我国科技资源配置的实证分析与效率评价
|
摘要
进入21世纪以来,科技资源作为科学技术的基本要素,已经成为国家战略资源；国与国之间的竞争,也逐渐从一般资源配置竞争上升到了科技资源配置的竞争。不断加大对科技资源的投入,已经成为世界各国的战略选择。当前,我国正处于工业化转型的关键时期,科技体制的深层次矛盾在改革进程中同益显露,突出地表现在：国家宏观科技管理体制政出多门、管理部门各自为政,权力高度分散和过分集中的双重矛盾并存；科技项目名目繁多,产学研联系不紧,科技资源配置缺乏整体布局；科技政策法规的效力等级较低,统筹协调力较弱等；科技资源配置主体权责不明,科技资源投入结构不合理,配置与使用效率低下。鉴此,本研究在对我国科技管理政策进行系统回顾和总结的基础上,通过对科技财力和人力资源配置格局的认识和配置效率评价,进一步认识我国科技资源配置现状及变动规律,查找存在的问题,并在借鉴国外经验的基础上,提出针对性的政策建议。
论文包括六个部分：一是运用资源配置、新制度经济学、产权和公共选择等相关理论和分析方法,对科技资源及其配置的基本概念和研究范畴进行了界定,构建了科技资源配置研究的理论分析框架；二是在基本概念界定和理论分析的基础上,着重对我国科技管理体制、配置机制和政策体系进行系统的梳理和评价；三是基于相关统计数据,运用集中度测算指数,对我国科技财力资源和人力资源配置的总量、区域及部门等布局情况进行分析；四是通过科技投入产出比率分析和构建“科技投入产出多元回归模型”,对我国科技资源投入产出的绩效进行系统评估；五是运用数据包络分析方法(DEA)中的Malmquist指数对1999-2007年全国和30个省(自治区、直辖市)科技资源配置和研发投入中的全要素生产率指数(TFPch)及其分解指标进行测算,多层次、多角度地对我国科技资源配置效率及其影响因素进行深度剖析；六是在总结发达国家科技资源配置主要做法及经验的基础上,研究提出优化科技资源配置的政策建议。
研究表明,虽然我国目前设立了国家科技教育领导小组,在一定程度上使过去政府科技政策或计划决策分散、各自为政的矛盾有所缓解,但并没有从根本上解决我国科技管理体制的平行式组织架构和混合型资源配置模式所导致的资源配置结构不合理、使用效率低下、科技政策难以有效落实等问题。其次,我国财政科技投入存在非常明显的地区差异和不均衡性,主要体现在：国家财政科技投入主要流向那些科技基础条件完善、科技力量雄厚和产业基础较好的经济发达地区,而经济不发达区域和少数民族及贫困地区由于基础较弱而很难得到财政科技投入支持。与此同时,我国科技研发持续投入战略尚不明朗,科技投入没有形成稳定增长机制,投入结构不尽合理,特别是对基础研究的投入明显不足,严重制约了我国原始创新能力的提升。第三,当前企业已成为我国科技活动的主体,近半数以上的科技人员来自企业；但我国科技人员主要分布在广东、江苏和北京、上海等东部发达地区；而在中西部欠发达地区,由于经济发展水平较低,企业创新意识淡薄,科技人员的工资待遇、科研环境和创新氛围较差,科技人力资源特别是高端科技人才十分缺乏。总体上,我国R&D人员的学历结构仍然偏低,高层次科技人才严重缺乏,已经成为当前制约我国企业提升自主创新能力的主要障碍。第四,从科技资源投入产出角度来看,基础研究的R&D人员投入、财政资金投入和企业资金投入对我国科技创新能力和产出绩效的影响显著；其中,特别是基础研究领域的R&D人员投入成为当前影响和制约我国科技创新能力与产出绩效的核心要素。应用研究领域的R&D人员投入、试验与发展研究领域的R&D人员投入及金融机构贷款对我国科技创新能力及产出绩效的影响相对较小。第五,1999-2007期间,随着科技人才队伍的不断壮大和科技投入的不断增加,我国科技资源配置效率和研发效率不断提高,这种提高主要源于技术进步加快和技术效率改善的双重作用,但技术效率改善的作用要大于技术进步加强的效果。同时,我国科技资源配置过程中仍然存在大量的重复投入和资源浪费,投入结构不尽合理,资源配置方式仍然以计划为主导,市场对科技资源的基础性配置作用难以充分发挥,科技资源配置效率仍有较大提升空间。
基于研究,论文最后针对我国科技资源配置从八个方面提出了有针对性的政策建议。一是理顺管理体制,加强科技资源配置的统筹与协调,合理界定各涉科管理部门职能,强化中观层面科技资源配置主体的职能。二是以现代院所制度建设为中心继续深化科研机构改革,优化科研力量布局和结构调整,加快科研机构的整合与重组,进一步明确科技成果权益的分配及归属。三是加强科技立法和制度规范建设,提升科技资源配置工作的战略性、权威性和规范性。四是建立多元化经费投入机制,要在确保科技经费两个法定增长的基础上,优化科技经费投入结构,强化科技经费的监管,并妥善解决科技经费使用中的现实问题。五是实施人才战略工程,加强创新型人才队伍建设,以实施高层次人才战略为抓手加大对青年科技人才、重点科研人才和团队的支持与培养,支持企业培养和引进科技人才。六是以科技资源共建共享为核心,加强科技基础条件平台建设要健全和完善科技基础条件平台共享机制。七是建立以企业为主体,以产业发展为导向,产学研紧密结合的创新体系,为企业创新营造良好的环境。八是建立区域创新中心和创新联盟,推动中西部欠发达地区创新能力建设和科技成果转化。
论文的主要创新点在于：一是对科技资源及其特点进行了深入研究,首次提出了科技资源流变性、衍生性、再生性、系统性和层次性的特点,为深化对科技资源配置及其流动规律提供了科学的理论基础；二是通过对现行科技管理体制和配置机制及相关政策进行系统梳理与评价,深入探讨了当前影响我国科技资源配置效率提升的制度阻碍和机制缺陷,从而使研究更具体、更有针对性；三是运用集中度指标和基尼系数,重点对我国科技财力资源和人力资源配置的总量、区域及部门特征等进行了分析；同时,结合多元回归模型和科技资源投入产出效率评价两阶段模型对我国科技资源配置的投入产出绩效和配置效率进行了不同层面的分析,这使研究的视角更加多维化,解剖更加全面,论证更加充分。
Since the 21st century, knowledge has become important strategic resources, which determined the development of economy and society.The core content of knowledge is science and technology(S&T). As the basic elements of S&T, S&T resources have become national strategic resources, and the competition among countries has gradually turned to S&T resources allocation from the general ones. Therefore, increasing investment in S&T resources has become the common strategic choice of all nations in the world. Now China is in the critical transition period, and many problems about scientific and technological system are exposed gradually during the reform process. The most prominent aspects are as following. First, there is a dual contradiction between decentralization and excessive concentration since the national macro-management system of S&T policies has been made by different departments, and the management department is separate rather than together. Second, the technology projects are too multiple, and the research cooperation among industries, universities and institutes is too weak. The allocation of S&T resources is lack of integral layout. Third, the hierarchy of S&T policy is quite low and lack of coordinate cohesive affinity, etc. Fourth, the consequent problems include the unidentified duty and right of the subject of S&T allocation, irrational structure of S&T resources, and inefficient allocation etc. In view of this, the study summarized the systematic and structural defects of current S&T resources in the aspect of management and allocation through depth analysis of China's institutions and mechanisms of S&T resources allocation and allocative efficiency. It also put forward targeted and constructive policies and advices on the basis of foreign experiences.
The research includes six parts. Firstly, it re-defines the basic concept of S&T resources allocation and its study scope, and build the theoretical framework of S&T resources allocation through relevant theories and analytical methods, such as theory resources allocation, new institutional economics, property rights theory and the theory of public choice. Secondly, on the basis of concepts definition and theoretical analysis, this study focused on the evaluation of current S&T management system, allocation mechanism and policy system, and identified the institutional and structural defects, so that to provide guidelines for the optimization of S&T resources allocation. Thirdly, this study made empirical analyses on the characteristics of total amount, regional and sectoral of the allocation of S&T financial resources and human resources by using the relative statistical data and measured concentration index, and analysed the status of spatial and regional distribution of technological resources in China. Fourthly, this study made a systematic evaluation on the performance of China's input and output of S&T resources by analyzing technology input-output ratio and building the technology input-output multiple regression model. Fifthly, based on DEA model and the Malmquist index, this study made a depth analysis on national S&T resources allocation efficiency and its influencing factors from multi-level and multi-angle, and estimated the total factor productivity index (TFPch) and its decomposable indicator of S&T resources allocation and R&D investment in the whole nation and 30 provinces (cities, districts) from 1999 to 2007. Finally, the paper proposed to optimize the principles, objectives, the general concepts and important points, also including relevant policies and advices by learning the good experiences from developed countries.
The research result shows that:in the new period, China has established Science and Technology Education Leading Group Office of the State Council, and to some extent have corrected the defects that government's S&T policy or program always concentrate on one sector or scattered in various departments, and improved position of S&T in government decision-making. However, it is hard to fundamentally resolve the problems that parallel management structure and hybrid resource allocation model of China's S&T system, which made the resource allocation structure irrational and inefficient. The technology policy is also hard to work. At the same time, due to the limitations of the inherent management system and operation mechanism, the stability and constraint force of S&T policy are weak, and evaluation and monitoring mechanism is not perfect, etc., S&T resource allocation efficiency of China is restricted to be improved. Secondly, it has remarkable regional differences and unbalance in state-owned S&T financial resources allocation. For example, those developed areas where basic conditions of S&T are perfect have more state-owned S&T financial resources than those undeveloped or minority areas for the weaken basis. Although the flow direction of S&T financial resources allocation based on market may help to improve the resource utilization efficiency, but it may also lead to the'vicious circle'of'poor getting poorer, the rich getting richer', thus makes the regional economic and social development gap more obvious. At the same time, R&D investment in China still lacks a clear strategy for sustainable development, and steady growth mechanism of S&T investment has not been formed, and the investment structure is also not reasonable, especially basic and applied research input is obviously insufficient, and the above situations have already influenced the development of original innovation ability. Thirdly, the current enterprises have become main activities of China's S&T activities, and more than half of China's S&T staffs are distributed in enterprises. But S&T staffs are mainly distributed in Guangdong, Jiangsu, Beijing, Shanghai and other eastern developed cities, while S&T staffs, especially high-end talents, in less developed central and western region are deficient due to lower level of economic development, and the innovation consciousness of enterprise, scientific and technical staff wage, research environment and atmosphere of innovation is not so good. At the same time, the R&D staff is less educated, especially in the enterprises compared to R&D institutions and colleges, and this has become a barrier to advance the ability of the independence and innovation of enterprises in China. In addition, in recent years the allocation ratio of R&D staff in the field of basic research and applied research has continuously decreased, which greatly affected the optimization and improvement of the S&T allocation efficiency. Fourthly, from the view of S&T resources input and output, R&D staff inputs, government funding and corporate capital investment in basic research had good effect on S&T innovation capacity and output performance, especially, R&D staff inputs in basic research are the core elements which influence and constrain China's technological innovation capacity and output performance. While R&D staff inputs in applied research and experimental research and development research and the loans from financial institutions has little influence on S&T innovation ability and output performance in China. Fifthly, from 1999 to 2007, China's S&T resource allocation efficiency and research efficiency were keeping improvement with growth of scientific and technological staff and increased investment inS&T. Growth of the nation's S&T resource allocation and R&D efficiency is mainly due to the dual impact of technological progress and technical efficiency improvement, but the latter is greater than the former. However, the capacity of original innovation of China's S&T research is still inadequate, there still exists a lot of problems in the progress of S&T resource allocation, such as repeated investment, waste of resources, unreasonable investment structure, the resource allocation is still dominated by plan, and the market is difficult to play full role as basic S&T resources allocation, which leads to the technology resource allocation inefficient.
Based on the above conclusions and the foreign experiences of S&T resource allocation in the typical market economy countries, the paper proposes some practical strategies and recommendations:it is possible to establish the highest decision-making bodies of technology management and make the functions of co-ordination of scientific and technological work centralized; enhance specifications and stability of scientific and technological project and strengthen the coordination and convergence between central and local S&T management; deepen reform of scientific research institutions, optimize scientific research layout and its structural adjustment; promote public R&D resources integration, strengthen the continued support of key areas such as basic research, common industrial technology and key technologies; establish a more flexible funding system and improve the related policy evaluation mechanisms of S&T investment of government; develop the basic role of market of the allocation of resources and set the dominant position of enterprises in technological innovation.
The main innovations of this thesis are as follows:
Firstly, the state-owned S&T resources and their derived types were clearly defined and divided, which can provide us a scientific and detailed theory basis for the whole society to deepen the understanding of S&T resource allocation and its flow pattern as well as related characteristics. Secondly, this study also discussed obstruction and mechanisms defects which affect the efficiency of S&T resource allocation, which makes the research more specific and the practice more targeted through sorting out and evaluating current technology management system and configuration mechanisms and related policies.Thirdly, using the concentration index and Gini coefficient, this study had an empirical study on total of the financial resources of technology and human resources, regional and sectoral characteristics. Meanwhile, analyzed the performance of the input and output and the allocation efficiency of the nation's S&T resource at different levels by combining multiple regression model with evaluation of technology resources input and output efficiency of two-stage model were also analyzed, which makes the study more multidimensional, and the analysis more comprehensive, and the demonstration more sufficient.
论文包括六个部分：一是运用资源配置、新制度经济学、产权和公共选择等相关理论和分析方法,对科技资源及其配置的基本概念和研究范畴进行了界定,构建了科技资源配置研究的理论分析框架；二是在基本概念界定和理论分析的基础上,着重对我国科技管理体制、配置机制和政策体系进行系统的梳理和评价；三是基于相关统计数据,运用集中度测算指数,对我国科技财力资源和人力资源配置的总量、区域及部门等布局情况进行分析；四是通过科技投入产出比率分析和构建“科技投入产出多元回归模型”,对我国科技资源投入产出的绩效进行系统评估；五是运用数据包络分析方法(DEA)中的Malmquist指数对1999-2007年全国和30个省(自治区、直辖市)科技资源配置和研发投入中的全要素生产率指数(TFPch)及其分解指标进行测算,多层次、多角度地对我国科技资源配置效率及其影响因素进行深度剖析；六是在总结发达国家科技资源配置主要做法及经验的基础上,研究提出优化科技资源配置的政策建议。
研究表明,虽然我国目前设立了国家科技教育领导小组,在一定程度上使过去政府科技政策或计划决策分散、各自为政的矛盾有所缓解,但并没有从根本上解决我国科技管理体制的平行式组织架构和混合型资源配置模式所导致的资源配置结构不合理、使用效率低下、科技政策难以有效落实等问题。其次,我国财政科技投入存在非常明显的地区差异和不均衡性,主要体现在：国家财政科技投入主要流向那些科技基础条件完善、科技力量雄厚和产业基础较好的经济发达地区,而经济不发达区域和少数民族及贫困地区由于基础较弱而很难得到财政科技投入支持。与此同时,我国科技研发持续投入战略尚不明朗,科技投入没有形成稳定增长机制,投入结构不尽合理,特别是对基础研究的投入明显不足,严重制约了我国原始创新能力的提升。第三,当前企业已成为我国科技活动的主体,近半数以上的科技人员来自企业；但我国科技人员主要分布在广东、江苏和北京、上海等东部发达地区；而在中西部欠发达地区,由于经济发展水平较低,企业创新意识淡薄,科技人员的工资待遇、科研环境和创新氛围较差,科技人力资源特别是高端科技人才十分缺乏。总体上,我国R&D人员的学历结构仍然偏低,高层次科技人才严重缺乏,已经成为当前制约我国企业提升自主创新能力的主要障碍。第四,从科技资源投入产出角度来看,基础研究的R&D人员投入、财政资金投入和企业资金投入对我国科技创新能力和产出绩效的影响显著；其中,特别是基础研究领域的R&D人员投入成为当前影响和制约我国科技创新能力与产出绩效的核心要素。应用研究领域的R&D人员投入、试验与发展研究领域的R&D人员投入及金融机构贷款对我国科技创新能力及产出绩效的影响相对较小。第五,1999-2007期间,随着科技人才队伍的不断壮大和科技投入的不断增加,我国科技资源配置效率和研发效率不断提高,这种提高主要源于技术进步加快和技术效率改善的双重作用,但技术效率改善的作用要大于技术进步加强的效果。同时,我国科技资源配置过程中仍然存在大量的重复投入和资源浪费,投入结构不尽合理,资源配置方式仍然以计划为主导,市场对科技资源的基础性配置作用难以充分发挥,科技资源配置效率仍有较大提升空间。
基于研究,论文最后针对我国科技资源配置从八个方面提出了有针对性的政策建议。一是理顺管理体制,加强科技资源配置的统筹与协调,合理界定各涉科管理部门职能,强化中观层面科技资源配置主体的职能。二是以现代院所制度建设为中心继续深化科研机构改革,优化科研力量布局和结构调整,加快科研机构的整合与重组,进一步明确科技成果权益的分配及归属。三是加强科技立法和制度规范建设,提升科技资源配置工作的战略性、权威性和规范性。四是建立多元化经费投入机制,要在确保科技经费两个法定增长的基础上,优化科技经费投入结构,强化科技经费的监管,并妥善解决科技经费使用中的现实问题。五是实施人才战略工程,加强创新型人才队伍建设,以实施高层次人才战略为抓手加大对青年科技人才、重点科研人才和团队的支持与培养,支持企业培养和引进科技人才。六是以科技资源共建共享为核心,加强科技基础条件平台建设要健全和完善科技基础条件平台共享机制。七是建立以企业为主体,以产业发展为导向,产学研紧密结合的创新体系,为企业创新营造良好的环境。八是建立区域创新中心和创新联盟,推动中西部欠发达地区创新能力建设和科技成果转化。
论文的主要创新点在于：一是对科技资源及其特点进行了深入研究,首次提出了科技资源流变性、衍生性、再生性、系统性和层次性的特点,为深化对科技资源配置及其流动规律提供了科学的理论基础；二是通过对现行科技管理体制和配置机制及相关政策进行系统梳理与评价,深入探讨了当前影响我国科技资源配置效率提升的制度阻碍和机制缺陷,从而使研究更具体、更有针对性；三是运用集中度指标和基尼系数,重点对我国科技财力资源和人力资源配置的总量、区域及部门特征等进行了分析；同时,结合多元回归模型和科技资源投入产出效率评价两阶段模型对我国科技资源配置的投入产出绩效和配置效率进行了不同层面的分析,这使研究的视角更加多维化,解剖更加全面,论证更加充分。
Since the 21st century, knowledge has become important strategic resources, which determined the development of economy and society.The core content of knowledge is science and technology(S&T). As the basic elements of S&T, S&T resources have become national strategic resources, and the competition among countries has gradually turned to S&T resources allocation from the general ones. Therefore, increasing investment in S&T resources has become the common strategic choice of all nations in the world. Now China is in the critical transition period, and many problems about scientific and technological system are exposed gradually during the reform process. The most prominent aspects are as following. First, there is a dual contradiction between decentralization and excessive concentration since the national macro-management system of S&T policies has been made by different departments, and the management department is separate rather than together. Second, the technology projects are too multiple, and the research cooperation among industries, universities and institutes is too weak. The allocation of S&T resources is lack of integral layout. Third, the hierarchy of S&T policy is quite low and lack of coordinate cohesive affinity, etc. Fourth, the consequent problems include the unidentified duty and right of the subject of S&T allocation, irrational structure of S&T resources, and inefficient allocation etc. In view of this, the study summarized the systematic and structural defects of current S&T resources in the aspect of management and allocation through depth analysis of China's institutions and mechanisms of S&T resources allocation and allocative efficiency. It also put forward targeted and constructive policies and advices on the basis of foreign experiences.
The research includes six parts. Firstly, it re-defines the basic concept of S&T resources allocation and its study scope, and build the theoretical framework of S&T resources allocation through relevant theories and analytical methods, such as theory resources allocation, new institutional economics, property rights theory and the theory of public choice. Secondly, on the basis of concepts definition and theoretical analysis, this study focused on the evaluation of current S&T management system, allocation mechanism and policy system, and identified the institutional and structural defects, so that to provide guidelines for the optimization of S&T resources allocation. Thirdly, this study made empirical analyses on the characteristics of total amount, regional and sectoral of the allocation of S&T financial resources and human resources by using the relative statistical data and measured concentration index, and analysed the status of spatial and regional distribution of technological resources in China. Fourthly, this study made a systematic evaluation on the performance of China's input and output of S&T resources by analyzing technology input-output ratio and building the technology input-output multiple regression model. Fifthly, based on DEA model and the Malmquist index, this study made a depth analysis on national S&T resources allocation efficiency and its influencing factors from multi-level and multi-angle, and estimated the total factor productivity index (TFPch) and its decomposable indicator of S&T resources allocation and R&D investment in the whole nation and 30 provinces (cities, districts) from 1999 to 2007. Finally, the paper proposed to optimize the principles, objectives, the general concepts and important points, also including relevant policies and advices by learning the good experiences from developed countries.
The research result shows that:in the new period, China has established Science and Technology Education Leading Group Office of the State Council, and to some extent have corrected the defects that government's S&T policy or program always concentrate on one sector or scattered in various departments, and improved position of S&T in government decision-making. However, it is hard to fundamentally resolve the problems that parallel management structure and hybrid resource allocation model of China's S&T system, which made the resource allocation structure irrational and inefficient. The technology policy is also hard to work. At the same time, due to the limitations of the inherent management system and operation mechanism, the stability and constraint force of S&T policy are weak, and evaluation and monitoring mechanism is not perfect, etc., S&T resource allocation efficiency of China is restricted to be improved. Secondly, it has remarkable regional differences and unbalance in state-owned S&T financial resources allocation. For example, those developed areas where basic conditions of S&T are perfect have more state-owned S&T financial resources than those undeveloped or minority areas for the weaken basis. Although the flow direction of S&T financial resources allocation based on market may help to improve the resource utilization efficiency, but it may also lead to the'vicious circle'of'poor getting poorer, the rich getting richer', thus makes the regional economic and social development gap more obvious. At the same time, R&D investment in China still lacks a clear strategy for sustainable development, and steady growth mechanism of S&T investment has not been formed, and the investment structure is also not reasonable, especially basic and applied research input is obviously insufficient, and the above situations have already influenced the development of original innovation ability. Thirdly, the current enterprises have become main activities of China's S&T activities, and more than half of China's S&T staffs are distributed in enterprises. But S&T staffs are mainly distributed in Guangdong, Jiangsu, Beijing, Shanghai and other eastern developed cities, while S&T staffs, especially high-end talents, in less developed central and western region are deficient due to lower level of economic development, and the innovation consciousness of enterprise, scientific and technical staff wage, research environment and atmosphere of innovation is not so good. At the same time, the R&D staff is less educated, especially in the enterprises compared to R&D institutions and colleges, and this has become a barrier to advance the ability of the independence and innovation of enterprises in China. In addition, in recent years the allocation ratio of R&D staff in the field of basic research and applied research has continuously decreased, which greatly affected the optimization and improvement of the S&T allocation efficiency. Fourthly, from the view of S&T resources input and output, R&D staff inputs, government funding and corporate capital investment in basic research had good effect on S&T innovation capacity and output performance, especially, R&D staff inputs in basic research are the core elements which influence and constrain China's technological innovation capacity and output performance. While R&D staff inputs in applied research and experimental research and development research and the loans from financial institutions has little influence on S&T innovation ability and output performance in China. Fifthly, from 1999 to 2007, China's S&T resource allocation efficiency and research efficiency were keeping improvement with growth of scientific and technological staff and increased investment inS&T. Growth of the nation's S&T resource allocation and R&D efficiency is mainly due to the dual impact of technological progress and technical efficiency improvement, but the latter is greater than the former. However, the capacity of original innovation of China's S&T research is still inadequate, there still exists a lot of problems in the progress of S&T resource allocation, such as repeated investment, waste of resources, unreasonable investment structure, the resource allocation is still dominated by plan, and the market is difficult to play full role as basic S&T resources allocation, which leads to the technology resource allocation inefficient.
Based on the above conclusions and the foreign experiences of S&T resource allocation in the typical market economy countries, the paper proposes some practical strategies and recommendations:it is possible to establish the highest decision-making bodies of technology management and make the functions of co-ordination of scientific and technological work centralized; enhance specifications and stability of scientific and technological project and strengthen the coordination and convergence between central and local S&T management; deepen reform of scientific research institutions, optimize scientific research layout and its structural adjustment; promote public R&D resources integration, strengthen the continued support of key areas such as basic research, common industrial technology and key technologies; establish a more flexible funding system and improve the related policy evaluation mechanisms of S&T investment of government; develop the basic role of market of the allocation of resources and set the dominant position of enterprises in technological innovation.
The main innovations of this thesis are as follows:
Firstly, the state-owned S&T resources and their derived types were clearly defined and divided, which can provide us a scientific and detailed theory basis for the whole society to deepen the understanding of S&T resource allocation and its flow pattern as well as related characteristics. Secondly, this study also discussed obstruction and mechanisms defects which affect the efficiency of S&T resource allocation, which makes the research more specific and the practice more targeted through sorting out and evaluating current technology management system and configuration mechanisms and related policies.Thirdly, using the concentration index and Gini coefficient, this study had an empirical study on total of the financial resources of technology and human resources, regional and sectoral characteristics. Meanwhile, analyzed the performance of the input and output and the allocation efficiency of the nation's S&T resource at different levels by combining multiple regression model with evaluation of technology resources input and output efficiency of two-stage model were also analyzed, which makes the study more multidimensional, and the analysis more comprehensive, and the demonstration more sufficient.
引文
3樊春良.全球化时代的科技政策.北京：北京理工大学出版社,2005.2
5本部分主要参考了《2008科技工作重大专题调研报告汇编(下册)》
6秦江萍,张文斌.中国人力资源配置机制的思考.石河子大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002(1)
7《中国科技人才流动态势与对策》
8刘凤朝.孙玉涛.我国科技政策向创新政策演变的过程、趋势与建议——基于我国289项创新政策的实证分析[J].
17国家统计局,科学技术部.中国科技统计年鉴2009[M].北京,中国统计出版社,2009.
18国家统计局,科学技术部.中国科技统计年鉴2010[M].北京,中国统计出版社,2010.
22 Acs. Z J., Anselin. Luc, Varga. Attila.Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge[J]. Research Policy,2002,31:1069-1085.
23 Cuddington. John T, Moss. Diana L. Technological change, depletion, and the U.S. petroleum industry[J]. The American Economic Review,2001,91:11351-148.
24 Griliches. Zvi. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey[J]. Journal of Economic Literature,1990 28:1661-1707.
25赵喜仓,陈海波.我国R&D状况的区域比较分析[J].统计研究,2003,3.38-42.
26鲁文龙,陈宏民.R&D合作与政府最优政策博弈分析[J]中国管理科学,2003,11,1.60-62.
27陈劲,景劲松,周笑磊.我国企业R&D国际化的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2003,21,1.51-57.
28 Groshby. Mark. Patents, innovation and growth[J]. Economic Record,2000,76:255-262.
29 GDP缩减指数(GDP Deflator),又称GDP折算指数,足指没有剔除物价变动前的GDP(现价GDP)增长与剔除了物价变动后的GDP(即不变价GDP (constant-price GDP)或实质GDP)增长之商。该指数也用来计算GDP的组成部分,如个人消费开支。它的计算基础比CPI更广泛,涉及全部商品和服务,除消费外,还包括生产资料和资本、进出口商品和劳务等。因此,这一指数能够更加准确地反映一般物价水平走向,是对价格水平最宏观测量。
34王玉民.国家创新体系建设是科技体制改革深化的基本方向[J].科学对社会的影响.2005(2)：15
37[美]赫希曼.经济发展战略[M].曹征海,潘照东译.北京：经济科学出版社,1991：65.
1. 中华人民共和国国务院.国家中长期科学和技术发展规划纲要(2006-2020年)[R].2006-02-07.
2. 中华人民共和国科学技术部.国家科学技术条件发展60年(1949-2009)[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,2009.
3. 万钢,李学勇,尚勇等.中国科技改革开放30年[M].北京：科学出版社,2008.
4. 万钢.坚持自主创新,推动科学发展,实现“十二五”科技工作良好开局[R].2011-02-18.
5. 周寄中.科技资源论[M].陕西：陕西人民教育出版社,1999.107-113.
6. 孙宝凤,李建华.基于可持续发展的科技资源配置研究[J].社会科学战线,2001,(5)：36-39.
7. 师萍,李垣.科技资源体系内涵与制度因素[J].中国软科学,2000,(11)：55-56,120.
8. 师萍.科技资源配置与制度安排的关系研究[D].西安交通大学博十论文,2001：16-22.
9. 丁厚德.科技资源配置的战略地位[J].哈尔滨工业大学学报,2001,3(1)：35-41.
10.宋宇.科技资源配置过程中的难点和无效率现象探讨[J].数量经济技术经济研究,1999,(10)：29-31.
11.叶儒霏,陈欣然,余新炳.影响我国科技资源配置效率的原因及对策分析[J].研究与发展管理,2004,16(5)：113-118.
12.彭华涛.区域科技资源配置的新制度经济学分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2006,(1)：141-144.
13.梅静娟,李石柱.科技资源配置阶段结构优化理论数学模型[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2002,17(2)：59-64.
14.谢思全,张熇铭.京津冀科技资源的配置特点及对策研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2006,(10)：103-109.
15.李晓群,谢科范,李季泽(1999).科技资源及其利用率评价的理论分析.技术经济,1999,(11).
16.吴传清.区域经济学原理[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社.2008,89-90.
17.李建华,周胜军,孙宝凤.我国科技人力资源与财力资源匹配规模优化研究[J].科学管理研究,2001,19(6)：72-76.
18.马勇,高延龙.科技资源使用效率研究[J].东北师范大学学报,2002,(3)：24-28.
19.李干石柱,李冬梅,唐五湘.影响我国区域科技资源配置效率要素的定量分析[J].科学管理研究,2003,21(2)：60-63.
20.李冬梅,李石柱,唐五湘.我国区域科技资源配置效率情况评价[J]一北京机械工业学院学报,2003,18(1)：50-55.
21.魏守华,吴贵生.区域科技资源配置效率研究[J].科学学研究,2005,(4)：467-473.
22.吴和成,郑垂勇.科技投入相对有效性的实证分析[J].科学管理研究,2003,21(3)：93-96.
23.孙宝,李建华,杨印生.运用DEA方法评价地区科技资源配置的相对有效性[J].数理统计与管理,2004,23(2)：52-58.
24.贺德方.我国科技投入效率、效果评价研究[J].情报学报,2006,(6)：740-748.
25.牛树海,金凤君,刘毅.科技资源配置的区域差异[J].资源科学,2004,26(1)：61-68.
26.王玉民.国家创新体系建设是科技体制改革深化的基本方向[J].科学对社会的影响,2005,(2)：12-15
27. 丁厚德.改革与建设国家创新体系—中国科技体制改革的挑战与机遇[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1999,(4)：14-24.
28.寇宗来.科技体制改革：中国科技体制改革三十年[J].世界经济文汇,2008,(1)：77-92
29.金高峰.从我国科技指标体系的变迁看科技体制改革[J].科技进步与对策,2008,(1)：7-10
30.张敏容.中国科技体制改革的路径选择[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(6)：47-50
31.周寄中,胡志坚,周勇.在国家创新系统内优化配置科技资源[J].管理科学学报,2002,(3)：40-49
32.阮晓妮.科技资源配置的模糊综合评价[J].创新论坛,2006,27(6)：15-18.
33.刘强.科技资源配置过程中的市场和投资行为分析[J].洛阳师范学院学报,2000,19(2)：41-53.
34.李立,邓玉勇.科技资源市场化配置模式探析[J].青岛化工学院学报,2000,(4)：33-35,46.
35.汪涛,李石柱.国际化背景下政府主导科技资源配置的主要方式分析[J].中国科技论坛,2002,(4)：9-14,71.
36.丁厚德.科技管理创新是科技创新的保证——试论科技资源宏观层次的配置管理[J],科学学与科学技术管理,2001,(5)：7-10.
37.李龙一.科技资源配置的模式研究[J].科研管理,2003,(12)：16-19.
38.朱付元.我国目前科技资源配置的基本特征[J].中国科技论坛,2000,(2)：61-64.
39.刘磊,胡树华.国内外R&D管理比较研究及对中国科技资源配置的启示[J].科学学研究,2000,(1)：
40.宋河发,穆荣平,任中保.我国财政科技投入与经费管理问题研究[J].科学管理研究,2005,(5)：
41.连燕华,石兵.国家科学技术投入与产业评价[J].中国软科学,2002,(1)：28-31.
42.朱付元.我国目前科技资源配置的基本特征[J].中国科技论坛,2000,(2)：61-64.
43.古利平,张宗益,康继军.专利与R&D资源：中国创新的投入产出分析[J].管理工程学报,2006(1)：147-151.
44.安宁,罗珊.德国科技资源的优化配置及其对我国的启示[J].云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008(7)：136-140.
45.刘友平.美日德韩国家科技资源配置模式比较及其借鉴意义[J].科技与管理,2005(9)：91-94.
46.张超然.韩国正强化国家科技体制改革[J].中国改革,2006(9)：43-44.
47.孙绪华,陈诗波,程国强.基于Malmquist指数的国有科技资源配置效率监测及其影响因素分析[J].中国科技论坛,2011(3)：21-27.
48.王宏希,卓成刚.论市场机制的缺陷与政府的经济职能[J].科技创业月刊,2005(1)：93-94,107.
49.师萍,李垣.科技资源配置有效性的DEA分析模型[J].中国科技论坛,2000,(5)：60-61.
50.李冬梅,李石柱,唐五湘.我国区域科技资源配置效率情况评价[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2003,(1)：50-55
51.魏守华,吴贵生.区域科技资源配置效率研究[J].科学学研究,2005,(4)：467-473.
52.沈赤.现代经济理论视角下的科技资源优化配置分析[J].学术交流,2009,(5).
53.王雪原,王宏起.基于科技计划的项目经费优化配置模型设计[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2008,(2).
54.陈金玲,付丹,傅毓维.高等教育科技资源配置的目标模式研究[J].科技管理研究,2008,(6)：.
55.魏延田.区域科技资源的再配置问题分析[J].科技管理研究,2006,(6)：
56.魏守华,吴贵生.区域科技资源配置效率研究[J].科学学研究,2005,(4).
57.吴和成,郑垂勇.科技资源配置的DEA分析[J]科技进步与对策,2004,(7).
58.罗珊,安宁.“泛珠三角”区域科技资源配置的现状、问题及对策[J].科研管理,2007,(1).
59.罗珊,安宁.广东科技人力资源的配置现状及对策研究[J].华南师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(1).
60.吴永忠.自主创新与科技资源的配置问题[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(1).
61.方福前.当代西方经济学主要流派[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2004.274-175.
62.E.G·菲吕博腾、S·配杰威齐.产权与经济理论：近期文献的一个综述[J].经济文献杂志,1972,(10).
63.贾岩.基于Cross-efficiency DEA算法的区域科技资源配置效率测算研究[J].现代情报,2009,(2)：219-221,225.
64.马鹏龙.区域创新系统效率评价[D].吉林大学硕十论文,2006.35-37.
65.袁嘉妮.行业科研基地科技资源配置评价及优化研究[D].武汉理工大学硕士论文,2009.29-35.
66.彭建华.我国中部地区区域创新系统评价与比较研究[D].中南大学硕士论文,2006.40-45.
67.朱有为,徐康宁中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究[J].中国工业经济,2006,(11)：38-45.
68.陈修德,梁彤缨.中国高新技术产业研发效率及其影响因素[J].科学学研究,2010,(8)：1198-1205.
69.罗珊.区域科技资源优化配置研究——以广东省为例[D].湖南长沙：中南大学博士论文,2008.
70.李志飞.国外科技管理模式与中国实施途径[J].湖北大学成人教育学院学报,2005,56-58.
71.杨多贵,周志田.国外典型科技发展计划案例分析及其启示[J].科学对社会的影响,2004,(3)：5-7.
72.张寅生,鲍鸥.俄罗斯科技体制改革纵横谈[J].民主与科学,2006,(2)：31-33.
73.李伟红.法国科技体制改革的研究与借鉴[J].产业与科技论坛,2007,6(4)：67-68.
74.徐世刚.日本科技体制改革及对我国的启示[J],黑龙江社会科学,2005,(2)：68-72.
75.方新,柳御林.我国科技体制改革的回顾及展望[J].求是,2004,(5)：43-45.
76.邱红.俄罗斯的科技资源及对外科技合作政策研究[J].东北亚论坛,2007,(3)：98-101.
77.严全治,席新.美国大学的科技资源配置及其效益[J].比较教育研究,2003,(3)：14-17.
78.刘友平.美日德韩国家科技资源配置模式比较及其借鉴意义[J].科技与管理,2005,(5)：91-94.
79.阎广芬,张玉琴.日本科技创新“立国论”与高等教育资源配置重点的转移[J].比较教育研究,2003,(9)：22-26.
80.魏龙.日本科技体制的改革措施[J].技术与创新管理,2008,(3)：217-220
81.尹晓亮,张杰军.日本科技行政管理体制改革与成效分析[J].科技政策与管理,2006,(7)：14-18.
82.刘凤朝,孙玉涛.我国科技政策向创新政策演变的过程、趋势与建议——基于我国289项创新政策的实证分析[J].中国软科学,2007,(5).
83.樊春良.全球化时代的科技政策.北京：北京理工大学出版社,2005.2
84.王玉民.国家创新体系建设是科技体制改革深化的基本方向[J].科学对社会的影响,2005,(2)：15.
85.秦江萍,张文斌.中国人力资源配置机制的思考[J].石河子大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002(1)
86.徐守华.重视基础研究,推动原始性创新[J].中国科技奖励,2001,(2)：3-6.
87.邹承鲁,金吾伦.自然、人文、社科三大领域聚焦原始创新[J].中国软科学,2002,(8)：8-25.
88.李志民.自主创新应成为高校科技创新工作的动力与源泉[J].科技成果纵横,2005,(3)：12-15.
89.陈诗波.国有科技资源产权结构分析及制度构建探讨[J].中国科技论坛,2010,(1)：106-110.
90.崔栋.我国区域科技资源配置评价及优化研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨：哈尔滨工程大学博十学位论文,2007.
91.华瑶,刘春波,朱林生.层次分析法在科技资源配置能力综合评价中的应用[J].东北电力学院学报,2004,(2)：42-44.
92.贾岩.基于Cross-efficiency DEA算法的区域科技资源配置效率测算研究[J].现代情报,2009,(2)：219-221,225.
93.李冬梅,李石柱.我国区域科技资源配置效率情况评价[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2003,(1)：50-55.
94.李晓群,谢科范.科技资源及其利用率评价的理论分析[J].技术经济,1999,(11)：48-50.
95.刘海峰.我国科技资源配置的问题研究[J].世界科技研究与发展,1999,(1)：95-98.
96.梅静娟,李石柱.科技资源配置阶段结构优化理论数学模型[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2002,(2)：59-63.
97.牛树海,金凤君.科技资源配置的区域差异[J].资源科学,2004,(1)：61-67.
98.宋涛,胡宝民.DEA模型及其参数在区域科技资源配置有效性评价中的应用[J].科技进步与对策,2004,(7)：77-75.
99.孙宝凤.运用DEA方法评价地区科技资源配置的相对有效性[J].数理统计与管理,2004,(2)：52-57.
100.吴贵生.区域科技浅论[J].科研研究,2004,(6)：55-63.
101.徐建国.我国科技资源空间分布的实证研究[D].北京：清华大学博十学位论文,2005.
102.杨艳萍.区域科技资源配置能力的综合评价[J].统计与决策,2007,(12)：68-70.
103.张改清.河北省各地区工业企业研发效率评[J].河北经贸大学学报,2009,(7)：93-96.
104.杨朝峰,赵志耘.主要国家相对研发效率研究[J].中国科技论坛,2009,(5)：132-139.
105.徐晓霞.中国科技资源的现状及开发利用中存在的问题[J].资源科学,2003,(5)：83-89.
106.刘玲利.科技资源配置理论与配置效率研究[D].吉林长春：吉林大学博十学位论文,2007,82-83.
107.朱有为,徐康宁.中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究[J].中国工业经济,2006,(11)：38-45.
108.管燕.江苏省科技资源配置评价研究[D].江苏南京：南京航空航天大学硕十论文,2010.
109.崔栋.我国区域科技资源配置评价及优化研究[D].江苏南京：哈尔滨工程大学硕士论文,2007.
110.陈至立.高自主创新能力,设创新型国家[N].科技日报,2005-11-07.
111.陈建辉.营造发展环境,培育创新主体[N].经济日报,2006-02-12.
112.魏加宁,李建伟,王召.科技发展亟待金融助力[N].经济日报,2004-06-22.
113.赵镇.黑龙江省高等教育科技资源配置评价及优化对策研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨：哈尔滨工程大学博十论文,2008.
114.杨向辉.科技资源配置、技术转移与区域经济协调发展研究[D].天津：天津大学博士学位论文,2010.
115.陈修德,梁彤缨.中国高新技术产业研发效率及其影响因素[J].科学学研究,2010,(8)：1198-1205.
116.张改清.河北省各地区工业企业研发效率评[J].河北经贸大学学报,2009,(7)：93-96.
117.杨朝峰,赵志耘.主要国家相对研发效率研究[J].中国科技论坛,2009,(5)：132-139.
118.徐晓霞.中国科技资源的现状及开发利用中存在的问题[J].资源科学.2003,(5)：83-89.
119.[美]赫希曼.经济发展战略[M].曹征海,潘照东译.北京：经济科学出版社,1991：65.
120.联合国教科文组织统计研究所.发展中国家的科学技术统计指标：展望和挑战,2002http://www.sts.org.cn/.
121.中国科技发展战略研究小组.2002中国区域创新能力报告[M].经济管理出版社,北京,2003.
122.陈劲,景劲松,周笑磊.我国企业R&D国际化的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2003,21,1.51-57.
123.赵喜仓,陈海波.我国R&D状况的区域比较分析[J].统计研究,2003,3.38-42.
124.鲁文龙,陈宏民.R&D合作与政府最优政策博弈分析[J]中国管理科学,2003,11,1.60-62.
125. Kaiser Retal. reconfiguration of national systems[J]. Research Policy,2004, (33):395-408.
126. OECD.OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy CHINA Synthes is Report[ER/OL]. [2007-08-05]. http: //www. Oecd.org/dataoecd/54/20/39177453.pdf.
127. Fare,R.,Grosskopf,S.,Lovell,C.A.K. Productivity Change in Swedish Pharmacies 1980-1989:A Nonparametric Malmquist Approach[J]. Journal of Productivity Analysis,1992,(3):85-101.
128. Colin Carter, Jing Chen and Baojun Chu. Agricultural Productivity Growth in China:Farm Level versus National Measurement. Working Paper,1999,99-001.
129. Davis, Leoncini, Riccardo. The Nature of Long-run Technological Change:Innovation, Evolution and Technological Systems[J].Research Policy,1998,27(1):75-93.
130. John AAlic. Postindustrial Technology Policy [J].ResearchPolicy,2001,30(6):873-889.
131. Sharp, Margaret, Pavitt, Keith. Technology Policy in the 1990s:Old Trends and New Realities[J] Journal of Common Market Studies,1993,31 (2):129-151.
132. Teubal,Morris.R&D and Technology Policy in NICs as Learning Processes[J].World Development,1996,24(3):449-460.
133. Hahn, Yoon-Hwan, Yu, Pyung-Il. Towards a New Technology Policy:The Integration of Generation and Diffusion[J].Technovation,1999,19(3):177-186.
134. Stoneman, Paul. The Use of A Levy/Grant System as an Alternative to Tax Based Incentives to R&D[J].Research Policy,1991,20(3):195-201.
135. Branscomb, Lewis M..Does America Need a Technology Policy[J].Harvard Business Review,1992,70(2):24-30.
136. Smits,Ruud,Leyten,Jos,Hertog,Pim Den. Technology Assessment and Technology Policy in Europe: New Concepts, New Goals, New Infrastructures[J].Policy Sciences,1995,28(3):271-299.
137. Cohen,Linda. When Can Government Subsidize Research Joint Ventures Politics, Economics and Limits to Technology Policy[J].The American Economic Review,1994,84(2):159-163.
138. Dianne Rahm,Veronica Hansen. Technology Policy 2000:University to Industry Transfer [J].International Journal of Public Administration,1999,22(8):1189-1211.
139. Renaud Bellais.Post Keynesian Theory,Technology Policy,and Long-term Growth[J].Journal of Post Keynesian Economics,2004,26(3):419-440.
140. Segerstrom, Paul S., Zolnierek, James M..The R&D Incentives of Industry Leaders [J].International Economic Review [H. W. Wilson-SSA],1999,40(3):745-766.
141. Charnes A.,Cooper W.W.,Rhodes.E. Measuring the Efficiency of DMU[J].European Journal of Operation Research,1978,(2):429-444.
142. Greene,W.H. Econometric Analysis[M].Upper Saddle River:Prentice Hall,2003.
143. Chun-Chu Liu,Chia-Yon Chen.A Two-Dimensional Model for Allocating Resources to R&D Programs[J].Journal of American Academy of Business,2004,5(1/2):459-473.
144. Yasuda, Takehiko. Firm Growth, Size, Age and Behavior in Japanese Manufacturing [J].Small Business Economics,2005,25(1):1-15.
145. Matthew Rafferty, Mark Funk..Demand Shocks and Firm-financed R&D Expenditures [J].Applied Economics,2004,36(14):1529-1536.
146. Katharine Wakelin. Productivity Growth and R&D Expenditure in UK Manufacturing Firms[J].Research Policy,2001,30(7):1079-1090.
147. Jorg C.Mahlich, Thomas, Roediger-Schluga. The Determinants of Pharmaceutical R&D Expenditures:Evidence from Japan[J].Review of Industrial Organization,2006,28(2):145-164.
148. Hu,Albert G.,&Gary H.J. Returns to Research and Development in Chinese Industry:Evidence from State owned Enterprises in Beijing[J].China Economic Review,2004,15(1).
149. Acs. Z J., Anselin. Luc, Varga. Attila.Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge[J]. Research Policy,2002,31:1069-1085.
150. Cuddington. John T, Moss. Diana L. Technological change, depletion, and the U.S. petroleum industry[J]. The American Economic Review,2001,91:11351-148.
151. Griliches. Zvi. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey[J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 1990 28:1661-1707.
152. Arundel. Anthony. The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation[J]. Research Policy,2001,30:611-624.
153. Mazzoleni. Roberto, Nelson. Richard R. The benefits and costs of strong patent protection:a contribution to the current debate[J]. Research Policy,1998,27:273-284.
154. Jaffe. Adam B. The U.S. patent system in transition:policy innovation and the innovation process[J]. Research Policy,2000,29:531-557.
155. Groshby. Mark. Patents, innovation and growth[J]. Economic Record,2000,76:255-262.
156. Guellec. Dominique, Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie. The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data[J]. Research Policy,2001,30:1253-1266.
157. Abraham. Biju Paul, Moitra.Soumyo D. Innovation assessment through patent analysis[J]. Technovation,2001,21:245-252.
158. Waterson. Michael. The Economics of Product Patents[J]. The American Economic Review,1990,80:860-869.
159. Furman. Jeffrey L., Porter. Michael E., Stern. Scott. The determinants of national innovative capacity [J]. Research Policy,2002,31:899-933.
160. Arundel. Anthony, Kabla. Isabel le. What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms[J]. Research Policy,1998,27:127-141.
161. Mahmood. Ishtiaq P., Singh. Jasjit. Technological dynamism in Asia[J]. Research Policy 2003,32:1031-1054.
162. Kortum. Samuel. Equilibrium R&D and the patent-R&D ratio:U.S. evidence[J]. The American Economic Review,1993,83:450-457.
163. Evenson.R. E. Patents, R&D, and invention potential:International evidence[J]. The American Economic Review,,1993,83:463-468.
164. Jaffe.Adam B. Real effects of academic research[J]. The American Economic Review,1989,79:957-970.
165. Adams.James D. Science, R&D, and invention potential recharge:U.S. evidence[J]. The American Economic Review,1993,83:458-462.
166. Jones.Charles I. R&D based models of economic growth[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1995,103: 759-784.
167. Lichtenberg.Frank R. The Private R&D Investment To Federal Design And Technical[J]. The American Econom ic Review,1988,78:550-559.
168. Freeman. Chris. Continental national and sub-national innovation systems—complementarity and economic growth[J]. Research Policy,2002,31:191-211.
169. PERROUX F. Note sur la notion des poles de croissanc[J].Econimie Applique,1955(1-2):307-320[法]弗朗索瓦·佩鲁.略论增长极概念[J].李仁贵,译.经济学译丛,1988(9)：67-72.
170. BOUDEVILLE J R.Problems of regional economic planning [M].Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press,1966:2.
5本部分主要参考了《2008科技工作重大专题调研报告汇编(下册)》
6秦江萍,张文斌.中国人力资源配置机制的思考.石河子大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002(1)
7《中国科技人才流动态势与对策》
8刘凤朝.孙玉涛.我国科技政策向创新政策演变的过程、趋势与建议——基于我国289项创新政策的实证分析[J].
17国家统计局,科学技术部.中国科技统计年鉴2009[M].北京,中国统计出版社,2009.
18国家统计局,科学技术部.中国科技统计年鉴2010[M].北京,中国统计出版社,2010.
22 Acs. Z J., Anselin. Luc, Varga. Attila.Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge[J]. Research Policy,2002,31:1069-1085.
23 Cuddington. John T, Moss. Diana L. Technological change, depletion, and the U.S. petroleum industry[J]. The American Economic Review,2001,91:11351-148.
24 Griliches. Zvi. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey[J]. Journal of Economic Literature,1990 28:1661-1707.
25赵喜仓,陈海波.我国R&D状况的区域比较分析[J].统计研究,2003,3.38-42.
26鲁文龙,陈宏民.R&D合作与政府最优政策博弈分析[J]中国管理科学,2003,11,1.60-62.
27陈劲,景劲松,周笑磊.我国企业R&D国际化的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2003,21,1.51-57.
28 Groshby. Mark. Patents, innovation and growth[J]. Economic Record,2000,76:255-262.
29 GDP缩减指数(GDP Deflator),又称GDP折算指数,足指没有剔除物价变动前的GDP(现价GDP)增长与剔除了物价变动后的GDP(即不变价GDP (constant-price GDP)或实质GDP)增长之商。该指数也用来计算GDP的组成部分,如个人消费开支。它的计算基础比CPI更广泛,涉及全部商品和服务,除消费外,还包括生产资料和资本、进出口商品和劳务等。因此,这一指数能够更加准确地反映一般物价水平走向,是对价格水平最宏观测量。
34王玉民.国家创新体系建设是科技体制改革深化的基本方向[J].科学对社会的影响.2005(2)：15
37[美]赫希曼.经济发展战略[M].曹征海,潘照东译.北京：经济科学出版社,1991：65.
1. 中华人民共和国国务院.国家中长期科学和技术发展规划纲要(2006-2020年)[R].2006-02-07.
2. 中华人民共和国科学技术部.国家科学技术条件发展60年(1949-2009)[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,2009.
3. 万钢,李学勇,尚勇等.中国科技改革开放30年[M].北京：科学出版社,2008.
4. 万钢.坚持自主创新,推动科学发展,实现“十二五”科技工作良好开局[R].2011-02-18.
5. 周寄中.科技资源论[M].陕西：陕西人民教育出版社,1999.107-113.
6. 孙宝凤,李建华.基于可持续发展的科技资源配置研究[J].社会科学战线,2001,(5)：36-39.
7. 师萍,李垣.科技资源体系内涵与制度因素[J].中国软科学,2000,(11)：55-56,120.
8. 师萍.科技资源配置与制度安排的关系研究[D].西安交通大学博十论文,2001：16-22.
9. 丁厚德.科技资源配置的战略地位[J].哈尔滨工业大学学报,2001,3(1)：35-41.
10.宋宇.科技资源配置过程中的难点和无效率现象探讨[J].数量经济技术经济研究,1999,(10)：29-31.
11.叶儒霏,陈欣然,余新炳.影响我国科技资源配置效率的原因及对策分析[J].研究与发展管理,2004,16(5)：113-118.
12.彭华涛.区域科技资源配置的新制度经济学分析[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2006,(1)：141-144.
13.梅静娟,李石柱.科技资源配置阶段结构优化理论数学模型[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2002,17(2)：59-64.
14.谢思全,张熇铭.京津冀科技资源的配置特点及对策研究[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2006,(10)：103-109.
15.李晓群,谢科范,李季泽(1999).科技资源及其利用率评价的理论分析.技术经济,1999,(11).
16.吴传清.区域经济学原理[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社.2008,89-90.
17.李建华,周胜军,孙宝凤.我国科技人力资源与财力资源匹配规模优化研究[J].科学管理研究,2001,19(6)：72-76.
18.马勇,高延龙.科技资源使用效率研究[J].东北师范大学学报,2002,(3)：24-28.
19.李干石柱,李冬梅,唐五湘.影响我国区域科技资源配置效率要素的定量分析[J].科学管理研究,2003,21(2)：60-63.
20.李冬梅,李石柱,唐五湘.我国区域科技资源配置效率情况评价[J]一北京机械工业学院学报,2003,18(1)：50-55.
21.魏守华,吴贵生.区域科技资源配置效率研究[J].科学学研究,2005,(4)：467-473.
22.吴和成,郑垂勇.科技投入相对有效性的实证分析[J].科学管理研究,2003,21(3)：93-96.
23.孙宝,李建华,杨印生.运用DEA方法评价地区科技资源配置的相对有效性[J].数理统计与管理,2004,23(2)：52-58.
24.贺德方.我国科技投入效率、效果评价研究[J].情报学报,2006,(6)：740-748.
25.牛树海,金凤君,刘毅.科技资源配置的区域差异[J].资源科学,2004,26(1)：61-68.
26.王玉民.国家创新体系建设是科技体制改革深化的基本方向[J].科学对社会的影响,2005,(2)：12-15
27. 丁厚德.改革与建设国家创新体系—中国科技体制改革的挑战与机遇[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1999,(4)：14-24.
28.寇宗来.科技体制改革：中国科技体制改革三十年[J].世界经济文汇,2008,(1)：77-92
29.金高峰.从我国科技指标体系的变迁看科技体制改革[J].科技进步与对策,2008,(1)：7-10
30.张敏容.中国科技体制改革的路径选择[J].北京理工大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(6)：47-50
31.周寄中,胡志坚,周勇.在国家创新系统内优化配置科技资源[J].管理科学学报,2002,(3)：40-49
32.阮晓妮.科技资源配置的模糊综合评价[J].创新论坛,2006,27(6)：15-18.
33.刘强.科技资源配置过程中的市场和投资行为分析[J].洛阳师范学院学报,2000,19(2)：41-53.
34.李立,邓玉勇.科技资源市场化配置模式探析[J].青岛化工学院学报,2000,(4)：33-35,46.
35.汪涛,李石柱.国际化背景下政府主导科技资源配置的主要方式分析[J].中国科技论坛,2002,(4)：9-14,71.
36.丁厚德.科技管理创新是科技创新的保证——试论科技资源宏观层次的配置管理[J],科学学与科学技术管理,2001,(5)：7-10.
37.李龙一.科技资源配置的模式研究[J].科研管理,2003,(12)：16-19.
38.朱付元.我国目前科技资源配置的基本特征[J].中国科技论坛,2000,(2)：61-64.
39.刘磊,胡树华.国内外R&D管理比较研究及对中国科技资源配置的启示[J].科学学研究,2000,(1)：
40.宋河发,穆荣平,任中保.我国财政科技投入与经费管理问题研究[J].科学管理研究,2005,(5)：
41.连燕华,石兵.国家科学技术投入与产业评价[J].中国软科学,2002,(1)：28-31.
42.朱付元.我国目前科技资源配置的基本特征[J].中国科技论坛,2000,(2)：61-64.
43.古利平,张宗益,康继军.专利与R&D资源：中国创新的投入产出分析[J].管理工程学报,2006(1)：147-151.
44.安宁,罗珊.德国科技资源的优化配置及其对我国的启示[J].云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2008(7)：136-140.
45.刘友平.美日德韩国家科技资源配置模式比较及其借鉴意义[J].科技与管理,2005(9)：91-94.
46.张超然.韩国正强化国家科技体制改革[J].中国改革,2006(9)：43-44.
47.孙绪华,陈诗波,程国强.基于Malmquist指数的国有科技资源配置效率监测及其影响因素分析[J].中国科技论坛,2011(3)：21-27.
48.王宏希,卓成刚.论市场机制的缺陷与政府的经济职能[J].科技创业月刊,2005(1)：93-94,107.
49.师萍,李垣.科技资源配置有效性的DEA分析模型[J].中国科技论坛,2000,(5)：60-61.
50.李冬梅,李石柱,唐五湘.我国区域科技资源配置效率情况评价[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2003,(1)：50-55
51.魏守华,吴贵生.区域科技资源配置效率研究[J].科学学研究,2005,(4)：467-473.
52.沈赤.现代经济理论视角下的科技资源优化配置分析[J].学术交流,2009,(5).
53.王雪原,王宏起.基于科技计划的项目经费优化配置模型设计[J].科学学与科学技术管理,2008,(2).
54.陈金玲,付丹,傅毓维.高等教育科技资源配置的目标模式研究[J].科技管理研究,2008,(6)：.
55.魏延田.区域科技资源的再配置问题分析[J].科技管理研究,2006,(6)：
56.魏守华,吴贵生.区域科技资源配置效率研究[J].科学学研究,2005,(4).
57.吴和成,郑垂勇.科技资源配置的DEA分析[J]科技进步与对策,2004,(7).
58.罗珊,安宁.“泛珠三角”区域科技资源配置的现状、问题及对策[J].科研管理,2007,(1).
59.罗珊,安宁.广东科技人力资源的配置现状及对策研究[J].华南师范大学学报(社会科学版),2007,(1).
60.吴永忠.自主创新与科技资源的配置问题[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,(1).
61.方福前.当代西方经济学主要流派[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,2004.274-175.
62.E.G·菲吕博腾、S·配杰威齐.产权与经济理论：近期文献的一个综述[J].经济文献杂志,1972,(10).
63.贾岩.基于Cross-efficiency DEA算法的区域科技资源配置效率测算研究[J].现代情报,2009,(2)：219-221,225.
64.马鹏龙.区域创新系统效率评价[D].吉林大学硕十论文,2006.35-37.
65.袁嘉妮.行业科研基地科技资源配置评价及优化研究[D].武汉理工大学硕士论文,2009.29-35.
66.彭建华.我国中部地区区域创新系统评价与比较研究[D].中南大学硕士论文,2006.40-45.
67.朱有为,徐康宁中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究[J].中国工业经济,2006,(11)：38-45.
68.陈修德,梁彤缨.中国高新技术产业研发效率及其影响因素[J].科学学研究,2010,(8)：1198-1205.
69.罗珊.区域科技资源优化配置研究——以广东省为例[D].湖南长沙：中南大学博士论文,2008.
70.李志飞.国外科技管理模式与中国实施途径[J].湖北大学成人教育学院学报,2005,56-58.
71.杨多贵,周志田.国外典型科技发展计划案例分析及其启示[J].科学对社会的影响,2004,(3)：5-7.
72.张寅生,鲍鸥.俄罗斯科技体制改革纵横谈[J].民主与科学,2006,(2)：31-33.
73.李伟红.法国科技体制改革的研究与借鉴[J].产业与科技论坛,2007,6(4)：67-68.
74.徐世刚.日本科技体制改革及对我国的启示[J],黑龙江社会科学,2005,(2)：68-72.
75.方新,柳御林.我国科技体制改革的回顾及展望[J].求是,2004,(5)：43-45.
76.邱红.俄罗斯的科技资源及对外科技合作政策研究[J].东北亚论坛,2007,(3)：98-101.
77.严全治,席新.美国大学的科技资源配置及其效益[J].比较教育研究,2003,(3)：14-17.
78.刘友平.美日德韩国家科技资源配置模式比较及其借鉴意义[J].科技与管理,2005,(5)：91-94.
79.阎广芬,张玉琴.日本科技创新“立国论”与高等教育资源配置重点的转移[J].比较教育研究,2003,(9)：22-26.
80.魏龙.日本科技体制的改革措施[J].技术与创新管理,2008,(3)：217-220
81.尹晓亮,张杰军.日本科技行政管理体制改革与成效分析[J].科技政策与管理,2006,(7)：14-18.
82.刘凤朝,孙玉涛.我国科技政策向创新政策演变的过程、趋势与建议——基于我国289项创新政策的实证分析[J].中国软科学,2007,(5).
83.樊春良.全球化时代的科技政策.北京：北京理工大学出版社,2005.2
84.王玉民.国家创新体系建设是科技体制改革深化的基本方向[J].科学对社会的影响,2005,(2)：15.
85.秦江萍,张文斌.中国人力资源配置机制的思考[J].石河子大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2002(1)
86.徐守华.重视基础研究,推动原始性创新[J].中国科技奖励,2001,(2)：3-6.
87.邹承鲁,金吾伦.自然、人文、社科三大领域聚焦原始创新[J].中国软科学,2002,(8)：8-25.
88.李志民.自主创新应成为高校科技创新工作的动力与源泉[J].科技成果纵横,2005,(3)：12-15.
89.陈诗波.国有科技资源产权结构分析及制度构建探讨[J].中国科技论坛,2010,(1)：106-110.
90.崔栋.我国区域科技资源配置评价及优化研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨：哈尔滨工程大学博十学位论文,2007.
91.华瑶,刘春波,朱林生.层次分析法在科技资源配置能力综合评价中的应用[J].东北电力学院学报,2004,(2)：42-44.
92.贾岩.基于Cross-efficiency DEA算法的区域科技资源配置效率测算研究[J].现代情报,2009,(2)：219-221,225.
93.李冬梅,李石柱.我国区域科技资源配置效率情况评价[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2003,(1)：50-55.
94.李晓群,谢科范.科技资源及其利用率评价的理论分析[J].技术经济,1999,(11)：48-50.
95.刘海峰.我国科技资源配置的问题研究[J].世界科技研究与发展,1999,(1)：95-98.
96.梅静娟,李石柱.科技资源配置阶段结构优化理论数学模型[J].北京机械工业学院学报,2002,(2)：59-63.
97.牛树海,金凤君.科技资源配置的区域差异[J].资源科学,2004,(1)：61-67.
98.宋涛,胡宝民.DEA模型及其参数在区域科技资源配置有效性评价中的应用[J].科技进步与对策,2004,(7)：77-75.
99.孙宝凤.运用DEA方法评价地区科技资源配置的相对有效性[J].数理统计与管理,2004,(2)：52-57.
100.吴贵生.区域科技浅论[J].科研研究,2004,(6)：55-63.
101.徐建国.我国科技资源空间分布的实证研究[D].北京：清华大学博十学位论文,2005.
102.杨艳萍.区域科技资源配置能力的综合评价[J].统计与决策,2007,(12)：68-70.
103.张改清.河北省各地区工业企业研发效率评[J].河北经贸大学学报,2009,(7)：93-96.
104.杨朝峰,赵志耘.主要国家相对研发效率研究[J].中国科技论坛,2009,(5)：132-139.
105.徐晓霞.中国科技资源的现状及开发利用中存在的问题[J].资源科学,2003,(5)：83-89.
106.刘玲利.科技资源配置理论与配置效率研究[D].吉林长春：吉林大学博十学位论文,2007,82-83.
107.朱有为,徐康宁.中国高技术产业研发效率的实证研究[J].中国工业经济,2006,(11)：38-45.
108.管燕.江苏省科技资源配置评价研究[D].江苏南京：南京航空航天大学硕十论文,2010.
109.崔栋.我国区域科技资源配置评价及优化研究[D].江苏南京：哈尔滨工程大学硕士论文,2007.
110.陈至立.高自主创新能力,设创新型国家[N].科技日报,2005-11-07.
111.陈建辉.营造发展环境,培育创新主体[N].经济日报,2006-02-12.
112.魏加宁,李建伟,王召.科技发展亟待金融助力[N].经济日报,2004-06-22.
113.赵镇.黑龙江省高等教育科技资源配置评价及优化对策研究[D].黑龙江哈尔滨：哈尔滨工程大学博十论文,2008.
114.杨向辉.科技资源配置、技术转移与区域经济协调发展研究[D].天津：天津大学博士学位论文,2010.
115.陈修德,梁彤缨.中国高新技术产业研发效率及其影响因素[J].科学学研究,2010,(8)：1198-1205.
116.张改清.河北省各地区工业企业研发效率评[J].河北经贸大学学报,2009,(7)：93-96.
117.杨朝峰,赵志耘.主要国家相对研发效率研究[J].中国科技论坛,2009,(5)：132-139.
118.徐晓霞.中国科技资源的现状及开发利用中存在的问题[J].资源科学.2003,(5)：83-89.
119.[美]赫希曼.经济发展战略[M].曹征海,潘照东译.北京：经济科学出版社,1991：65.
120.联合国教科文组织统计研究所.发展中国家的科学技术统计指标：展望和挑战,2002http://www.sts.org.cn/.
121.中国科技发展战略研究小组.2002中国区域创新能力报告[M].经济管理出版社,北京,2003.
122.陈劲,景劲松,周笑磊.我国企业R&D国际化的影响因素分析[J].科学学研究,2003,21,1.51-57.
123.赵喜仓,陈海波.我国R&D状况的区域比较分析[J].统计研究,2003,3.38-42.
124.鲁文龙,陈宏民.R&D合作与政府最优政策博弈分析[J]中国管理科学,2003,11,1.60-62.
125. Kaiser Retal. reconfiguration of national systems[J]. Research Policy,2004, (33):395-408.
126. OECD.OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy CHINA Synthes is Report[ER/OL]. [2007-08-05]. http: //www. Oecd.org/dataoecd/54/20/39177453.pdf.
127. Fare,R.,Grosskopf,S.,Lovell,C.A.K. Productivity Change in Swedish Pharmacies 1980-1989:A Nonparametric Malmquist Approach[J]. Journal of Productivity Analysis,1992,(3):85-101.
128. Colin Carter, Jing Chen and Baojun Chu. Agricultural Productivity Growth in China:Farm Level versus National Measurement. Working Paper,1999,99-001.
129. Davis, Leoncini, Riccardo. The Nature of Long-run Technological Change:Innovation, Evolution and Technological Systems[J].Research Policy,1998,27(1):75-93.
130. John AAlic. Postindustrial Technology Policy [J].ResearchPolicy,2001,30(6):873-889.
131. Sharp, Margaret, Pavitt, Keith. Technology Policy in the 1990s:Old Trends and New Realities[J] Journal of Common Market Studies,1993,31 (2):129-151.
132. Teubal,Morris.R&D and Technology Policy in NICs as Learning Processes[J].World Development,1996,24(3):449-460.
133. Hahn, Yoon-Hwan, Yu, Pyung-Il. Towards a New Technology Policy:The Integration of Generation and Diffusion[J].Technovation,1999,19(3):177-186.
134. Stoneman, Paul. The Use of A Levy/Grant System as an Alternative to Tax Based Incentives to R&D[J].Research Policy,1991,20(3):195-201.
135. Branscomb, Lewis M..Does America Need a Technology Policy[J].Harvard Business Review,1992,70(2):24-30.
136. Smits,Ruud,Leyten,Jos,Hertog,Pim Den. Technology Assessment and Technology Policy in Europe: New Concepts, New Goals, New Infrastructures[J].Policy Sciences,1995,28(3):271-299.
137. Cohen,Linda. When Can Government Subsidize Research Joint Ventures Politics, Economics and Limits to Technology Policy[J].The American Economic Review,1994,84(2):159-163.
138. Dianne Rahm,Veronica Hansen. Technology Policy 2000:University to Industry Transfer [J].International Journal of Public Administration,1999,22(8):1189-1211.
139. Renaud Bellais.Post Keynesian Theory,Technology Policy,and Long-term Growth[J].Journal of Post Keynesian Economics,2004,26(3):419-440.
140. Segerstrom, Paul S., Zolnierek, James M..The R&D Incentives of Industry Leaders [J].International Economic Review [H. W. Wilson-SSA],1999,40(3):745-766.
141. Charnes A.,Cooper W.W.,Rhodes.E. Measuring the Efficiency of DMU[J].European Journal of Operation Research,1978,(2):429-444.
142. Greene,W.H. Econometric Analysis[M].Upper Saddle River:Prentice Hall,2003.
143. Chun-Chu Liu,Chia-Yon Chen.A Two-Dimensional Model for Allocating Resources to R&D Programs[J].Journal of American Academy of Business,2004,5(1/2):459-473.
144. Yasuda, Takehiko. Firm Growth, Size, Age and Behavior in Japanese Manufacturing [J].Small Business Economics,2005,25(1):1-15.
145. Matthew Rafferty, Mark Funk..Demand Shocks and Firm-financed R&D Expenditures [J].Applied Economics,2004,36(14):1529-1536.
146. Katharine Wakelin. Productivity Growth and R&D Expenditure in UK Manufacturing Firms[J].Research Policy,2001,30(7):1079-1090.
147. Jorg C.Mahlich, Thomas, Roediger-Schluga. The Determinants of Pharmaceutical R&D Expenditures:Evidence from Japan[J].Review of Industrial Organization,2006,28(2):145-164.
148. Hu,Albert G.,&Gary H.J. Returns to Research and Development in Chinese Industry:Evidence from State owned Enterprises in Beijing[J].China Economic Review,2004,15(1).
149. Acs. Z J., Anselin. Luc, Varga. Attila.Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge[J]. Research Policy,2002,31:1069-1085.
150. Cuddington. John T, Moss. Diana L. Technological change, depletion, and the U.S. petroleum industry[J]. The American Economic Review,2001,91:11351-148.
151. Griliches. Zvi. Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators:A Survey[J]. Journal of Economic Literature, 1990 28:1661-1707.
152. Arundel. Anthony. The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation[J]. Research Policy,2001,30:611-624.
153. Mazzoleni. Roberto, Nelson. Richard R. The benefits and costs of strong patent protection:a contribution to the current debate[J]. Research Policy,1998,27:273-284.
154. Jaffe. Adam B. The U.S. patent system in transition:policy innovation and the innovation process[J]. Research Policy,2000,29:531-557.
155. Groshby. Mark. Patents, innovation and growth[J]. Economic Record,2000,76:255-262.
156. Guellec. Dominique, Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie. The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data[J]. Research Policy,2001,30:1253-1266.
157. Abraham. Biju Paul, Moitra.Soumyo D. Innovation assessment through patent analysis[J]. Technovation,2001,21:245-252.
158. Waterson. Michael. The Economics of Product Patents[J]. The American Economic Review,1990,80:860-869.
159. Furman. Jeffrey L., Porter. Michael E., Stern. Scott. The determinants of national innovative capacity [J]. Research Policy,2002,31:899-933.
160. Arundel. Anthony, Kabla. Isabel le. What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms[J]. Research Policy,1998,27:127-141.
161. Mahmood. Ishtiaq P., Singh. Jasjit. Technological dynamism in Asia[J]. Research Policy 2003,32:1031-1054.
162. Kortum. Samuel. Equilibrium R&D and the patent-R&D ratio:U.S. evidence[J]. The American Economic Review,1993,83:450-457.
163. Evenson.R. E. Patents, R&D, and invention potential:International evidence[J]. The American Economic Review,,1993,83:463-468.
164. Jaffe.Adam B. Real effects of academic research[J]. The American Economic Review,1989,79:957-970.
165. Adams.James D. Science, R&D, and invention potential recharge:U.S. evidence[J]. The American Economic Review,1993,83:458-462.
166. Jones.Charles I. R&D based models of economic growth[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1995,103: 759-784.
167. Lichtenberg.Frank R. The Private R&D Investment To Federal Design And Technical[J]. The American Econom ic Review,1988,78:550-559.
168. Freeman. Chris. Continental national and sub-national innovation systems—complementarity and economic growth[J]. Research Policy,2002,31:191-211.
169. PERROUX F. Note sur la notion des poles de croissanc[J].Econimie Applique,1955(1-2):307-320[法]弗朗索瓦·佩鲁.略论增长极概念[J].李仁贵,译.经济学译丛,1988(9)：67-72.
170. BOUDEVILLE J R.Problems of regional economic planning [M].Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press,1966:2.