洼地效应、政治资源与民营企业总部选址
|
摘要
进入21世纪以来,随着中国经济转型的进一步深入和国际竞争环境的改变,国内区域制度落差和区域经济发展水平的差异,导致出生于小城市的优秀民营企业的总部选址问题凸显,获取制度优势和市场优势成为企业获得持续竞争优势的重要方式,也成为民营企业实施全球战略、布局全球竞争的一种组织形式和制度安排。在前人研究的基础上,本文对区位优势理论进行了深刻的反思。结合前人的研究和中国制度转型期的特殊环境,本文将民营企业总部选址的重要影响因素概括和归结为洼地效应和政治资源。本文认为:(1)中国经济转型的渐进性、分权性和试验型特征所带来的制度落差,客观上使得民营企业为获取政治优势而追求政治资源的以制度为基础的战略思维方式成为其重要战略问题解决的首要思路。(2)中国经济转型的渐进性、分权性和试验型特征所带来的市场差异,客观上使得民营企业为获取市场优势而追求市场资源的以资源为基础的战略思维方式仍然在其战略制定和执行中起着基础性的作用,在小城市的洼地效应和中心城市的区位优势之间的选择构成了民营企业总部选址的重要因素。
基于系统动力学的观点,本文详细分析民营企业总部选址决策的两种驱动力量:促使民营企业总部再选址的力量和阻碍民营企业总部再选址的力量,在此基础上构建了本文的概念模型。基于以制度为基础的战略观点和以资源为基础的战略观点,本文将民营企业总部选址的两种驱动力在制度因素和市场资源的框架下进行归纳和总结,详细分析洼地效应和政治资源对民营企业总部选址决策的作用,在此基础上构建了本文的研究框架。
鉴于研究问题的特殊性,本文采取了案例研究的方法。通过资料获取的可信性、模式匹配的程度、命题建立的合理性、研究过程的严谨性和可靠性检验保证案例研究的科学性。通过深度访谈、相关报道和查询公司历史资料三种方法获得研究资料和数据,通过三角验证以保证资料的可信性,并通过构念效度、内部效度和信度三个方面进行检验。
通过对8家案例企业总部选址决策的深入分析和讨论,得到如下的主要研究结果:(1)中国经济转型特殊的政治和经济环境对民营企业总部选址决策具有实质性影响,对洼地效应和政治资源的追求成为民营企业应对政治和经济环境的重要方式。(2)中国经济转型的特殊环境造就了不同区域、不同层次的政府所拥有的政治资源具有实质性差异,民营企业不得不在追求政治资源的战略思维指引下考虑企业总部选址决策。(3)中国经济转型的特殊环境造就了民营企业在出生地的洼地效应,民营企业不得不在追求市场资源的战略思维指引下慎重考虑企业总部选址决策。(4)企业商业模式对洼地效应和政治资源的使用方式存在实质性差异,导致企业商业模式的洼地效应关联性、市场化程度、政治资源依赖性、政治资源优化性等因素成为民营企业总部选址决策的中介变量。(5)高层管理者的价值观在企业总部选址决策中具有非常重要的作用,无论是政治资源还是洼地效应,以及作为中介变量的商业模式,都通过企业高层管理者的价值观在企业总部选址决策中得以充分体现。
研究结果显示,在洼地效应方面,企业商业模式的市场化程度、商业模式的地域性以及企业家对洼地效应的追求显著影响民营企业的总部选址决策。在政治资源方面,企业商业模式的政治资源关联性、商业模式的政治资源优化性以及企业家对政治资源的追求显著影响民营企业的总部选址决策。
本文的研究结果表明,中国民营企业的总部选址决策在经济转型背景下表现出独特的特征:对政治资源的追求和对洼地效应的权衡。这种特征即体现了中国民营企业总部选址的特殊规律,也映射了中国经济转型的成果和存在的问题。基于对中国民营企业总部选址规律的认识,本文的研究结论既能够为民营企业总部选址决策提供理论指引,也能够为中国经济转型的进一步深入提供理论建议。
When entering the 21st century, with further in-depth economic transition and the changes of the international competition environment, China faces a new challenge. That is the institutional gaps and economic differences among regions within China have prominently resulted in headquarter relocation problems for those private firms who have outstanding performance but were born in small cities. This problem implies that obtaining institutional advantages and market advantages have become an important approach for firms to gain sustainable competitive advantages, and also become an organizational form and institutional arrangement for private firms to implement global strategy and arrange global competition. Based on previous studies, this paper conducts a profound reflection to the location advantage theory. Incorporating with the previous studies and the specific circumstance of Chinese institutional transition, this paper summarizes the important factors of headquarters relocation decision-making in private firms and categorizes them into two factors: the political resource and the lowland effect. The paper argues that: (1) the institutional gaps, caused by the gradual, decentralized and experimental economic transition, objectively make the private firms form an institution-based strategic thinking mode that they should pursuit political resources to gain political advantages. This thinking mode becomes a dominant idea of solving strategic problems. (2)The market differences, caused by the gradual, decentralization and experimental features of Chinese economic transition, objectively make the private firms form a resource-based strategic thinking mode that they should pursuit market resources to gain market advantages. Such thinking mode plays a fundamental role in the formulation and implementation of strategies. The choice between the lowland effects of small cities and the location advantages of central cities constitutes an important factor for Chinese private firms to decide headquarters location.
Based on the theory of System Dynamics, this paper raises two driving forces of headquarters location decision-making: the promoting driver and the preventing driver. Further, the conceptual model is constructed. Based on the institution-based view and the resource-based view, this paper summarizes the two driving forces for headquarter location decision-making under the framework of institutional factors and market resources, analyses the influences of political resources and lowland effects on headquarter location decision-making in private firms in detail, and constructs the research framework.
Given the specificity of the research questions, this paper adopts the case study approach. The methodology is guaranteed by the credibility of information, the matching extent of patterns, the rationality of hypotheses, the stringency of the research process and the reliability of testing. The research materials and data were obtained by three ways, including deep interview, reports and historical information. The credibility of the data is ensured by triangulation verification. The data are tested through construction validity, internal validity and reliability.
Through deep analysis and discussion of eight cases in headquarters location decision-making, this paper got some findings as follows: (1) the specific political and economic environments of China during the economic transition have substantive impacts on headquarter location decision-making in private firms. Pursing lowland effects and political resources become an important way for private firms to deal with political and economic environments. (2) The specific environment of China's economic transition has created substantial differences in political resources owned by governments between different regions within China. Private firms have to consider headquarter location in order to get political resources. In fact, this consideration already becomes a thinking mode in Chinese private firms. (3) The specific environment of China during the economic transition has generated the lowland effects to private firms in their birthplaces. Private firms have to decide their headquarters location carefully under the strategic thinking mode of pursing market resources. (4) The business models turns out to have substantially different impacts on the usage of lowland effects and political resources, which reveals that the variable of business model, including the level of marketization, the dependence on political resource, and the optimization of political resources, are mediate variables between, lowland effects, as well as political resources, and the headquarter location decision-making. (5) The value of top managers plays a very important role in the headquarters location decision-making process. No matter whether it is political resource or lowland effect, as well as the mediated variable——business model, it is fully reflected through the values of top managers in the headquarters location decision-making process.
The results show that, as far as the lowland effect is concerned, the level of marketization of the business model, the geographic location of the business model and entrepreneurs’motivation of pursuing lowland effects have significant impacts on headquarters location decision-making in private firms; As far as the political resource is concerned, the relevance of political resources of the business model, the optimization of political resources of business model, as well as the entrepreneurs’pursuit of political resources, have significant impacts on headquarters location decision-making in private firms.
The research results indicate that, the headquarter location decision-making in Chinese private firms shows unique characteristics in the context of economic transition. That is, the pursuit of political resources and the trade-off of lowland effects. These characteristics reveal a specific law of headquarter location decision-making process in China, which also implies the status quo of China's economic transition process. Based on the understanding of the specific Chinese law of headquarter location decision-making process, our conclusions can not only provide a theoretical guidance for headquarter location decision-making in private firms, but also provide a theoretical proposal for further researches on China’s economic transition.
基于系统动力学的观点,本文详细分析民营企业总部选址决策的两种驱动力量:促使民营企业总部再选址的力量和阻碍民营企业总部再选址的力量,在此基础上构建了本文的概念模型。基于以制度为基础的战略观点和以资源为基础的战略观点,本文将民营企业总部选址的两种驱动力在制度因素和市场资源的框架下进行归纳和总结,详细分析洼地效应和政治资源对民营企业总部选址决策的作用,在此基础上构建了本文的研究框架。
鉴于研究问题的特殊性,本文采取了案例研究的方法。通过资料获取的可信性、模式匹配的程度、命题建立的合理性、研究过程的严谨性和可靠性检验保证案例研究的科学性。通过深度访谈、相关报道和查询公司历史资料三种方法获得研究资料和数据,通过三角验证以保证资料的可信性,并通过构念效度、内部效度和信度三个方面进行检验。
通过对8家案例企业总部选址决策的深入分析和讨论,得到如下的主要研究结果:(1)中国经济转型特殊的政治和经济环境对民营企业总部选址决策具有实质性影响,对洼地效应和政治资源的追求成为民营企业应对政治和经济环境的重要方式。(2)中国经济转型的特殊环境造就了不同区域、不同层次的政府所拥有的政治资源具有实质性差异,民营企业不得不在追求政治资源的战略思维指引下考虑企业总部选址决策。(3)中国经济转型的特殊环境造就了民营企业在出生地的洼地效应,民营企业不得不在追求市场资源的战略思维指引下慎重考虑企业总部选址决策。(4)企业商业模式对洼地效应和政治资源的使用方式存在实质性差异,导致企业商业模式的洼地效应关联性、市场化程度、政治资源依赖性、政治资源优化性等因素成为民营企业总部选址决策的中介变量。(5)高层管理者的价值观在企业总部选址决策中具有非常重要的作用,无论是政治资源还是洼地效应,以及作为中介变量的商业模式,都通过企业高层管理者的价值观在企业总部选址决策中得以充分体现。
研究结果显示,在洼地效应方面,企业商业模式的市场化程度、商业模式的地域性以及企业家对洼地效应的追求显著影响民营企业的总部选址决策。在政治资源方面,企业商业模式的政治资源关联性、商业模式的政治资源优化性以及企业家对政治资源的追求显著影响民营企业的总部选址决策。
本文的研究结果表明,中国民营企业的总部选址决策在经济转型背景下表现出独特的特征:对政治资源的追求和对洼地效应的权衡。这种特征即体现了中国民营企业总部选址的特殊规律,也映射了中国经济转型的成果和存在的问题。基于对中国民营企业总部选址规律的认识,本文的研究结论既能够为民营企业总部选址决策提供理论指引,也能够为中国经济转型的进一步深入提供理论建议。
When entering the 21st century, with further in-depth economic transition and the changes of the international competition environment, China faces a new challenge. That is the institutional gaps and economic differences among regions within China have prominently resulted in headquarter relocation problems for those private firms who have outstanding performance but were born in small cities. This problem implies that obtaining institutional advantages and market advantages have become an important approach for firms to gain sustainable competitive advantages, and also become an organizational form and institutional arrangement for private firms to implement global strategy and arrange global competition. Based on previous studies, this paper conducts a profound reflection to the location advantage theory. Incorporating with the previous studies and the specific circumstance of Chinese institutional transition, this paper summarizes the important factors of headquarters relocation decision-making in private firms and categorizes them into two factors: the political resource and the lowland effect. The paper argues that: (1) the institutional gaps, caused by the gradual, decentralized and experimental economic transition, objectively make the private firms form an institution-based strategic thinking mode that they should pursuit political resources to gain political advantages. This thinking mode becomes a dominant idea of solving strategic problems. (2)The market differences, caused by the gradual, decentralization and experimental features of Chinese economic transition, objectively make the private firms form a resource-based strategic thinking mode that they should pursuit market resources to gain market advantages. Such thinking mode plays a fundamental role in the formulation and implementation of strategies. The choice between the lowland effects of small cities and the location advantages of central cities constitutes an important factor for Chinese private firms to decide headquarters location.
Based on the theory of System Dynamics, this paper raises two driving forces of headquarters location decision-making: the promoting driver and the preventing driver. Further, the conceptual model is constructed. Based on the institution-based view and the resource-based view, this paper summarizes the two driving forces for headquarter location decision-making under the framework of institutional factors and market resources, analyses the influences of political resources and lowland effects on headquarter location decision-making in private firms in detail, and constructs the research framework.
Given the specificity of the research questions, this paper adopts the case study approach. The methodology is guaranteed by the credibility of information, the matching extent of patterns, the rationality of hypotheses, the stringency of the research process and the reliability of testing. The research materials and data were obtained by three ways, including deep interview, reports and historical information. The credibility of the data is ensured by triangulation verification. The data are tested through construction validity, internal validity and reliability.
Through deep analysis and discussion of eight cases in headquarters location decision-making, this paper got some findings as follows: (1) the specific political and economic environments of China during the economic transition have substantive impacts on headquarter location decision-making in private firms. Pursing lowland effects and political resources become an important way for private firms to deal with political and economic environments. (2) The specific environment of China's economic transition has created substantial differences in political resources owned by governments between different regions within China. Private firms have to consider headquarter location in order to get political resources. In fact, this consideration already becomes a thinking mode in Chinese private firms. (3) The specific environment of China during the economic transition has generated the lowland effects to private firms in their birthplaces. Private firms have to decide their headquarters location carefully under the strategic thinking mode of pursing market resources. (4) The business models turns out to have substantially different impacts on the usage of lowland effects and political resources, which reveals that the variable of business model, including the level of marketization, the dependence on political resource, and the optimization of political resources, are mediate variables between, lowland effects, as well as political resources, and the headquarter location decision-making. (5) The value of top managers plays a very important role in the headquarters location decision-making process. No matter whether it is political resource or lowland effect, as well as the mediated variable——business model, it is fully reflected through the values of top managers in the headquarters location decision-making process.
The results show that, as far as the lowland effect is concerned, the level of marketization of the business model, the geographic location of the business model and entrepreneurs’motivation of pursuing lowland effects have significant impacts on headquarters location decision-making in private firms; As far as the political resource is concerned, the relevance of political resources of the business model, the optimization of political resources of business model, as well as the entrepreneurs’pursuit of political resources, have significant impacts on headquarters location decision-making in private firms.
The research results indicate that, the headquarter location decision-making in Chinese private firms shows unique characteristics in the context of economic transition. That is, the pursuit of political resources and the trade-off of lowland effects. These characteristics reveal a specific law of headquarter location decision-making process in China, which also implies the status quo of China's economic transition process. Based on the understanding of the specific Chinese law of headquarter location decision-making process, our conclusions can not only provide a theoretical guidance for headquarter location decision-making in private firms, but also provide a theoretical proposal for further researches on China’s economic transition.
引文
[1] [德]阿尔弗雷德·韦伯.工业区位论(中译本).北京:商务印书馆,1997
[2] [德]冯·杜能.孤立国同农业和国民经济的关系(中译本).北京:商务印书馆,1997
[3] [美]埃德加·M·胡佛,弗兰克·杰莱塔尼著.区域经济学导论.郭万清,汪明等译.上海:上海远东出版社,1992
[4] [美]罗伯特·达尔.现代政治分析.上海译文出版社,1987:47
[5] Agodo, O. The Determinants of US Private Manufacturing Investment in Africa. Journal of International Business Studies,1978,Winter, 9(3):95-107
[6] Baron D. Integrated strategy: market and nonmarket components. California Management Retnew,1995(37):47-65
[7] Boddewyn J and Brewer T. International business political behavior: new theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review,1994(19):119-143
[8] Dahan, N. A contribution to the conceptualization of political resources utilized in corporate political action. fournal of Public Affairs,2005(5):43-54
[9] Douglas,D. Corporate Political Activity as a Competitive Strategy:Influencing Public Policy to Increase firm Performance. PH.D.Thesis,Texas A&M University,1995
[10] Dunning, J. H. The Eclectic Paradigm in the Global Economic. International Journal of the Economic of Business,2001, 8(2)
[11] Dunning, J.H. Location and the Multinational Enterprise: A Neglected Factor? Journal of International Business Studies,1998, 29(1)
[12] Dunning,J.H. Trade, location of economic activity and the MNE: A search for an eclectic approach. In:Ohlin,B., Hesselborn,P.,Wijkman,P.(Eds.), The International Allocation of Economic Activity.London:MacMillan Press,1977
[13] Eisenhardt,Kathleen.Building Theories from Case Study Research.Academy of Management Review,1989(14)
[14] Epstein E. The Corporation in American Politics. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs,1969
[15] Faccio,M. Politically Connected Firms. American Economic Review,2006,96(1)
[16] Fainsod M. Some reflections on the nature of the regulatory process. In Public Policy, Volume 1, Feldman D.C. and Bolino M.C.. Moving on out: When are employeeswilling to follow their organization during corporate relocation?.Journal of Organizational Behavior,1998,Vol.19:275-288
[17] Frederick Lydell Hamilton.What’s driving industrial location decisions in Alabama: a perception analysis.Academy of Management Review,2004
[18] Fredrich CJ, Mason E (eds). Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA; 1940:297-323
[19] Frynas J.G., Mellahi K. and Pigman G.A.. Frist Mover Advantages in International Business and Firm-Specific Political Resources. Strategic Management Journal. 2006, 27: 321–345
[20] Granovetter M. S.. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 1985, 91(3): 481-510
[21] Holloway.R and Wheeler, O. Corporate Headquarters Relocation and Changes in Metropolitan Corporate Dominance, 1980-1987. Economic Geography, 1991, 67: 54-74
[22] Hortst, T. and Koropeckyi, S. Headquartaers Effect. Regional Financial Review, 2000, 16-29
[23] Jeannette T. Goldsmith.The Top Five Things You Need to Know About HQ Relocations.Academy of Management,2004
[24] Jonash R S.Strategic technology leveraging: Making outsourcing work for you. IEEE Engineering Management Review,1997(Summer):90-95
[25] Joseph H. Eisenberg, Roger Fried land.Corporate Headquarters Relocation. Real Estate Issues. Fall, 1990, 15:2.
[26] Klier T, Testa W. Location trends of large company headquarters during the 1990s. Economic Perspectives, 2002,(2Q):12-26
[27] Knobena J. and Oerlemans L.A.G.. The effects of firm relocation on firm performance:A literature review. ERSA2005,Free University Amsterdam, 2005
[28] Kumar, N. Multinational Enterprises in Indid .London: Routledge. 1991
[29] Leonard, H.. Are Environmental Regulations Driving US Industry Overseas? Washington DC: The Conversation Foundation. 1984
[30] Michael C. Sturman.Multiple Approaches to Analyzing Count Data in Studies of Individual Differences: The Propensity for Type I Errors, Illustrated with the Case of Absenteeism Prediction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 59, No. 3, 414-430 (1999)
[31] Nicolas Dahan.A contribution to the conceptualization of political resources utilized in corporate political action, Journal of Public Affairs, 1990:2
[32] Oberman W. Strategy and tactic choice in an institutional resource context. In Corporate Political Agency. Mitnick B (ed.). Sage: Newbury Hark, CA; 1993, 213-241
[33] Porter, M. E. Cluster and New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review. 1998, 11
[34] Robert E.Stake. The art of case study research. Brussels/Artists Rights Society (ARS):New York,1995
[35] Smith R A.Interest Group Influence in the U.S. Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 1995, 20(1):89-139
[36] Sweeney M. M.. The Corporate Headquarters Challenge. http://www.facilitycity.com/ busfac/ bf_03_04_cover2.asp. April 2003.
[37] Ulgado, Francis M.Location Characteristics of Manufacturing Investments in the U.S.: A Comparison of American and Foreign-based Firms.Harvard Business Review,1996.
[38] Vogel D J. The Study of Business and Politics. California Management Review, 1996,38(3):146-165
[39] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1994
[40]陈伟鸿,王会龙.企业迁移的理论基础及其演变脉络.经济评论,2007(3):155-158
[41]陈伟鸿.民营企业区域迁移及其策略分析.学术交流,2005(10):80-83
[42]陈伟鸿.浙江民营企业跨区域迁移的―根植性‖策略.商业经济与管理,2008(8):29-34
[43]陈文新.政治资源与政治发展.东方论坛,2008(3)
[44]陈智敏.论苏南模式与温州模式.合作经济与科技,2006(10):9-10
[45]陈周.论吴文化与苏南经济发展之关系.江南论坛,2008(9):52-53
[46]戴德胜,姚迪.总部办公区位分布与选址规律研究.现代城市研究,2006a(6)
[47]戴德胜,姚迪.从企业总部地址迁移变化看CBD的发展态势.规划师,2006b(10):84-8
[48]戴乐平,周曙东.湖南工业竞争力研究(下).学习导报,2001(11):10-11
[49]丁辉侠,冯宗宪.制度作为区位优势对中国吸引外商直接投资的影响——以引力模型为基础的实证分析.经济经纬,2007(2)
[50]董辅扔.中华人民共和国经济史.北京:经济科学出版社,1999:416-417
[51]杜伟锦,黄冬梅.浙江民企迁徙的态势特点.浙江经济,2006(16):58-59
[52]范爱军,李真,刘小勇.国内市场分割及其影响因素的实证分析——以我国商品市场为例.南开经济研究,2007(5)
[53]辜胜阻,郑凌云,张昭华.区域经济文化对创新模式影响的比较分析——以硅谷和温州为例.中国软科学,2006(4):8-14
[54]郭晓洁.发展广州总部经济的现状、优势及思考.特区经济,2008(7):42-43.
[55]国家统计局企调总队,浙江省企调队.浙江企业缘何纷纷外迁.山东经济战略研究,2005(7):23-25
[56]海路,徐伟.工业园区论——新农村建设武义经验之三.百色学院学报,2007(1):67-72
[57]何骏.上海发展总部经济的思考.上海企业,2008(8):7-9
[58]贺灿飞.公司总部地理集聚及其空间演变.中国软科学,2007(3)
[59]侯光明,邹锐.民营企业的发展模式研究.经济师,2003(11):8-10
[60]黄文夫.民营在中国.北京:中国城市出版社,2003
[61]蒋伏心,周春平.交易费用视角的政府行为——以温州模式为例.中国工业经济,2005(6):24-30
[62]金祥荣,朱希伟.―温州模式‖变迁与创新——兼对若干转型理论假说的检验.经济理论与经济管理,2001(8):70-75
[63]金中梁.武义县:发展―一中心两翼‖的区域工业.当代经济,2001(1):44-45.
[64]蓝海林.多点竞争战略.企业管理,2000(7):1-2
[65]李各海.对民营企业融资问题的探析.经济师.2009(1):180-182
[66]李恒.交易费用、聚集经济与跨国公司区位.中国软科学,2005(2)
[67]李恒.制度分割、产业集群与跨国公司区位.国际贸易问题,2005(3)
[68]李靖宇,荣丽华.东亚大市场综合成因论析.国际论坛,2001(4)
[69]李魁.1998—2005我国民企500强的动态发展分析.巢湖学院学报,2007,9(2):40-47
[70]李善同,侯永志,刘云中等.中国国内地方保护问题的调查与分析.经济研究,2004(11)
[71]李王鸣,朱珊,王纯彬.民营企业迁移扩张现象调查——以浙江省乐清市为例.经济问题,2004(9):30-32
[72]李艺纹,李小玲.京津联合发展总部经济探讨.现代财经,2006(11):17-20
[73]李真,范爱军.中国区域市场分割的研究现状及展望.天府新论,2008(6):47-51
[74]林文俏.发展总部经济:广州走向国际化的新机遇.珠江经济,2006(6):44-47
[75]刘冬银,熊毅.从区位优势理论看跨国公司对中国研发的投资.科技进步与对策,2003(22)
[76]刘光尧.民营企业对外直接投资的理论探讨.科学与管理,2002(6)
[77]刘鸿.农村剩余劳动力转移过程的洼地效应研究.理论与改革,2007(4):84-86
[78]刘怀德.经济发展中的企业迁移.财经理论与实践(双月刊),2001,22(3):114-116
[79]刘克谦.―总部经济‖走红中国大都市.金融经济,2004(9)
[80]刘润葵.中西部开发不是―三线建设‖.经济前沿,1996(10)
[81]刘莹.苏南模式和浙江模式中企业制度变迁的比较研究.世界经济情况,2007(1):65-68
[82]柳岸林.中国与东盟五国引进FDI的区位优势研究.厦门:厦门大学出版社,2006
[83]鲁明泓.制度因素与国际直接投资区位分布:一项实证研究.经济研究,1999(7)
[84]麦肯锡.中国是最难征服的零售市场.http://www.globrand.com/2007/77030.shtml
[85]毛蕴诗,汪建成.日本跨国公司对华直接投资的动机与区位因素分析.南开管理评论,2004(5)
[86]孟庆民.安成谋.西北地区经济开发系统构想──兼论西北经济开发区建设.兰州商学院学报,1995(4)
[87]潘镇,潘持春.制度、政策与外商直接投资的区位分布——来自中国各地区的经验证据.南京师大学报(社会科学版),2004(3)
[88]任晓.地方政府意志与民营经济的发展:―温州模式‖生成中的互惠性动力.经济理论与经济管理,2006(3):11-16
[89]史福厚,周建民.内蒙古中西部地区经济发展与金融成长差异分析.内蒙古财经学院学报,2007(5):90-94
[90]史晋川.温州模式的历史制度分析——从人格化交易与非人格化交易视角的观察.浙江社会科学,2004(2):16-20
[91]史忠良,沈红兵.中国总部经济的形成及其发展研究.中国工业经济,2005(5):58-65
[92]田志龙,高勇强,卫武.中国企业政治策略与行为研究.管理世界(月刊),2003(12)
[93]王长富.改革开放后的中国私营经济.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1997
[94]王殿华.―洼地效应‖与资源依赖型地区的经济振兴之路.南方国土资源,2005(8):21-25
[95]王浩.地区总部、产业转型和经济发展——兼论上海营造总部经济的战略与规划.亚太经济,2005(3):45-48
[96]王建中.资本复兴—中国个体私营经济20年速写.济南:山东人民出版社,2002
[97]王静.我国吸引跨国公司设立地区总部的区位优势分析.黑龙江对外经贸,2006(9)
[98]王克忠.非公有制经济论.上海:上海人民出版社,2003
[99]王业强.国外企业迁移研究综述.经济地理,2007(1):30-35
[100]王莹.上海总部经济发展:现状与思考.上海经济研究,2006(2):57-64
[101]王子新,夏斌.广州市总部经济发展研究.科技进步与对策,2006(9):66-68
[102]卫武,田志龙,刘晶.我国企业经营活动中的政治关联性研究.中国工业经济,2004(4):67-75
[103]卫武.中国环境下企业政治资源、政治策略和政治绩效及其关系研究.管理世界(月刊),2006(2):95-109
[104]魏爱琴.谈谈企业家的利益激励──关于建立企业家激励机制的思考.经营与管理,1999(3)
[105]魏后凯,白玫.中国上市公司总部迁移现状及特征分析.中国工业经济,2008(9):13-24
[106]魏守华,石碧华.论企业集群的竞争优势.中国工业经济,2002(1):59-65
[107]文艳,赵奉军.企业―迁都‖中的经济学.决策咨询,2003(6):32-33
[108]吴解生,价值链重组、制造业吸纳与区位优势提升.甘肃省经济管理干部学院学报,2004(3):3-6
[109]吴倩.―迁都‖,让企业登上发展快车.经贸导刊,2003(Z1):64-65
[110]夏飞,胡洪曙.试论―洼地效应‖.技术经济,2001(11):59-60
[111]萧怡钦.跨国公司新一轮对粤投资因素分析.广东社会科学,2002(2)
[112]肖永芹,董路宁.上海发展总部经济的优势、现状及对策.经济前沿,2006(8):11-15
[113]谢健.民营经济发展模式比较.中国工业经济,2002(10):76-82
[114]徐金发,江青虎,张宏.基于产业集群视角的总部经济分析,2006(1):1-5
[115]杨东方,臧学英.对区位优势内涵的理解与运用.城市,2008(6):23-27
[116]杨国亮.论范围经济、集聚经济与规模经济的相容性.当代财经,2005(11):10-14
[117]杨家栋.面向21世纪扬州经济发展的战略思考.扬州大学学报(人文社会科学版),1999
[118]杨名权.坚持―四个突出‖增强民办高校活力.中国高等教育,2001
[119]余建国.全球化背景下的企业外包决策分析.中国商界(下半月).2008,9
[120]俞启定.关于人才实行有偿流动的思考.北京师范大学学报(社会科学版).2003(3):78-84
[121]曾明.中国政治资源的空间分布:一个描述性分析.理论与改革,2007(5):8-11
[122]张厚义,明立志.中国私营企业发展报告(1978—1998).北京:社会科学文献出版社,1999:36
[123]张建君,张志学.中国民营企业家的政治战略.管理世界,2006(7):94-105
[124]张仁涛,李红.温州模式研究.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1990:154
[125]张燕,高小珣.企业迁都的冷思考.经济与管理,2006(8):26-28
[126]张英智.加入WTO与人才流动市场化趋势研究.中国人力资源开发,2002(10):25-27
[127]张宇馨.跨国公司地区总部的区位选择和引资对策.中国市场.2008(48)
[128]赵弘.总部经济.北京:中国经济出版社,2004
[129]赵佳宝,卢锐,盛昭瀚.西方企业孵化器理论研究.管理工程学报,2003(4):100-102
[130]赵丽江.试论中国私营企业家的政治接触及其价值.江汉论坛,2005(3):122-125
[131]赵美英.苏南率先发展的文化解读.常州工学院学报(社科版),2007(5):97-102
[132]赵薇.企业国际化经营及战略决策.经济改革,1997
[133]郑国中.企业缘何要迁都.西部大开发,2003(11):44-45
[134]郑京淑.跨国公司地区总部职能与亚洲地区总部的区位研究.世界地理研究,2002(1)
[135]郑敬岳.企业总部迁移动力机制研究.广东商学院学报,2005(3):46-50
[136]郑琦.总部经济潮之三―城市笑脸‖的诱惑.中国外资,2006
[137]中国私营经济年鉴2000—2001:第一版.北京:中华工商联合出版社,2003(2):117-191
[138]周春平.苏南模式与温州模式的产权比较.中国农村经济,2002(8):39-46
[139]周宏燕,于振涛.山东半岛城市群的区位优势分析.技术经济,2004(9)
[140]周晓,洪建刚.―苏南模式‖的发展历程及转型研究.市场周刊,2006(2):97-98
[141]周政.基于区位优势的温州吸引FDI政策研究.上海:同济大学公共管理系,2006(14)
[142]朱希伟,金祥荣,罗德明.国内市场分割与中国的出口贸易扩张.经济研究,2005(12)
[143]朱先春.民营企业的―政治营销‖策略.港澳经济,1999(9):2-5
[2] [德]冯·杜能.孤立国同农业和国民经济的关系(中译本).北京:商务印书馆,1997
[3] [美]埃德加·M·胡佛,弗兰克·杰莱塔尼著.区域经济学导论.郭万清,汪明等译.上海:上海远东出版社,1992
[4] [美]罗伯特·达尔.现代政治分析.上海译文出版社,1987:47
[5] Agodo, O. The Determinants of US Private Manufacturing Investment in Africa. Journal of International Business Studies,1978,Winter, 9(3):95-107
[6] Baron D. Integrated strategy: market and nonmarket components. California Management Retnew,1995(37):47-65
[7] Boddewyn J and Brewer T. International business political behavior: new theoretical directions. Academy of Management Review,1994(19):119-143
[8] Dahan, N. A contribution to the conceptualization of political resources utilized in corporate political action. fournal of Public Affairs,2005(5):43-54
[9] Douglas,D. Corporate Political Activity as a Competitive Strategy:Influencing Public Policy to Increase firm Performance. PH.D.Thesis,Texas A&M University,1995
[10] Dunning, J. H. The Eclectic Paradigm in the Global Economic. International Journal of the Economic of Business,2001, 8(2)
[11] Dunning, J.H. Location and the Multinational Enterprise: A Neglected Factor? Journal of International Business Studies,1998, 29(1)
[12] Dunning,J.H. Trade, location of economic activity and the MNE: A search for an eclectic approach. In:Ohlin,B., Hesselborn,P.,Wijkman,P.(Eds.), The International Allocation of Economic Activity.London:MacMillan Press,1977
[13] Eisenhardt,Kathleen.Building Theories from Case Study Research.Academy of Management Review,1989(14)
[14] Epstein E. The Corporation in American Politics. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs,1969
[15] Faccio,M. Politically Connected Firms. American Economic Review,2006,96(1)
[16] Fainsod M. Some reflections on the nature of the regulatory process. In Public Policy, Volume 1, Feldman D.C. and Bolino M.C.. Moving on out: When are employeeswilling to follow their organization during corporate relocation?.Journal of Organizational Behavior,1998,Vol.19:275-288
[17] Frederick Lydell Hamilton.What’s driving industrial location decisions in Alabama: a perception analysis.Academy of Management Review,2004
[18] Fredrich CJ, Mason E (eds). Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA; 1940:297-323
[19] Frynas J.G., Mellahi K. and Pigman G.A.. Frist Mover Advantages in International Business and Firm-Specific Political Resources. Strategic Management Journal. 2006, 27: 321–345
[20] Granovetter M. S.. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 1985, 91(3): 481-510
[21] Holloway.R and Wheeler, O. Corporate Headquarters Relocation and Changes in Metropolitan Corporate Dominance, 1980-1987. Economic Geography, 1991, 67: 54-74
[22] Hortst, T. and Koropeckyi, S. Headquartaers Effect. Regional Financial Review, 2000, 16-29
[23] Jeannette T. Goldsmith.The Top Five Things You Need to Know About HQ Relocations.Academy of Management,2004
[24] Jonash R S.Strategic technology leveraging: Making outsourcing work for you. IEEE Engineering Management Review,1997(Summer):90-95
[25] Joseph H. Eisenberg, Roger Fried land.Corporate Headquarters Relocation. Real Estate Issues. Fall, 1990, 15:2.
[26] Klier T, Testa W. Location trends of large company headquarters during the 1990s. Economic Perspectives, 2002,(2Q):12-26
[27] Knobena J. and Oerlemans L.A.G.. The effects of firm relocation on firm performance:A literature review. ERSA2005,Free University Amsterdam, 2005
[28] Kumar, N. Multinational Enterprises in Indid .London: Routledge. 1991
[29] Leonard, H.. Are Environmental Regulations Driving US Industry Overseas? Washington DC: The Conversation Foundation. 1984
[30] Michael C. Sturman.Multiple Approaches to Analyzing Count Data in Studies of Individual Differences: The Propensity for Type I Errors, Illustrated with the Case of Absenteeism Prediction. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 59, No. 3, 414-430 (1999)
[31] Nicolas Dahan.A contribution to the conceptualization of political resources utilized in corporate political action, Journal of Public Affairs, 1990:2
[32] Oberman W. Strategy and tactic choice in an institutional resource context. In Corporate Political Agency. Mitnick B (ed.). Sage: Newbury Hark, CA; 1993, 213-241
[33] Porter, M. E. Cluster and New Economics of Competition. Harvard Business Review. 1998, 11
[34] Robert E.Stake. The art of case study research. Brussels/Artists Rights Society (ARS):New York,1995
[35] Smith R A.Interest Group Influence in the U.S. Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 1995, 20(1):89-139
[36] Sweeney M. M.. The Corporate Headquarters Challenge. http://www.facilitycity.com/ busfac/ bf_03_04_cover2.asp. April 2003.
[37] Ulgado, Francis M.Location Characteristics of Manufacturing Investments in the U.S.: A Comparison of American and Foreign-based Firms.Harvard Business Review,1996.
[38] Vogel D J. The Study of Business and Politics. California Management Review, 1996,38(3):146-165
[39] Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1994
[40]陈伟鸿,王会龙.企业迁移的理论基础及其演变脉络.经济评论,2007(3):155-158
[41]陈伟鸿.民营企业区域迁移及其策略分析.学术交流,2005(10):80-83
[42]陈伟鸿.浙江民营企业跨区域迁移的―根植性‖策略.商业经济与管理,2008(8):29-34
[43]陈文新.政治资源与政治发展.东方论坛,2008(3)
[44]陈智敏.论苏南模式与温州模式.合作经济与科技,2006(10):9-10
[45]陈周.论吴文化与苏南经济发展之关系.江南论坛,2008(9):52-53
[46]戴德胜,姚迪.总部办公区位分布与选址规律研究.现代城市研究,2006a(6)
[47]戴德胜,姚迪.从企业总部地址迁移变化看CBD的发展态势.规划师,2006b(10):84-8
[48]戴乐平,周曙东.湖南工业竞争力研究(下).学习导报,2001(11):10-11
[49]丁辉侠,冯宗宪.制度作为区位优势对中国吸引外商直接投资的影响——以引力模型为基础的实证分析.经济经纬,2007(2)
[50]董辅扔.中华人民共和国经济史.北京:经济科学出版社,1999:416-417
[51]杜伟锦,黄冬梅.浙江民企迁徙的态势特点.浙江经济,2006(16):58-59
[52]范爱军,李真,刘小勇.国内市场分割及其影响因素的实证分析——以我国商品市场为例.南开经济研究,2007(5)
[53]辜胜阻,郑凌云,张昭华.区域经济文化对创新模式影响的比较分析——以硅谷和温州为例.中国软科学,2006(4):8-14
[54]郭晓洁.发展广州总部经济的现状、优势及思考.特区经济,2008(7):42-43.
[55]国家统计局企调总队,浙江省企调队.浙江企业缘何纷纷外迁.山东经济战略研究,2005(7):23-25
[56]海路,徐伟.工业园区论——新农村建设武义经验之三.百色学院学报,2007(1):67-72
[57]何骏.上海发展总部经济的思考.上海企业,2008(8):7-9
[58]贺灿飞.公司总部地理集聚及其空间演变.中国软科学,2007(3)
[59]侯光明,邹锐.民营企业的发展模式研究.经济师,2003(11):8-10
[60]黄文夫.民营在中国.北京:中国城市出版社,2003
[61]蒋伏心,周春平.交易费用视角的政府行为——以温州模式为例.中国工业经济,2005(6):24-30
[62]金祥荣,朱希伟.―温州模式‖变迁与创新——兼对若干转型理论假说的检验.经济理论与经济管理,2001(8):70-75
[63]金中梁.武义县:发展―一中心两翼‖的区域工业.当代经济,2001(1):44-45.
[64]蓝海林.多点竞争战略.企业管理,2000(7):1-2
[65]李各海.对民营企业融资问题的探析.经济师.2009(1):180-182
[66]李恒.交易费用、聚集经济与跨国公司区位.中国软科学,2005(2)
[67]李恒.制度分割、产业集群与跨国公司区位.国际贸易问题,2005(3)
[68]李靖宇,荣丽华.东亚大市场综合成因论析.国际论坛,2001(4)
[69]李魁.1998—2005我国民企500强的动态发展分析.巢湖学院学报,2007,9(2):40-47
[70]李善同,侯永志,刘云中等.中国国内地方保护问题的调查与分析.经济研究,2004(11)
[71]李王鸣,朱珊,王纯彬.民营企业迁移扩张现象调查——以浙江省乐清市为例.经济问题,2004(9):30-32
[72]李艺纹,李小玲.京津联合发展总部经济探讨.现代财经,2006(11):17-20
[73]李真,范爱军.中国区域市场分割的研究现状及展望.天府新论,2008(6):47-51
[74]林文俏.发展总部经济:广州走向国际化的新机遇.珠江经济,2006(6):44-47
[75]刘冬银,熊毅.从区位优势理论看跨国公司对中国研发的投资.科技进步与对策,2003(22)
[76]刘光尧.民营企业对外直接投资的理论探讨.科学与管理,2002(6)
[77]刘鸿.农村剩余劳动力转移过程的洼地效应研究.理论与改革,2007(4):84-86
[78]刘怀德.经济发展中的企业迁移.财经理论与实践(双月刊),2001,22(3):114-116
[79]刘克谦.―总部经济‖走红中国大都市.金融经济,2004(9)
[80]刘润葵.中西部开发不是―三线建设‖.经济前沿,1996(10)
[81]刘莹.苏南模式和浙江模式中企业制度变迁的比较研究.世界经济情况,2007(1):65-68
[82]柳岸林.中国与东盟五国引进FDI的区位优势研究.厦门:厦门大学出版社,2006
[83]鲁明泓.制度因素与国际直接投资区位分布:一项实证研究.经济研究,1999(7)
[84]麦肯锡.中国是最难征服的零售市场.http://www.globrand.com/2007/77030.shtml
[85]毛蕴诗,汪建成.日本跨国公司对华直接投资的动机与区位因素分析.南开管理评论,2004(5)
[86]孟庆民.安成谋.西北地区经济开发系统构想──兼论西北经济开发区建设.兰州商学院学报,1995(4)
[87]潘镇,潘持春.制度、政策与外商直接投资的区位分布——来自中国各地区的经验证据.南京师大学报(社会科学版),2004(3)
[88]任晓.地方政府意志与民营经济的发展:―温州模式‖生成中的互惠性动力.经济理论与经济管理,2006(3):11-16
[89]史福厚,周建民.内蒙古中西部地区经济发展与金融成长差异分析.内蒙古财经学院学报,2007(5):90-94
[90]史晋川.温州模式的历史制度分析——从人格化交易与非人格化交易视角的观察.浙江社会科学,2004(2):16-20
[91]史忠良,沈红兵.中国总部经济的形成及其发展研究.中国工业经济,2005(5):58-65
[92]田志龙,高勇强,卫武.中国企业政治策略与行为研究.管理世界(月刊),2003(12)
[93]王长富.改革开放后的中国私营经济.北京:中国人民大学出版社,1997
[94]王殿华.―洼地效应‖与资源依赖型地区的经济振兴之路.南方国土资源,2005(8):21-25
[95]王浩.地区总部、产业转型和经济发展——兼论上海营造总部经济的战略与规划.亚太经济,2005(3):45-48
[96]王建中.资本复兴—中国个体私营经济20年速写.济南:山东人民出版社,2002
[97]王静.我国吸引跨国公司设立地区总部的区位优势分析.黑龙江对外经贸,2006(9)
[98]王克忠.非公有制经济论.上海:上海人民出版社,2003
[99]王业强.国外企业迁移研究综述.经济地理,2007(1):30-35
[100]王莹.上海总部经济发展:现状与思考.上海经济研究,2006(2):57-64
[101]王子新,夏斌.广州市总部经济发展研究.科技进步与对策,2006(9):66-68
[102]卫武,田志龙,刘晶.我国企业经营活动中的政治关联性研究.中国工业经济,2004(4):67-75
[103]卫武.中国环境下企业政治资源、政治策略和政治绩效及其关系研究.管理世界(月刊),2006(2):95-109
[104]魏爱琴.谈谈企业家的利益激励──关于建立企业家激励机制的思考.经营与管理,1999(3)
[105]魏后凯,白玫.中国上市公司总部迁移现状及特征分析.中国工业经济,2008(9):13-24
[106]魏守华,石碧华.论企业集群的竞争优势.中国工业经济,2002(1):59-65
[107]文艳,赵奉军.企业―迁都‖中的经济学.决策咨询,2003(6):32-33
[108]吴解生,价值链重组、制造业吸纳与区位优势提升.甘肃省经济管理干部学院学报,2004(3):3-6
[109]吴倩.―迁都‖,让企业登上发展快车.经贸导刊,2003(Z1):64-65
[110]夏飞,胡洪曙.试论―洼地效应‖.技术经济,2001(11):59-60
[111]萧怡钦.跨国公司新一轮对粤投资因素分析.广东社会科学,2002(2)
[112]肖永芹,董路宁.上海发展总部经济的优势、现状及对策.经济前沿,2006(8):11-15
[113]谢健.民营经济发展模式比较.中国工业经济,2002(10):76-82
[114]徐金发,江青虎,张宏.基于产业集群视角的总部经济分析,2006(1):1-5
[115]杨东方,臧学英.对区位优势内涵的理解与运用.城市,2008(6):23-27
[116]杨国亮.论范围经济、集聚经济与规模经济的相容性.当代财经,2005(11):10-14
[117]杨家栋.面向21世纪扬州经济发展的战略思考.扬州大学学报(人文社会科学版),1999
[118]杨名权.坚持―四个突出‖增强民办高校活力.中国高等教育,2001
[119]余建国.全球化背景下的企业外包决策分析.中国商界(下半月).2008,9
[120]俞启定.关于人才实行有偿流动的思考.北京师范大学学报(社会科学版).2003(3):78-84
[121]曾明.中国政治资源的空间分布:一个描述性分析.理论与改革,2007(5):8-11
[122]张厚义,明立志.中国私营企业发展报告(1978—1998).北京:社会科学文献出版社,1999:36
[123]张建君,张志学.中国民营企业家的政治战略.管理世界,2006(7):94-105
[124]张仁涛,李红.温州模式研究.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1990:154
[125]张燕,高小珣.企业迁都的冷思考.经济与管理,2006(8):26-28
[126]张英智.加入WTO与人才流动市场化趋势研究.中国人力资源开发,2002(10):25-27
[127]张宇馨.跨国公司地区总部的区位选择和引资对策.中国市场.2008(48)
[128]赵弘.总部经济.北京:中国经济出版社,2004
[129]赵佳宝,卢锐,盛昭瀚.西方企业孵化器理论研究.管理工程学报,2003(4):100-102
[130]赵丽江.试论中国私营企业家的政治接触及其价值.江汉论坛,2005(3):122-125
[131]赵美英.苏南率先发展的文化解读.常州工学院学报(社科版),2007(5):97-102
[132]赵薇.企业国际化经营及战略决策.经济改革,1997
[133]郑国中.企业缘何要迁都.西部大开发,2003(11):44-45
[134]郑京淑.跨国公司地区总部职能与亚洲地区总部的区位研究.世界地理研究,2002(1)
[135]郑敬岳.企业总部迁移动力机制研究.广东商学院学报,2005(3):46-50
[136]郑琦.总部经济潮之三―城市笑脸‖的诱惑.中国外资,2006
[137]中国私营经济年鉴2000—2001:第一版.北京:中华工商联合出版社,2003(2):117-191
[138]周春平.苏南模式与温州模式的产权比较.中国农村经济,2002(8):39-46
[139]周宏燕,于振涛.山东半岛城市群的区位优势分析.技术经济,2004(9)
[140]周晓,洪建刚.―苏南模式‖的发展历程及转型研究.市场周刊,2006(2):97-98
[141]周政.基于区位优势的温州吸引FDI政策研究.上海:同济大学公共管理系,2006(14)
[142]朱希伟,金祥荣,罗德明.国内市场分割与中国的出口贸易扩张.经济研究,2005(12)
[143]朱先春.民营企业的―政治营销‖策略.港澳经济,1999(9):2-5