,1998,12(4):31-50.
[8]Deardorff, A.V. Fragmentation Across Cones[C].University of Michigan Working Papers No.427,1998.
[9]Hummels,D.,Rapoport, D.and Yi,K.M.. Vertical Specialization and the Changing Nature of World Trade [J]. Economic Policy Review,1998,(6):79-99.
[10]Arndt, S.W. and Kierzkowski, H. Fragmentation:New Production Patterns in the World Economy[M]. London:Oxford University Press,2001.
[11]Deardorff, A.V. Fragmentation in Simple Trade Models[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2001,12(2):121-137.
[12]Egger, H. and Egger, P.Cross-border Sourcing and Outward Processing in EU Manufacturing [J]. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 2001:12(3):243-256.
[13]Hummels, D., Ishii,J. and Yi,K.M.The Nature and Growth of Vertical Specialization in World Trade [J]. Journal of International Economics,2001,54 (1):75-96.
[14]Grossman,G. and Helpman, E. Integration versus Outsourcing in Industry Equilibrium [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics,2002,117(1):85-120.
[15]Yi, K.M.Can Vertical Specialization Explain the Growth of World Trade?[J] Journal of Political Economy,2003, 111(1):52-102.
[16]Grossman,G.M. and Helpman,E.Managerial Incentives and the International Organization of Production, Journal of International Economics, 2004,63(2):237-262.
[17]Antras,P. and Helpman, E.Global Sourcing[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 2004,112(3):552-580.
[18]Deardorff, A.V.Gains from Trade and Fragmentation[C]. University of Michigan Working Papers No.543,2005.
[19]Deardorff, A.V.Ricardian Comparative Advantage with Intermediate Inputs [J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 2005,16(1):11-34.
[20]Jones, R., Kierzkowski, H. and Lurong, C. What Does Evidence Tell Us About Fragmentation and Outsourcing? [J]. International Review of Economics and Finance,2005,14(3):305-316.
[21]Feenstra,R.C. and Hanson G.H.Ownership and Control in Outsourcing to China: Estimating the Property-Rights Theory of the Firm[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,2005,120(2):729-761.
[22]Spencer,B.J.International Outsourcing and Incomplete Contracts [J].NBER working paper.No.11418,2005.
[23]Grossman,G. and Helpman, E.Outsourcing in a Global Economy [J].Review of Economic Studies,2005,72 (1):135-159.
[24]Swenson,D.L.Overseas Assembly and Country Sourcing Choices[J]. Journal of International Economics,2005,66(1):107-130,
[25]Dean,J.M.,Fung,K.C. and Wang,Z.Measuring the Vertical Specialization in Chinese Trade[C] U.S. International Trade Commission Working Paper No.2007-01-A,2007.
[26]Koopman, R.,Wang, Z. and Wei, S.J. How Much of Chinese Exports is Really Made in China?Assessing Domestic Value-added When Processing Trade is Pervasive[C].NBER Working Paper No.14109,2008.
[27]Dean, J.M., Fung, K.C. and Wang, Z.How Vertically Specialized is Chinese Trade?[C]. BOFIT Discussion Paper No.31,2008.
[28]Grossman,G.M. and Rossi-Hansberg,E.Trading Tasks:A Simple Theory of Offshoring[J]. American Economic Review,2008,98(5):1978-1997.
[29]Amador, J. and Cabral,S. Vertical Specialization Across the World:A Relative Measure[J]. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 2009,20(3):267-280.
[30]Wang,Z., Powers, W. and Wei,S.J. Value Chains in East Asian Production Networks:An International Input-Output Mode Based Analysis[C]. U.S. International Trade Commission Working Paper No.2009-10-C,2009.
[31]Meng, B., Yamano, N. and Webb. C. Vertical Specialization Indicator Based on Supply-driven Input-Output Model [C].IDE Discussion Paper No.270,2010.
[32]Feenstra,R.C. and Hanson G.H.Globalization,Outsourcing and Wage Inequality [J].The American Economic Review,1996,86(2):240-245.
[33]Feenstra,R.C. and Hanson,G.H.The Impact of Outsourcing and High-Technology Capital on Wages:Estimates for the United States,1979-1990[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1999,114(3):907-940..
[34]Anderton, B. and Brenton, P.Outsourcing and Low-skilled Workers in the UK[J].Bulletin of Economic Research,1999,51(4):267-285.
[35]Glass,A.J. and Saggi,K.Innovation and Wage Effects of International Outsourcing[J]. European Economic Review,2001,45(1):67-86.
[36]Egger, P.,Pfaffermayr,M. and Weber, A. Sectoral Adjustment of Employment: The Impact of Outsourcing and Trade at the Micro Level[C]. Institute for Advanced Studies of Vienna Working Paper No.145,2003.
[37]Kahn,V.S.The Role of Globalization in the within-industry Shift Away from Unskilled Workers in France [C]. NBER Working Papers No.9716,2003.
[38]Baily, M.N. and Lawrence, R.Z.What Happened to the Great U.S. Job Machine? The Role of Trade and Electronic Offshoring[J]. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,2004,35(2):211-284.
[39]Hijzen, A., Gorg,H. and Hine, R.C.International Outsourcing and the Skill Structure of Labour Demand in the United Kingdom[J].The Economic Journal,2005,115 (506):860-878.
[40]Hsieh, C.T. and Woo,K.T.The Impact of Outsourcing to China on Hong Kong's Labor Market[J].The American Economic Review,2005,95(5):1673-1687.
[41]Helg, R. and Tajoli. L. Patterns of International Fragmentation of Production and Implications for the Labour Markets [J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2005,16(1):233-254.
[42]Geishecker, I. and Gorg, H. Do Unskilled Workers Always Lose From Fragmentation[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2005,16(1):81-92.
[43]Koskela, E. and Stenbacka, R.Equilibrium Unemployment with Outsourcing and Wage Solidarity Under Labour Market Imperfections[C].CESifo Working Paper Series No.1988,2007.
[44]Geishecker, I. and Gorg H. Winners and Losers:A Micro-level Analysis of International Outsourcing and Wages[J].Canadian Journal of Economics, 2008,41(1):243-270.
[45]Geisbecker,I.The Impact of International Outsourcing on Individual Employment Security[J]. Labour Econom ics,2008,15(3):291-314.
[46]Egger, H. and Kreickemeier, H,U.International Fragmentation:Boon or Bane for Domestic Employment [J]. European Economic Review,2008,52(1):116-132.
[47]Hummels,D,et al.The Wage and Employment Effects of Outsourcing:Evidence from Danish Matched Worker-Firm Data[C].Working Paper,2009.
[48]Munch,J.R.Whose Job Goes Abroad? International Outsourcing and Individual Job Separations[J], S candinavian Journal of Economics,2010,112(2):339-360.
[49]Dedrick, J, et al.Who Profits from Innovation in Global Value Chains? A Study of the iPod and Notebook PCs[J].Industrial and Corporate Change,2010,19(1): 81-116.
[50]Konig, J. and Koskela, E.Does International Outsourcing Really Lower Workers' Income?[J].Journal of Labor Research,2011,32(1):21-38.
[51]Egger, P. and Pfaffermayr, M. and Wolfmayr,Y.A.The International Fragmentation of Austrian Manufacturing:The Effects of Outsourcing on Productivity and Wages[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2001,12(3):257-272.
[52]Pack, H. and Saggi,K.Vertical Technology Transfer via International Outsourcing[J].Journal of Development Economics,2001,65(2):389-415.
[53]Gorg, H., Hanley, A. and Strobl, E.Outsourcing, Foreign Ownership, Exporting and Productivity:An Empirical Inves tigation with Plant Level Data[C].The University of Nottingham Working Paper No.08,2004.
[54]Girma, S. and G6rg,H.Outsourcing, Foreign Ownership, and Productivity: Evidence from UK Establishment-level Data [J].Review of International Economics,2004,12(5):817-832.
[55]Amighini, A.China in the International Fragmentation of Production:Evidence from the ICT Industry [J]. The European Journal of Comparative Economics,2005,2(2):203-219.
[56]Amiti, M. and Wei, S.J.Service Offshoring,Productivity and Employment: Evidence From the US [C].IMF Working Paper No.238,2005
[57]Goh, A.T.Knowledge Diffusion, Input Supplier's Technological Effort and Technology Transfer via Vertical Relationships[J].Journal of International Economics,2005,66:527-540.
[58]Egger, P. and Egger, H.International Outsourcing and the Productivity of Low-skilled Labor in the EU[J].Economic Inquiry,2006,44(1):98-108.
[59]Dluhosch, B. Intra-industry Trade and the Gains From Fragmentation[J].The North American Journal of Economi cs and Finance,2006,17(1):49-64.
[60]Olsen, K.B.Productivity Impacts of Offshoring and Outsourcing:A Review [C]. OECD Working Paper No.1,2006.
[61]Jabbour, L. and Mucchiellli, J.L.Technology Transfer through Vertical Linkages: The Case of the Spanish Manufacturing Industry [J]. Journal of Applied Economics,2007,X(1):115-1360.
[62]Gorg, H.,Hanley, A.and Strobl, E.Productivity Effects of International Outsourcing:Evidence from Plant-Level Data [J].Canadian Journal of Economics,2008,41(2):670-688.
[63]Ehmcke, J.S.The Impact of Outsourcing on Total Factor Productivity-Evidence from Matched Firm Level Data[C].Working Paper,2010.
[64]Jung,J. and Mercenier,J. Offshore Outsourcing, Technology Upgrading and Welfare in a Two-Sector North-South Model[C] Working Paper,2010.
[65]Kose, M.A. and Yi, K.M.International Trade and Business Cycles:Is Vertical Specialization the Missing Link?[J]. The American Economic Review, 200I,91(2):371-375.
[66]Samuelson,P.A.Where Ricardo and Mill Rebut and Confirm Arguments of Mainstream Economists Supporting Globalization [J] Journal of Economic Perspectives,2004,18(3):135-146.
[67]Chen, H., Kondratowicz, M. and Yi, K.M.Vertical Specialization and Three Facts about U.S. International Trade[J]. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2005,16 (1):35-59.
[68]Kimura, F.,Takahashi,Y. and Hayakawa, K. Fragmentation and Parts and Components Trade:Comparison between East Asia and Europe[J].The North American Journal of Economics and Finance,2007,18(1):23-40.
[69]Horgos,D.Labor Market Effects of International Outsourcing:How Measurement Matters[J]. International Review of Economics and Finance,2009,18(4):611-623.
[70]Hwang, Y.S. Song, J. and Kim.S.E.Vertical Specialization and Trade Growth in Northeast Asia[J]. China and World Economy,2011,19(2):109-126.
[71]Bems, R., Johnson, R.C. and Yi,K.M.Vertical Linkages and the Collapse of Global Trade[J]. American Economic Review,2011,101(3):308-312.
[72]邹薇,庄子银.分工、交易与经济增长[J].中国社会科学,1996,(3).
[73]刘志彪,刘晓昶.垂直专业化：经济全球化中的贸易和生产模式[J].经济理论与经济管理,2001,(10)
[74]卢锋.产品内分工[J].经济学(季刊),2004,(4).
[75]吴福象.经济全球化中制造业垂直分离的研究[J].财经科学,2005,(3)
[76]田文.产品内贸易的定义、计量及比较分析[J].财贸经济,2005,(5)
[77]李晓华.产业组织的垂直解体与网络化[J].中国工业经济,2005,(7)
[78]刘志彪,吴福象.贸易一体化与生产非一体化——基于经济全球化两个重要假说的实证研究[J].中国社会科学,2006,(2).
[79]北京大学中国经济研究中心课题组.中国出口贸易中的垂直专门化与中美贸易[J].世界经济,2006,(5)
[80]胡昭玲.国际垂直专业化分工与贸易：研究综述[J].南开经济研究,2006,(5).
[81]曾铮.产品内分工理论的历史沿承及其范式擅变[J].首都经济贸易大学学报,2007,(1)
[82]胡昭玲,张蕊.中国制造业参与产品内国际分工的影响因素分析[J].世界经济研究,2008,(3).
[83]林季红.国际生产非一体化论析[J].厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008,(5)
[84]王中华,梁俊伟.国际垂直专业化、贸易分工模式与福利[J].山西财经大学学报,2008,(8)
[85]赵明亮.分工理论：从古希腊思想到新国际体系的研究述评[J].产经评论,2010,(3).
[86]赵明亮,臧旭恒.垂直专业化分工测度及经济效应研究述评[J].经济理论与经济管理,2011,(9)
[87]鲍晓华,张莉.中国制造业外包水平的测度[J].统计研究,2011, (4)
[88]戴魁早.中国高技术产业垂直专业化影响因素研究——基于各产业和各地区面板协整的实证检验[J].财经研究,2011,(5)
[89]盛斌,马涛.中间产品贸易对中国劳动力需求变化的影响：基于工业部门动态面板数据的分析[J].世界经济,2008,(3).
[90]宗毅君.国际产品内分工与工资收入——基于中国工业行业面板数据的经验研究[J].财贸经济,2008,(4).
[91]王中华,梁俊伟.中国参与国际垂直专业化分工的收入差距效应[J].经济评论,2008,(4)
[92]孙宇.国际服务外包、结构转型与扩大就业[J].宏观经济研究,2009(2).
[93]顾磊.国际外包与我国城乡收入差距关系的实证研究：1981-2007[J].国际贸易问题,2009,(2).
[94]唐宜红,马风涛.国际垂直专业化对中国劳动力就业结构的影响[J].财贸经济,2009,(4)
[95]王中华,等.国际垂直专业化与工资收入差距——基于工业行业数据的实证分析[J].财经研究,2009,(7)
[96]籍艳丽,席艳乐.产品内分工对相对就业的影响——基于中国制造业面板数据的实证分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2009,(12).
[97]陈仲常,马红旗.我国制造业不同外包形式的就业效应研究——基于动态劳动需求模型的实证检验[J].中国工业经济,2010,(4).
[98]张亚斌,艾洪山.国际垂直专业化与工薪差距：理论研究与经验分析[J].经济学动态,2010,(6).
[99]黄春媛.国际外包的劳动力市场效应：研究综述[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,(6).
[100]徐毅.外包与工资差距——基于工业行业数据的经验研究[J].世界经济研究,2011,(1).
[101]戴魁早.垂直专业化的工资增长效应——理论与中国高技术产业的经验分析[J].中国工业经济,2011,(3).
[102]臧旭恒,赵明亮.垂直专业化分工与劳动力市场就业结构——基于中国工业行业面板数据的分析[J].中国工业经济,2011,(6).
[103]赵明亮,臧旭恒.垂直专业化分工与中国劳动力工资收入差距[J].东岳论丛,2011,(9).
[104]韦畅.外包对承接国的效应分析及中国承接外包水平的实证研究[D].浙江大学博士学位论文,2005.
[105]王洪庆.我国加工贸易的技术溢出效应研究[J].世界经济研究,2006,(7).
[106]张纪.产品内国际分工：动因、机制与效应研究[D].上海社会科学院博士 学位论文,2007.
[107]胡昭玲.产品内国际分工对中国工业生产率的影响分析[J].中国工业经济,2007,(6)
[108]姚洋,张晔.中国出口品国内技术含量升级的动态研究——来自全国及江苏省、广东省的证据[J].中国社会科学,2008,(2).
[109]盛斌,马涛.中国工业部门垂直专业化与国内技术含量的关系研究[J].世界经济研究,2008,(5)
[110]刘海云,唐玲.国际外包的生产率效应及产业差异——基于中国工业行业的经验研究[J].中国工业经济,2009,(8).
[111]张秋菊,孙赫.跨国外包的承接对我国工业产业技术进步的影响[J].国际贸易问题,2009,(8).
[112]王中华,等.中国工业参与国际国际垂直专业化分工的技术进步效应分析[J].中央财经大学学报,2009,(9)
[113]黄烨菁.国际外包对承接方的技术效应——基于微观机制的分析[J].上海经济研究,2009,(9).
[114]唐玲.国际外包与生产率——基于中国工业行业的实证分析[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2010.
[115]孟祺,隋杨.垂直专业化与全要素生产率——基于工业行业的面板数据分析[J].山西财经大学学报,2010,(1)
[116]刘庆林,等.国际生产分割的生产率效应[J].经济研究,2010,(2)
[117]汪丽,贺书锋.中国制造业国际外包与生产率增长——基于服务外包和实物外包的双重度量[J].上海经济研究,2010,(3).
[118]张杰,等.外包与技术转移：基于发展中国家异质性模仿的分析[J].经济学(季刊)2010,(4)
[119]孙文远,姜德波.产品内国际分工的劳动生产率效应——基于长三角与珠三角的经验研究[J].产业经济研究,2010,(4).
[120]于明超,陈柳.垂直专业化与中国企业技术创新[J].当代经济科学,2011,(1).
[121]肖文,殷宝庆.垂直专业化的技术进步效应——基于27个制造产业面板 数据的实证分析[J].科学学研究,2011,(3)
[122]郭炳南,魏润卿.国际垂直专业化分工与中国工业行业技术进步——基于DEA方法的面板数据分析[J].经济问题探索,2011,(11).
[123]张小蒂,孙景蔚.基于国际垂直专业化分工的中国产业国际竞争力分析[J].世界经济,2006,(5)
[124]马风涛,刘辉群.垂直专业化、出口商品复杂度与国内含量——基于中国工业部门的视角[J].云南财经大学学报,2011,(2).
[125]符正平.论企业集群的产生条件与形成机制[J].中国工业经济,2002,(10).
[126]青木昌彦,安藤晴彦.模块时代,新产业结构的本质[M].上海：上海远东出版社,2003.
[127]金碚.世界分工体系中的中国制造业[J].中国工业经济,2003,(5).
[128]张辉.全球价值链理论与我国产业发展研究[J].中国工业经济,2004,(5).
[129]本多光雄.国际分工与产业集聚[J].产业经济评论,2005,(2).
[130]刘德学,等.全球生产网络、知识扩散与加工贸易升级[J].经济问题探索,2005,(12).
[131]刘志彪.全球化背景下中国制造业升级的路径与品牌战略[J].财经问题研究,2005,(5)
[132]刘志彪,张杰.全球代工体系下发展中国家俘获型网络的形成、突破与对策一基于GVC与NVC的比较视角[J].中国工业经济,2005,(8).
[133]梁宏.产业集群及其竞争力研究,哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)[J].2005,(1)
[134]梁琦,詹亦军.产业集聚、技术进步和产业升级：来自长三角的证据[J].产业经济评论,2005,(2).
[135]李海舰,原磊.基于价值链层面的利润转移研究[J].中国工业经济,2005,(6).
[136]张辉.全球价值链下地方产业集群转型和升级[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2006.
[137]刘德学.全球生产网络与加工贸易升级[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2006.
[138]王文平,谈正达.产业集群中知识共享深度与知识型企业的创新资源投入关系研究[J].产业经济评论,2006,(1).
[139]符正平.论企业集群升级战略[J].产业经济评论,2006,(1).
[140]谭力文,马海燕.全球外包下的中国企业价值链重构[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(2)
[141]吴延兵.中国工业产业创新水平及影响因素——面板数据的实证分析[J].产业经济评论,2006,(2).
[142]臧旭恒,何青松.试论产业集群租金与产业集群演进[J].中国工业经济,2007,(3).
[143]张小蒂,朱勤.论全球价值链中我国企业创新与市场势力构建的良性互动[J].中国工业经济,2007,(5).
[144]杨蕙馨,等.产业链纵向关系与分工制度安排的选择及整合[J].中国工业经济,2007,(9)
[145]江静,刘志彪.全球化进程中的收益分配不均与中国产业升级[J].经济理论与经济管理,2007,(7).
[146]张明志.国际外包对发展中国家产业升级影响的机理分析[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(1).
[147]高越,高峰.国际垂直专业化分工及我国的分工地位[J].国际贸易问题,2008,(3).
[148]杨继军,等.承接国际服务外包与长三角产业结构升级[J].南京社会科学[J].2008,(5).
[149]林敏华.产品内分工对中国产业升级促进作用的途径分析[J].云南财经大学学报,2009,(5).
[150]李淑梅.国际垂直专业化分工下的制造业产业升级[J].社会科学家,2009,(12).
[151]丁蕾.科研投入、制造业基础与发展中国家加工贸易的产业升级[J].产业经济评论,2010,(1).
[152]巫强,刘志彪.双边交易平台下构建国家价值链的条件、瓶颈与突破——基于山寨手机与传统手机产业链与价值链的比较分析[J].中国工业经济, 2010, (3).
[153]马涛,刘仕国.产品内分工下中国进口结构与增长的二元边际——基于引力模型的动态面板数据分析[J].南开经济研究,2010,(4).
[154]杨文芳.国际外包的承接对我国经济效应的实证分析[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2010.
[155]张会清.新国际分工、全球生产网络与中国制造业发展[D].华东师范大学博士学位论文,2010.
[156]张明志,李敏.国际垂直专业化分工下的中国制造业产业升级及实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2011,(1).
[157]郭炳南,等.国际垂直专业化分工与中国经济增长——基于一般贸易模式的比较[J].云南财经大学学报,2011,(2).
[158]刘友金,胡黎明.产品内分工、价值链重组与产业转移——兼论产业转移过程中的大国战略[J].中国软科学,2011,(3).
[159]金碚.中国工业的转型升级[J].中国工业经济,2011,(7).
[160]张纪.产品内分工条件下中国新型工业化模式探索[J].现代经济探讨,2011,(11).
[161]梁运文,张帅.垂直专业化下中国制造业竞争力层次传导效应[J].财经研究,2011,(12).
[162]吕新军.国际外包及其对产业竞争力的影响——基于中国工业产业的实证分析[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2011.
[163]赵明亮,杨蕙馨.经济全球化条件下的国际生产网络与发展中国家价值链的重构[J].产业经济评论,2012,(1).
[164]臧旭恒,等.产业经济学(第四版)[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2007.
[165]杨蕙馨.产业组织理论[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2007.
[166]刘春生.全球生产网络的构建与中国的战略选择[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[167]卜国琴.全球生产网络与中国产业升级研究研究[M].广州：暨南大学出版社,2009.
[168]宗毅君.国际产品内分工与中国经济[M].上海：上海三联书店出版社, 2010.
[169]丁永建.面向全球产业价值链的中国制造业升级[M].北京：科学出版社,2010.