开放经济条件下贸易保护对技术进步的影响
|
摘要
在开放经济条件下,技术进步已成为世界各国经济的核心竞争力。而技术水平的提高主要源于本国的技术创新(R&D活动)以及利用各种技术转移和技术溢出途径对国外知识进行引进与学习、吸收与模仿。国际贸易是国际技术传递和溢出的最主要渠道之一,国际贸易的发展,既为发达国家提供了进行技术创新的充足资金,又为发展中国家创造了学习先进技术的机遇。
但是,在经济全球化过程中,由于一国对外贸易政策的本质是国家的产物,任何一个国家在制定经济贸易政策时,为了维护国家利益,必然要考虑本国政治、经济、文化、社会等诸多方面因素。我国已经加入世界贸易组织(WTO)。这意味着我国必须逐步开放国内市场,大幅度削减关税和非关税壁垒,把本国市场纳入到整个世界市场体系中。但是,尽管世贸组织以及世界各国都在不断的为贸易自由化而努力,然而存在于世界各国之间的贸易壁垒依然有增无减；同时,我国与国际贸易对手和伙伴的贸易冲突也日益增多。尤其是20世纪70年代中期以后,随着一批新兴工业化国家和地区经济的迅速发展和国际竞争力的提高,美国、欧盟等在国际竞争中处于优势地位的国家和地区,兴起了以非关税壁垒为核心内容的新保护主义潮流。可以说,贸易保护政策的存在是世界经济和政治发展不稳定和不平衡的必然结果。
我国作为一个发展中国家,工业化水平尚处于初期阶段,从整体上讲,生产技术和生产效率与当今世界先进水平差距较大,决定了入世后我国必须对本国有关行业和企业实行适度的保护。而且,实质上世贸组织也是承认并接受贸易保护的观点的。这既体现在其基本原则上,也体现在谈判协调机制及其实际运行上。在国际贸易壁垒变化不定及贸易冲突加剧的形势下,我国作为一个技术相对落后的发展中国家,如何认识并处理好贸易保护与技术创新、技术扩散的关系,如何有效利用技术扩散(技术转移和技术溢出)这一技术传输途径,发挥技术进步效应,成为一个理论和现实的问题。因此本文选择技术进步的载体之一——国际贸易渠道作为具体分析对象,可能首次从贸易保护的视角,围绕“技术进步”这一核心概念,沿着技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出的技术进步途径,对贸易保护对技术进步的影响进行了较为系统的研究。提出贸易保护对技术进步影响的评估是贸易保护动态成本评价范畴。一方面具有一定的理论意义,具有认识贸易保护促进或抑制技术创新、技术扩散内在机制的作用,将丰富技术进步理论和国际贸易理论(主要是贸易保护对技术进步途径的影响及技术传播理论)；另一方面又具有一定的现实意义,可以根据贸易保护对技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出的影响作出相应的对策,有利于为制定我国的战略性贸易政策提供参考,有利于将比较优势转化为竞争优势,提供可借鉴的国际经验,有利于认识目前我国关税有效保护结构的合理性及其存在的问题。
本文广泛运用规范分析和实证分析相结合、静态分析和动态分析相结合、逻辑与历史相统一的研究方法,综合运用新国际贸易理论、博弈理论、新古典经济学、新经济增长理论、技术进步理论、计量经济学等经济学理论进行分析与论述。其中,突出定量分析和实证分析。本文将收集、计算、绘制R&D投入与产出、货物和服务贸易、技术贸易、分国别中间产品和资本品贸易、关税征收率和资本存量、劳动投入、人力资本存量等数据和图形,构建并估算贸易开放度、知识产权保护强度、技术创新综合指标、技术转移综合指数、全要素生产率等指标,进行贸易保护对技术进步影响的定量实证分析,并采用国内外该领域研究中常用的主流分析工具,如Pearson相关分析、Granger因果检验、Johansoen协整检验及向量误差修正模型、向量自回归(VAR),以及较少使用的结构向量自回归(SVAR)分析、脉冲响应函数分析、投入产出分析等计量经济学和统计学的研究方法,运用常用的Eviews6.0软件和鲜见使用的Matlab数学计算软件作为运算工具,再引用贸易限制指数和TFP增长率来说明贸易保护对技术进步的影响。为了保证结论的稳健性,本文在实证分析中,还对同一变量采用不同的代理指标进行检验。如体现技术创新的指标有国家财政科研拨款、R&D投资支出和构建的技术创新综合指标；体现贸易保护程度的贸易依存度和关税征收率指标。这些方法有一定的系统性和创新性。
本文的主要内容如下：
本文首先就研究的背景、目的和问题进行了阐述,界定了技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出、贸易保护与技术进步的概念,并且对技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出与贸易保护、国际贸易的相关理论进行了综述,重点介绍了新近发展的贸易保护的技术创新和技术扩散理论等。本文第三章提出了几个技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出与贸易保护、知识产权保护的理论分析模型。先后回顾了贸易保护理论的发展过程,技术创新、国际技术转移、技术溢出与贸易保护的理论联系,基于贸易保护的技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出效应,贸易保护影响技术进步的主要因素以及贸易保护影响技术进步的相关模型。在理论分析之后,本文第四章至第六章就中国关于贸易保护的技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出效应进行了实证分析。通过对中国技术创新与对外贸易和贸易开放现状分析的基础上,详细考察了我国贸易保护所带来的技术创新与技术转移、技术溢出影响程度,并分别从总进口贸易开放度、中间产品进口贸易开放度结构、资本品进口贸易开放度等角度,重点考察了我国由进口贸易保护所带来的技术溢出效应。最后,根据新增长理论,对贸易保护和人力资本因素对我国整体技术进步的影响也进行了详细的实证研究；并运用可获得的、能较全面反映贸易保护程度的贸易限制指数国际截面数据,对开放经济条件下,贸易保护与国民收入、技术进步之间的关系进行了国际层面的分析。考虑到我国的基本国情以及各种技术进步途径对我国的实际影响,本文在讨论贸易保护的技术进步效应时,更多的是关注其通过技术创新和技术溢出渠道,对我国技术水平的提升所带来的抑制作用。因此,基于贸易保护的技术创新、技术溢出效应是本文的重点研究内容。
通过本文对开放经济条件下贸易保护对技术进步影响的深入研究,得出以下核心结论及各个子结论。南方和北方的贸易保护对技术创新、技术模仿和技术转移具有有利或不利的影响；我国的贸易保护对技术创新、技术转移和技术溢出均有显著的抑制作用,因此我国从总体上来说处于技术模仿国的地位；我国中、高技术中间产品、资本品进口贸易开放度的技术溢出效应为正,而低技术中间产品进口贸易开放度的技术溢出效应为负；我国关税有效保护结构与我国技术进步效、应相适应,而与我国的国际贸易比较优势的动态变化和产业结构调整的方向还存在不相适应。据此,必须提出促进技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出的对策。
主要的子结论如下：
1、贸易保护对R&D活动的两面性有不利影响。一方面,在技术模仿国知识产权保护不力的情况下,技术创新来源国的贸易保护对技术创新是有利的,模仿国的贸易开放对技术创新具有促进作用,而知识产权保护对技术创新活动提供了有力的保证。另一方面,贸易保护抑制了国内R&D活动,从而也降低了我国对外来技术的模仿和吸收能力。
2、贸易保护对我国国际技术转移有不利影响。理论分析认为,技术引进国提高贸易保护程度,可能导致“绕过关税”的国际技术转移活动；而降低贸易保护程度,也有可能导致“遏制竞争”的竞争性国际技术转移活动。实证研究表明,从我国总体层面来讲,存在来自国外的竞争性的“遏制进入”的技术转移,即掌握先进技术的外国企业为了阻止其他外国企业进入中国市场,可能采取向中国企业转移技术的现象,并且贸易开放度和知识产权保护程度是技术转移的Granger原因。
3、贸易保护对外国技术溢出效应有不利影响。实证分析也表明,无论是全部产品层面的进口贸易开放度还是中等技术和高技术中间产品、资本品进口贸易开放度对我国的技术进步都产生了正面影响,贸易开放度的技术溢出效应十分明显,而低技术中间产品进口贸易对技术进步具有负面影响。一方面,从全部产品贸易来看,本国研发支出对全要素生产率提高(技术进步)起到促进作用,而且作用系数大于国外的技术溢出,说明中国当前的国内技术创新是本国技术进步的根本。另一方面,中国对工业化国家和亚洲国家的贸易开放,促进了从这些国家的中间产品和机械设备等有技术含量的资本品进口,促进了相关产业的竞争与发展,提升了国内企业的生产率。选定的欧美和亚洲国家通过中间产品贸易产生的技术溢出显著促进了中国的技术进步和全要素生产率的增长,而且估计系数大于本国的研发资本弹性系数。这和我们假定中间产品贸易开放度越大,技术溢出效应越明显一致,进一步证实中间产品贸易开放度在技术溢出中的重要作用,也证明我国处于中间产品净进口国地位和加工贸易为主的贸易格局的现状,我国整体上处于生产贸易价值链条的较低端。
4、必须合理安排中间产品(含资本品)贸易保护结构。对中间产品(含资本品)贸易保护的价格关联效应的投入产出分析表明,由于中间产品(含资本品)前后项产业关联特性,对其实施贸易保护将导致上下游产品价格的连锁反应,扭曲整个产业链条的资源配置,抑制进口贸易,阻碍了技术溢出效应的发挥。而基于总产品、中高技术中间产品和资本品进口贸易开放度的R&D溢出效应均为正；低技术中间产品的溢出效应为负,但由于以矿产资源为主的低技术中间产品的无序和过度开采,将导致巨大的环境成本和不可持续的发展问题,因此,对于我国这样的资源匮乏的国家来说,相对于技术进步的代价而言,低技术中间产品过度开采的代价更值得考虑。因此,中间产品和资本品贸易保护程度的降低,不仅可以增加外国R&D溢出量,更大程度地促进我国技术进步,而且可以保护资源、降低环境成本、提高可持续发展的能力。因此,如何安排现有的中间产品贸易保护结构,以减少贸易保护对技术进步效应的抑制,是一个重大的贸易政策问题。
5、人力资本对我国技术进步的有显著促进作用。作为技术进步的载体,人力资本在新增长理论中成为了内生技术进步的主要表述形式之一(Lucas,1988)。第七章的实证分析表明,人力资本显著促进技术进步,而且人力资本与劳动力结合比人力资本与有形资本结合对技术进步的促进作用更大。一国人力资源的数量和质量是其成功获得技术扩散、取得技术进步的关键。
6、贸易保护的国别特征及其对国别技术进步的影响。越发达的国家,贸易保护程度越低,但核心非关税壁垒和农业国内支持越高；贸易保护程度越低的国家,技术进步效应越大。
7、目前我国关税有效保护结构存在合理性及不合理性之处。从结构角度看：一方面,我国关税有效保护结构与技术进步效应相适应。随着产业链的延伸,对加工阶段越深的产品征收越高的关税,从而形成了从上游产品到下游产品逐渐升高的阶梯型分布。相应地,有效保护率也呈现出了从上游产品到下游产品逐渐升高的阶梯型保护结构。这样的名义和有效关税保护结构符合关税升级原理,也与相关产品的技术溢出效应相适应。另一方面,关税的有效保护结构与贸易优势的动态变化发展不相适应。按照一般的贸易政治经济学理论,关税等贸易措施是用来保护不具有比较优势的部门,因此产业竞争优势越低的部门保护程度越高,即形成一种逆比较优势的保护结构,从而抵消外国的竞争优势,促进本国产品的进口替代和幼稚产业内生比较优势的配置。但现实情况是,我国呈现出了一种顺比较优势的有效保护结构。这种顺比较优势的有效保护结构说明我国关税有效保护结构与国际贸易比较优势的动态变化和产业结构调整的方向还存在不相适应的情况。以上两方面存在一定的矛盾,在政策实践中必须加以协调处理。
本论文虽然在研究视角、研究方法、研究内容和结论有一些创新性,但还存在以下不足之处(研究展望)：
1、本文的不足之一在于没能对地区或产业层次的贸易保护技术进步效应问题进行分析,从而为政策制定提供可行的建议。这固然与本文主题的过于宏大有关,但也与地区或产业层面的数据的系统性和可得性有关。这是笔者打算进一步研究的课题之一。
2、本文的不足之二在于贸易保护度量指标没能采用能够较客观和直接地反映贸易保护程度的贸易限制指数,而是采用贸易依存度作为代理变量或采用局部反映贸易保护程度的关税实际征收率指标。这主要是因为贸易保护数据并不是连续时间系列,而是间断的,而且非关税壁垒的关税等值估计很困难。这也是笔者打算进一步研究的课题之一。
Under an open economy, the technology progress has already become the key competitiveness of an economy all over the world. The improvement of the technology level mainly comes from the domestic technology innovation (R&D activity) and the usage of various kinds of technology diffusion (technology transfer and technology spillover) channel to introduce and study, absorb and imitate to advanced knowledge. With the economic globalization being accelerated day by day, international trade, as one of the main channels transmitting and spreading international technology, the development of international trade has not only offered the sufficient fund which has been carried on technology innovation for developed country, but also provided the opportunities of studying advanced technology for developing country.
However, during the course of economic globalization, a country must considers domestic politics, economy, culture and some other factors when she makes economic and trade policies since the essence of a country's foreign trade policies are the outcome of the nation. China has been the member of WTO. China's entry to WTO predicates that she has to open her domestic market to the outside, and reduce the tariff and non-tariff barriers so as to bring her domestic market into the world-economy system. However, the trade barriers among the countries are still increasing though WTO and all countries in the world have been made great efforts for trade liberalization. At the same time, trade conflicts between China and her trading opponents and trading partners are increasing. Moreover, with the rapid economy-development in some newly industrializing countries and regions, some developed countries and regions such as U.S.A. and EU started a new protectionism-trend by taking non-tariff barriers as the main measures since 1970s. We may say that the existence of trade protection policy is the result of instability and imbalance of world economy and politics.
China is a developing country and the level of industrialization is in the initial stages. The overall situation is that there is a gap between China and the advanced countries in production technology and production efficiency. Therefore, China must implement temperate trade-protection policies on some certain industries and enterprises. Furthermore, in fact, WTO admits and accepts trade protection. And this embodies not only in the basic principles but also in the dispute settlement system and its practices. Under the conditions of variable trade barriers and drastic trade conflicts in world, it is a theoretical and realistic issue for China how to recognize and deal with the relation between trade protection and technology innovation or diffusion well as well as how to effectively use technology diffusion's (technology transfer&technology spillover) technology transition channels in order to enjoy more benefit of the technology progress. Therefore, this dissertation choose one of the vehicles of technology progress——international trade channels as a specific analyzed object, and may be firstly having a more systematic study to the impact of trade protection on technology progress from the view of trade protection, around the core concept "technology progress", along the technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover channels of technology progress, having a proposition that assessment of the impact of trade protection on technology progress is the evaluation of dynamic costs of trade protection. Thus my article-research, on one hand, has a certain theoretical significance, and is beneficial to understanding inherent mechanism of trade protection promoting or inhibiting technology innovation and technology diffusion, and it will enrich the technology progress theory and international trade theory (mainly the impact of trade protection on technology progress and technology communication theory); on the other hand, it also has some practical significance. Corresponding countermeasure may be taken according to the relationship between trade protection and technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover. It is beneficial for China to provide a reference of making a strategic trade policy; It facilitates for China to transform its comparative advantage into a competitive advantage; It provide references of international experiences; This dissertation make us aware of the rationalities of China's current effective tariff protection structure and its existing problems.
This dissertation will extensively apply methodologies of the combination of normative analysis and empirical analysis, the combination of static analysis and dynamic analysis and the unity of logical and historical, and synthetically use economy theories such as new international trade theory, game theory, new classical economics, new economic growth theory, technological progress theory, econometrics etc to analyze and discuss, among which, gives emphasis on quantitative analysis and empirical analysis. This dissertation will collect, calculate data or draw graphics such as R&D input and output, goods and service trade, technology trade, sub-national trade in intermediate goods and capital goods, tariff collection rate and the capital stock, labor input, human capital stock and other data, and construct and estimate trade openness, intellectual property protection degree, synthetic technology innovation indicator, composite technology transfer index, total factor productivity indicators etc to do quantitative and empirical analysis on the impact of trade protection on technology progress, and use current analysis tools applied to commonly in the file in domestic and abroad, such as the Pearson correlation analysis, Granger causality test, Johansen cointegration test and vector error correction model, vector auto-regression (VAR) model as well as econometrics and statistics methods less used such as structural vector auto-regression (SVAR) model, impulse response function analysis, input-output analysis, apply Eviews6.0 commonly used and Matlab mathematical software rarely used as a computing tool, then cite trade restrictiveness indices and the TFP growth rate to explain the impact of trade protection on technology progress. In order to ensure the robustness of the conclusions of this dissertation in the empirical analysis, the same variable has used different proxy measurements, such as indicators of capturing technology innovation include national financial research funding, R&D investment expenditure and built technology innovation indicators; indicators of reflecting trade protection degree has trade dependence degree and real tariff collection ratios indicator. These methods are somewhat systematic and innovative.
The main contents of this dissertation are as follows:
Firstly, this dissertation has explored the background, purpose and problem and defined the concept of technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover, trade protection and technology progress. Then it has surveyed the relevant research of the technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover and trade protection, international trade, and introduced the recent theory development of technology innovation and technology diffusion especially. Chapter Three of this dissertation has proposed several theory analysis models such as technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover and trade protection, intellectual property protection. Among them it successively discussed the development orbit of the trade protection theory, the theory contact of technology innovation, international technology transfer, technology spillover and trade protection, the technology innovation and technology diffusion effects on the basis of international trade protection, the main influencing factor of the technology progress effects of trade protection, and the relevant models of trade protection impacting technology progress. After the above theories have been analyzed, Chapter Four to Six have carried on the empirical study of China. On the basis of the current situation of China's technology innovation and foreign trade as well as trade openness, this dissertation has investigated the degrees of the impacts of trade protection on technology innovation, transfer and spillover in detail. And with the angles such as total import trade openness, intermediate import trade openness structure, capital goods import trade openness etc, we have investigated the technology spillover effect through import trade protection especially.Finally, on the basis of new growth theory, this dissertation has empirically analyzed the effect of trade protection and human capital factors on the overall technology progress of China. Moreover, we have a cross-country analysis on the relations between trade protection and national income, technology progress through the obtainable cross-section data of trade restrictiveness indices which can reflect trade restrictiveness more comprehensively. Considering China's situation and real influence of various technology progress channels on her, when this dissertation discuss technology progress effects based on trade protection, we pay more important attention to the technology innovation and diffusion based on trade protection.
I can draw the following core conclusion and sub-conclusions by my profound study on the impact of trade protection on technology progress under an open economy in this dissertation. My core conclusion is that trade protection of north and south have a positive or negative impact on technology innovation, technology imitation and technology transfer; China's trade protection has significantly inhibited its technology innovation, technology transfer and technology spillover, so generally speaking, China is in the status of technology imitation in the world; The technology spillover effect based on middling-tech and high-tech intermediate goods and capital goods import trade openness is positive in China, while the technology spillover effect based on the low-tech intermediate goods import trade openness is negative; The effective protection structure of China's tariff and China's technology progress effects are adaptive, but are still incompatible with the dynamic changes of China's comparative advantage in international trade and the adjustment direction of industrial structure. Accordingly, we must make countermeasures of promoting technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover.
And my sub-conclusions are stated respectively as follows:
Firstly, Trade protection in China has a two-side significance to R&D activities. Trade protection in China not only has impeded R&D activities, but also impeded the promotion of the imitative and absorptive capacity to foreign technology.
Secondly, International technology transfer in. China is adversely affected by trade protection. Theoretical analyses show that an increase in trade protection degree in technology introduction countries may lead to "tariff-jumping" technology transfer; while "entry-deterring" technology transfer may occur in the case of tariff-reductions. In particular, our policy implication that the South countries should take pro-competitive policies to facilitate technology transfer seems to be novel in the development economics literature. Empirical studies have shown that there is a competitive "entry-deterring" technology transfer in China's nation level, and that trade openness and the degree of intellectual property protection in China are technology transfer's Granger causes.
Thirdly, Trade protection has an adverse impact for China to international technology spillovers. Empirical analyses also show that the effects of total import trade openness or middle-and high-tech intermediate goods and capital goods import trade openness on China's technology progress are significantly positive, and their technology spillover effects are very significant, while the low-tech intermediate goods import trade openness have a negative impact on technology progress. This confirms our assume that the higher the intermediate goods trade openness, the more significant the technology spillover effects, further confirms the important role of intermediate goods import trade openness in technology spillovers, also shows that China is in a status of net importer of intermediate products and the status quo of processing trade-based trade pattern, China overall is in a lower end of the value chain of production and trade.
Fourthly, It is necessary for China to optimize the structure of trade protection of intermediate goods (including capital goods). This dissertation empirically measures the price effects of trade protection on intermediate products (including capital goods) through the Input/Output table analysis and yields the conclusion that trade protection on intermediate products affects downstream products negatively, distorts the allocation of resources throughout the industry chain, curbs import trade, then hinders technology spillovers. China should take the effects of technology spillovers into consideration in trade protection on intermediate products. Therefore, how to arrange the existing structure of trade protection on intermediate goods so as to reduce the inhibitory effects of trade protection on technology progress is an important issue on trade policy.
Fifthly, Human capital on technology progress in China has an important promoting role. As one of carriers of technology progress, human capital in the new growth theory has become a main expression form of endogenous technology progress (Lucas,1988). Empirical analysis in Chapter VII shows that human capital significantly promotes technology progress, and the combination of human capital and labor has a greater impact than the combination of human capital and physical capital in promoting technology progress. The quantity and quality of the human capital of host country are the key factors of developing countries carrying on innovation and obtaining technology diffusion successfully.
Sixthly, National characteristics of trade protection and its impacts on technology progress in every country. More developed countries have lower trade restrictiveness, and have higher equivalent of core non-tariff barrier and agriculture domestic support. Those countries having lower trade restrictiveness obtained higher technology improvement.
Seventhly, Current structure of effective tariff protection in China has some rationalities and irrationalities. From the view of structure:on one hand, the structure of effective tariff protection in China adapts to the effects of technology progress. On the other hand, the structure of effective tariff protection in China is incompatible with dynamic change and development of trade advantages. These two aspects have a certain contradiction, and we must be coordinated well in the policy practice.
Although I have innovative research perspectives, research methods, research contents and conclusions in the dissertation, some shortcomings (research prospects) do exist:
First, This dissertation failed to analysis the effects of trade protection on technology progress based on regional or industrial level so as to provide some viable policy recommendations. Of course, this is relative to the subject of this dissertation being too ambitious, but also due to the limitation of systematization and acquisition of datas about regions or industries. This is one of the issues which I attend to further research.
Second, Trade protection measurement failed to adopt trade restrictiveness indices which can more objectively or directly capture trade protection degree, instead of, using trade dependence ratios as a proxy as well as using real collected tariff ratios indicators to partially reflect trade protection degree. This is mainly due to data of trade protection being not continuous time series, but intermittent, and the estimation on ad-valorem equivalents of non-tariff barriers (AVEs of NTBs) is difficult. This is also one of the issues which I attend to further research.
但是,在经济全球化过程中,由于一国对外贸易政策的本质是国家的产物,任何一个国家在制定经济贸易政策时,为了维护国家利益,必然要考虑本国政治、经济、文化、社会等诸多方面因素。我国已经加入世界贸易组织(WTO)。这意味着我国必须逐步开放国内市场,大幅度削减关税和非关税壁垒,把本国市场纳入到整个世界市场体系中。但是,尽管世贸组织以及世界各国都在不断的为贸易自由化而努力,然而存在于世界各国之间的贸易壁垒依然有增无减；同时,我国与国际贸易对手和伙伴的贸易冲突也日益增多。尤其是20世纪70年代中期以后,随着一批新兴工业化国家和地区经济的迅速发展和国际竞争力的提高,美国、欧盟等在国际竞争中处于优势地位的国家和地区,兴起了以非关税壁垒为核心内容的新保护主义潮流。可以说,贸易保护政策的存在是世界经济和政治发展不稳定和不平衡的必然结果。
我国作为一个发展中国家,工业化水平尚处于初期阶段,从整体上讲,生产技术和生产效率与当今世界先进水平差距较大,决定了入世后我国必须对本国有关行业和企业实行适度的保护。而且,实质上世贸组织也是承认并接受贸易保护的观点的。这既体现在其基本原则上,也体现在谈判协调机制及其实际运行上。在国际贸易壁垒变化不定及贸易冲突加剧的形势下,我国作为一个技术相对落后的发展中国家,如何认识并处理好贸易保护与技术创新、技术扩散的关系,如何有效利用技术扩散(技术转移和技术溢出)这一技术传输途径,发挥技术进步效应,成为一个理论和现实的问题。因此本文选择技术进步的载体之一——国际贸易渠道作为具体分析对象,可能首次从贸易保护的视角,围绕“技术进步”这一核心概念,沿着技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出的技术进步途径,对贸易保护对技术进步的影响进行了较为系统的研究。提出贸易保护对技术进步影响的评估是贸易保护动态成本评价范畴。一方面具有一定的理论意义,具有认识贸易保护促进或抑制技术创新、技术扩散内在机制的作用,将丰富技术进步理论和国际贸易理论(主要是贸易保护对技术进步途径的影响及技术传播理论)；另一方面又具有一定的现实意义,可以根据贸易保护对技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出的影响作出相应的对策,有利于为制定我国的战略性贸易政策提供参考,有利于将比较优势转化为竞争优势,提供可借鉴的国际经验,有利于认识目前我国关税有效保护结构的合理性及其存在的问题。
本文广泛运用规范分析和实证分析相结合、静态分析和动态分析相结合、逻辑与历史相统一的研究方法,综合运用新国际贸易理论、博弈理论、新古典经济学、新经济增长理论、技术进步理论、计量经济学等经济学理论进行分析与论述。其中,突出定量分析和实证分析。本文将收集、计算、绘制R&D投入与产出、货物和服务贸易、技术贸易、分国别中间产品和资本品贸易、关税征收率和资本存量、劳动投入、人力资本存量等数据和图形,构建并估算贸易开放度、知识产权保护强度、技术创新综合指标、技术转移综合指数、全要素生产率等指标,进行贸易保护对技术进步影响的定量实证分析,并采用国内外该领域研究中常用的主流分析工具,如Pearson相关分析、Granger因果检验、Johansoen协整检验及向量误差修正模型、向量自回归(VAR),以及较少使用的结构向量自回归(SVAR)分析、脉冲响应函数分析、投入产出分析等计量经济学和统计学的研究方法,运用常用的Eviews6.0软件和鲜见使用的Matlab数学计算软件作为运算工具,再引用贸易限制指数和TFP增长率来说明贸易保护对技术进步的影响。为了保证结论的稳健性,本文在实证分析中,还对同一变量采用不同的代理指标进行检验。如体现技术创新的指标有国家财政科研拨款、R&D投资支出和构建的技术创新综合指标；体现贸易保护程度的贸易依存度和关税征收率指标。这些方法有一定的系统性和创新性。
本文的主要内容如下：
本文首先就研究的背景、目的和问题进行了阐述,界定了技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出、贸易保护与技术进步的概念,并且对技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出与贸易保护、国际贸易的相关理论进行了综述,重点介绍了新近发展的贸易保护的技术创新和技术扩散理论等。本文第三章提出了几个技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出与贸易保护、知识产权保护的理论分析模型。先后回顾了贸易保护理论的发展过程,技术创新、国际技术转移、技术溢出与贸易保护的理论联系,基于贸易保护的技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出效应,贸易保护影响技术进步的主要因素以及贸易保护影响技术进步的相关模型。在理论分析之后,本文第四章至第六章就中国关于贸易保护的技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出效应进行了实证分析。通过对中国技术创新与对外贸易和贸易开放现状分析的基础上,详细考察了我国贸易保护所带来的技术创新与技术转移、技术溢出影响程度,并分别从总进口贸易开放度、中间产品进口贸易开放度结构、资本品进口贸易开放度等角度,重点考察了我国由进口贸易保护所带来的技术溢出效应。最后,根据新增长理论,对贸易保护和人力资本因素对我国整体技术进步的影响也进行了详细的实证研究；并运用可获得的、能较全面反映贸易保护程度的贸易限制指数国际截面数据,对开放经济条件下,贸易保护与国民收入、技术进步之间的关系进行了国际层面的分析。考虑到我国的基本国情以及各种技术进步途径对我国的实际影响,本文在讨论贸易保护的技术进步效应时,更多的是关注其通过技术创新和技术溢出渠道,对我国技术水平的提升所带来的抑制作用。因此,基于贸易保护的技术创新、技术溢出效应是本文的重点研究内容。
通过本文对开放经济条件下贸易保护对技术进步影响的深入研究,得出以下核心结论及各个子结论。南方和北方的贸易保护对技术创新、技术模仿和技术转移具有有利或不利的影响；我国的贸易保护对技术创新、技术转移和技术溢出均有显著的抑制作用,因此我国从总体上来说处于技术模仿国的地位；我国中、高技术中间产品、资本品进口贸易开放度的技术溢出效应为正,而低技术中间产品进口贸易开放度的技术溢出效应为负；我国关税有效保护结构与我国技术进步效、应相适应,而与我国的国际贸易比较优势的动态变化和产业结构调整的方向还存在不相适应。据此,必须提出促进技术创新、技术转移、技术溢出的对策。
主要的子结论如下：
1、贸易保护对R&D活动的两面性有不利影响。一方面,在技术模仿国知识产权保护不力的情况下,技术创新来源国的贸易保护对技术创新是有利的,模仿国的贸易开放对技术创新具有促进作用,而知识产权保护对技术创新活动提供了有力的保证。另一方面,贸易保护抑制了国内R&D活动,从而也降低了我国对外来技术的模仿和吸收能力。
2、贸易保护对我国国际技术转移有不利影响。理论分析认为,技术引进国提高贸易保护程度,可能导致“绕过关税”的国际技术转移活动；而降低贸易保护程度,也有可能导致“遏制竞争”的竞争性国际技术转移活动。实证研究表明,从我国总体层面来讲,存在来自国外的竞争性的“遏制进入”的技术转移,即掌握先进技术的外国企业为了阻止其他外国企业进入中国市场,可能采取向中国企业转移技术的现象,并且贸易开放度和知识产权保护程度是技术转移的Granger原因。
3、贸易保护对外国技术溢出效应有不利影响。实证分析也表明,无论是全部产品层面的进口贸易开放度还是中等技术和高技术中间产品、资本品进口贸易开放度对我国的技术进步都产生了正面影响,贸易开放度的技术溢出效应十分明显,而低技术中间产品进口贸易对技术进步具有负面影响。一方面,从全部产品贸易来看,本国研发支出对全要素生产率提高(技术进步)起到促进作用,而且作用系数大于国外的技术溢出,说明中国当前的国内技术创新是本国技术进步的根本。另一方面,中国对工业化国家和亚洲国家的贸易开放,促进了从这些国家的中间产品和机械设备等有技术含量的资本品进口,促进了相关产业的竞争与发展,提升了国内企业的生产率。选定的欧美和亚洲国家通过中间产品贸易产生的技术溢出显著促进了中国的技术进步和全要素生产率的增长,而且估计系数大于本国的研发资本弹性系数。这和我们假定中间产品贸易开放度越大,技术溢出效应越明显一致,进一步证实中间产品贸易开放度在技术溢出中的重要作用,也证明我国处于中间产品净进口国地位和加工贸易为主的贸易格局的现状,我国整体上处于生产贸易价值链条的较低端。
4、必须合理安排中间产品(含资本品)贸易保护结构。对中间产品(含资本品)贸易保护的价格关联效应的投入产出分析表明,由于中间产品(含资本品)前后项产业关联特性,对其实施贸易保护将导致上下游产品价格的连锁反应,扭曲整个产业链条的资源配置,抑制进口贸易,阻碍了技术溢出效应的发挥。而基于总产品、中高技术中间产品和资本品进口贸易开放度的R&D溢出效应均为正；低技术中间产品的溢出效应为负,但由于以矿产资源为主的低技术中间产品的无序和过度开采,将导致巨大的环境成本和不可持续的发展问题,因此,对于我国这样的资源匮乏的国家来说,相对于技术进步的代价而言,低技术中间产品过度开采的代价更值得考虑。因此,中间产品和资本品贸易保护程度的降低,不仅可以增加外国R&D溢出量,更大程度地促进我国技术进步,而且可以保护资源、降低环境成本、提高可持续发展的能力。因此,如何安排现有的中间产品贸易保护结构,以减少贸易保护对技术进步效应的抑制,是一个重大的贸易政策问题。
5、人力资本对我国技术进步的有显著促进作用。作为技术进步的载体,人力资本在新增长理论中成为了内生技术进步的主要表述形式之一(Lucas,1988)。第七章的实证分析表明,人力资本显著促进技术进步,而且人力资本与劳动力结合比人力资本与有形资本结合对技术进步的促进作用更大。一国人力资源的数量和质量是其成功获得技术扩散、取得技术进步的关键。
6、贸易保护的国别特征及其对国别技术进步的影响。越发达的国家,贸易保护程度越低,但核心非关税壁垒和农业国内支持越高；贸易保护程度越低的国家,技术进步效应越大。
7、目前我国关税有效保护结构存在合理性及不合理性之处。从结构角度看：一方面,我国关税有效保护结构与技术进步效应相适应。随着产业链的延伸,对加工阶段越深的产品征收越高的关税,从而形成了从上游产品到下游产品逐渐升高的阶梯型分布。相应地,有效保护率也呈现出了从上游产品到下游产品逐渐升高的阶梯型保护结构。这样的名义和有效关税保护结构符合关税升级原理,也与相关产品的技术溢出效应相适应。另一方面,关税的有效保护结构与贸易优势的动态变化发展不相适应。按照一般的贸易政治经济学理论,关税等贸易措施是用来保护不具有比较优势的部门,因此产业竞争优势越低的部门保护程度越高,即形成一种逆比较优势的保护结构,从而抵消外国的竞争优势,促进本国产品的进口替代和幼稚产业内生比较优势的配置。但现实情况是,我国呈现出了一种顺比较优势的有效保护结构。这种顺比较优势的有效保护结构说明我国关税有效保护结构与国际贸易比较优势的动态变化和产业结构调整的方向还存在不相适应的情况。以上两方面存在一定的矛盾,在政策实践中必须加以协调处理。
本论文虽然在研究视角、研究方法、研究内容和结论有一些创新性,但还存在以下不足之处(研究展望)：
1、本文的不足之一在于没能对地区或产业层次的贸易保护技术进步效应问题进行分析,从而为政策制定提供可行的建议。这固然与本文主题的过于宏大有关,但也与地区或产业层面的数据的系统性和可得性有关。这是笔者打算进一步研究的课题之一。
2、本文的不足之二在于贸易保护度量指标没能采用能够较客观和直接地反映贸易保护程度的贸易限制指数,而是采用贸易依存度作为代理变量或采用局部反映贸易保护程度的关税实际征收率指标。这主要是因为贸易保护数据并不是连续时间系列,而是间断的,而且非关税壁垒的关税等值估计很困难。这也是笔者打算进一步研究的课题之一。
Under an open economy, the technology progress has already become the key competitiveness of an economy all over the world. The improvement of the technology level mainly comes from the domestic technology innovation (R&D activity) and the usage of various kinds of technology diffusion (technology transfer and technology spillover) channel to introduce and study, absorb and imitate to advanced knowledge. With the economic globalization being accelerated day by day, international trade, as one of the main channels transmitting and spreading international technology, the development of international trade has not only offered the sufficient fund which has been carried on technology innovation for developed country, but also provided the opportunities of studying advanced technology for developing country.
However, during the course of economic globalization, a country must considers domestic politics, economy, culture and some other factors when she makes economic and trade policies since the essence of a country's foreign trade policies are the outcome of the nation. China has been the member of WTO. China's entry to WTO predicates that she has to open her domestic market to the outside, and reduce the tariff and non-tariff barriers so as to bring her domestic market into the world-economy system. However, the trade barriers among the countries are still increasing though WTO and all countries in the world have been made great efforts for trade liberalization. At the same time, trade conflicts between China and her trading opponents and trading partners are increasing. Moreover, with the rapid economy-development in some newly industrializing countries and regions, some developed countries and regions such as U.S.A. and EU started a new protectionism-trend by taking non-tariff barriers as the main measures since 1970s. We may say that the existence of trade protection policy is the result of instability and imbalance of world economy and politics.
China is a developing country and the level of industrialization is in the initial stages. The overall situation is that there is a gap between China and the advanced countries in production technology and production efficiency. Therefore, China must implement temperate trade-protection policies on some certain industries and enterprises. Furthermore, in fact, WTO admits and accepts trade protection. And this embodies not only in the basic principles but also in the dispute settlement system and its practices. Under the conditions of variable trade barriers and drastic trade conflicts in world, it is a theoretical and realistic issue for China how to recognize and deal with the relation between trade protection and technology innovation or diffusion well as well as how to effectively use technology diffusion's (technology transfer&technology spillover) technology transition channels in order to enjoy more benefit of the technology progress. Therefore, this dissertation choose one of the vehicles of technology progress——international trade channels as a specific analyzed object, and may be firstly having a more systematic study to the impact of trade protection on technology progress from the view of trade protection, around the core concept "technology progress", along the technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover channels of technology progress, having a proposition that assessment of the impact of trade protection on technology progress is the evaluation of dynamic costs of trade protection. Thus my article-research, on one hand, has a certain theoretical significance, and is beneficial to understanding inherent mechanism of trade protection promoting or inhibiting technology innovation and technology diffusion, and it will enrich the technology progress theory and international trade theory (mainly the impact of trade protection on technology progress and technology communication theory); on the other hand, it also has some practical significance. Corresponding countermeasure may be taken according to the relationship between trade protection and technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover. It is beneficial for China to provide a reference of making a strategic trade policy; It facilitates for China to transform its comparative advantage into a competitive advantage; It provide references of international experiences; This dissertation make us aware of the rationalities of China's current effective tariff protection structure and its existing problems.
This dissertation will extensively apply methodologies of the combination of normative analysis and empirical analysis, the combination of static analysis and dynamic analysis and the unity of logical and historical, and synthetically use economy theories such as new international trade theory, game theory, new classical economics, new economic growth theory, technological progress theory, econometrics etc to analyze and discuss, among which, gives emphasis on quantitative analysis and empirical analysis. This dissertation will collect, calculate data or draw graphics such as R&D input and output, goods and service trade, technology trade, sub-national trade in intermediate goods and capital goods, tariff collection rate and the capital stock, labor input, human capital stock and other data, and construct and estimate trade openness, intellectual property protection degree, synthetic technology innovation indicator, composite technology transfer index, total factor productivity indicators etc to do quantitative and empirical analysis on the impact of trade protection on technology progress, and use current analysis tools applied to commonly in the file in domestic and abroad, such as the Pearson correlation analysis, Granger causality test, Johansen cointegration test and vector error correction model, vector auto-regression (VAR) model as well as econometrics and statistics methods less used such as structural vector auto-regression (SVAR) model, impulse response function analysis, input-output analysis, apply Eviews6.0 commonly used and Matlab mathematical software rarely used as a computing tool, then cite trade restrictiveness indices and the TFP growth rate to explain the impact of trade protection on technology progress. In order to ensure the robustness of the conclusions of this dissertation in the empirical analysis, the same variable has used different proxy measurements, such as indicators of capturing technology innovation include national financial research funding, R&D investment expenditure and built technology innovation indicators; indicators of reflecting trade protection degree has trade dependence degree and real tariff collection ratios indicator. These methods are somewhat systematic and innovative.
The main contents of this dissertation are as follows:
Firstly, this dissertation has explored the background, purpose and problem and defined the concept of technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover, trade protection and technology progress. Then it has surveyed the relevant research of the technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover and trade protection, international trade, and introduced the recent theory development of technology innovation and technology diffusion especially. Chapter Three of this dissertation has proposed several theory analysis models such as technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover and trade protection, intellectual property protection. Among them it successively discussed the development orbit of the trade protection theory, the theory contact of technology innovation, international technology transfer, technology spillover and trade protection, the technology innovation and technology diffusion effects on the basis of international trade protection, the main influencing factor of the technology progress effects of trade protection, and the relevant models of trade protection impacting technology progress. After the above theories have been analyzed, Chapter Four to Six have carried on the empirical study of China. On the basis of the current situation of China's technology innovation and foreign trade as well as trade openness, this dissertation has investigated the degrees of the impacts of trade protection on technology innovation, transfer and spillover in detail. And with the angles such as total import trade openness, intermediate import trade openness structure, capital goods import trade openness etc, we have investigated the technology spillover effect through import trade protection especially.Finally, on the basis of new growth theory, this dissertation has empirically analyzed the effect of trade protection and human capital factors on the overall technology progress of China. Moreover, we have a cross-country analysis on the relations between trade protection and national income, technology progress through the obtainable cross-section data of trade restrictiveness indices which can reflect trade restrictiveness more comprehensively. Considering China's situation and real influence of various technology progress channels on her, when this dissertation discuss technology progress effects based on trade protection, we pay more important attention to the technology innovation and diffusion based on trade protection.
I can draw the following core conclusion and sub-conclusions by my profound study on the impact of trade protection on technology progress under an open economy in this dissertation. My core conclusion is that trade protection of north and south have a positive or negative impact on technology innovation, technology imitation and technology transfer; China's trade protection has significantly inhibited its technology innovation, technology transfer and technology spillover, so generally speaking, China is in the status of technology imitation in the world; The technology spillover effect based on middling-tech and high-tech intermediate goods and capital goods import trade openness is positive in China, while the technology spillover effect based on the low-tech intermediate goods import trade openness is negative; The effective protection structure of China's tariff and China's technology progress effects are adaptive, but are still incompatible with the dynamic changes of China's comparative advantage in international trade and the adjustment direction of industrial structure. Accordingly, we must make countermeasures of promoting technology innovation, technology transfer, technology spillover.
And my sub-conclusions are stated respectively as follows:
Firstly, Trade protection in China has a two-side significance to R&D activities. Trade protection in China not only has impeded R&D activities, but also impeded the promotion of the imitative and absorptive capacity to foreign technology.
Secondly, International technology transfer in. China is adversely affected by trade protection. Theoretical analyses show that an increase in trade protection degree in technology introduction countries may lead to "tariff-jumping" technology transfer; while "entry-deterring" technology transfer may occur in the case of tariff-reductions. In particular, our policy implication that the South countries should take pro-competitive policies to facilitate technology transfer seems to be novel in the development economics literature. Empirical studies have shown that there is a competitive "entry-deterring" technology transfer in China's nation level, and that trade openness and the degree of intellectual property protection in China are technology transfer's Granger causes.
Thirdly, Trade protection has an adverse impact for China to international technology spillovers. Empirical analyses also show that the effects of total import trade openness or middle-and high-tech intermediate goods and capital goods import trade openness on China's technology progress are significantly positive, and their technology spillover effects are very significant, while the low-tech intermediate goods import trade openness have a negative impact on technology progress. This confirms our assume that the higher the intermediate goods trade openness, the more significant the technology spillover effects, further confirms the important role of intermediate goods import trade openness in technology spillovers, also shows that China is in a status of net importer of intermediate products and the status quo of processing trade-based trade pattern, China overall is in a lower end of the value chain of production and trade.
Fourthly, It is necessary for China to optimize the structure of trade protection of intermediate goods (including capital goods). This dissertation empirically measures the price effects of trade protection on intermediate products (including capital goods) through the Input/Output table analysis and yields the conclusion that trade protection on intermediate products affects downstream products negatively, distorts the allocation of resources throughout the industry chain, curbs import trade, then hinders technology spillovers. China should take the effects of technology spillovers into consideration in trade protection on intermediate products. Therefore, how to arrange the existing structure of trade protection on intermediate goods so as to reduce the inhibitory effects of trade protection on technology progress is an important issue on trade policy.
Fifthly, Human capital on technology progress in China has an important promoting role. As one of carriers of technology progress, human capital in the new growth theory has become a main expression form of endogenous technology progress (Lucas,1988). Empirical analysis in Chapter VII shows that human capital significantly promotes technology progress, and the combination of human capital and labor has a greater impact than the combination of human capital and physical capital in promoting technology progress. The quantity and quality of the human capital of host country are the key factors of developing countries carrying on innovation and obtaining technology diffusion successfully.
Sixthly, National characteristics of trade protection and its impacts on technology progress in every country. More developed countries have lower trade restrictiveness, and have higher equivalent of core non-tariff barrier and agriculture domestic support. Those countries having lower trade restrictiveness obtained higher technology improvement.
Seventhly, Current structure of effective tariff protection in China has some rationalities and irrationalities. From the view of structure:on one hand, the structure of effective tariff protection in China adapts to the effects of technology progress. On the other hand, the structure of effective tariff protection in China is incompatible with dynamic change and development of trade advantages. These two aspects have a certain contradiction, and we must be coordinated well in the policy practice.
Although I have innovative research perspectives, research methods, research contents and conclusions in the dissertation, some shortcomings (research prospects) do exist:
First, This dissertation failed to analysis the effects of trade protection on technology progress based on regional or industrial level so as to provide some viable policy recommendations. Of course, this is relative to the subject of this dissertation being too ambitious, but also due to the limitation of systematization and acquisition of datas about regions or industries. This is one of the issues which I attend to further research.
Second, Trade protection measurement failed to adopt trade restrictiveness indices which can more objectively or directly capture trade protection degree, instead of, using trade dependence ratios as a proxy as well as using real collected tariff ratios indicators to partially reflect trade protection degree. This is mainly due to data of trade protection being not continuous time series, but intermittent, and the estimation on ad-valorem equivalents of non-tariff barriers (AVEs of NTBs) is difficult. This is also one of the issues which I attend to further research.
引文
[1]白重恩,谢长泰,钱颖一.中国的资本回报率.《比较》第28期,中信出版社,2007.
[2]包群,许和连,赖明勇.出口贸易如何促进经济增长?——基于全要素生产率的实证研究.上海经济研究,2003(3).
[3]包群,许和连,赖明勇.贸易开放度与经济增长：理论及中国的经验研究.世界经济,2003(2)：10～18.
[4]包群,许和连,赖明勇.贸易开放与经济增长：理论及中国的经验研究.世界经济,2003(2).
[5]鲍晓华.技术性贸易壁垒的双重性质及甄别机制.财贸经济,2005,10.
[6]编委会.中华人民共和国海关进出口税则(2007年版).北京：经济日报出版社,2007.
[7]查理·辛格.技术史(第六卷),王平(译),成都科技出版社,1995.
[8]陈飞翔,蔡茂森等.开放效率论.上海：同济大学出版社,2002.
[9]丹尼·罗德里克.新全球经济与发展中国家让开放起作用.世界知识出版社,2004.
[10]单豪杰.中国资本存量K的再估算：1952～2006年.数量经济技术经济研究,2008(10)：17-31.
[11]窦丽琛,李国平.技术创新扩散与区域生产率差异—对中国的实证分析.科学学研究,2004,(5)：538-542.
[12]方齐云.国际经济学.武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2002.1.142-147.
[13]方希桦,包群,赖明勇.国际技术溢出：基于进口传导机制的实证研究.中国软科学,2004,(7)：58-64.
[14]方希桦,包群.国际技术溢出：基于进口传导机制的实证研究.中国软科学,2007(7).
[15]冯宗宪,柯大钢.开放经济下的国际贸易壁垒.经济科学出版社,2001.
[16]傅家骥.技术创新学.北京：清华大学出版社,1998.
[17]郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国经济波动的解释：投资冲击与全要素生产率冲击.管理世界,2004b,7.
[18]郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国潜在产出与产出缺口的估算.经济研究,2004a,5.
[19]郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国全要素生产率的估算：1979-2004.经济研究,2005,5.
[20]郭庆旺,赵志耘,贾俊雪：中国省份经济的全要素生产率分析.世界经济,2005,5..
[21]国家统计局.2002年度中国投入产出表.北京：中国统计出版社,2006.
[22]哈罗德·孔茨,海因茨·韦里克.管理学(第十版).经济科学出版社,1998.
[23]海关总署考试教材编写委员会.进出口商品名称与编码(2007年版).北京：中国海关出版社,2007.
[24]海闻.国际贸易理论的新发展.经济研究,1995,9：67-73.
[25]郝枫.中国省区资本存量估算：1952～2004.数据分析,2006,6.
[26]何枫,陈荣,何林.我国资本存量的估算及其相关分析.经济学家,2003,5.
[27]何建坤,吴玉鸣,周立.大学技术转移对首都区域经济增长的贡献分析.科学学研究,2007,(5).
[28]贺菊煌.我国资产的估算.数量经济技术经济研究,1992,8.
[29]胡兵,乔晶.对外贸易、全要素生产率与中国经济增长——基于LA-VAR模型的实证分析.财经问题研究,2006(5).
[30]黄繁华.90年代度量贸易开放度的新方法及其启示.外国经济与管理,2001,(23)：19-22.
[31]黄静波.国际技术转移.北京：清华大学出版社,2005.
[32]黄玖立.贸易开放、要素积累和经济增长—以东亚地区经济快速增长为例.南开经济研究,2004,(6)：59-64.
[33]黄先海,石东楠.对外贸易对我国全要素生产率影响的测度与分析.世界经济研究,2005(1).
[34]黄先海,张云帆.我国外贸技术溢出效应的国别差异分析.经济经纬,2004(1).
[35]黄勇峰,任若恩等.中国制造业资本存量永续盘存法估计.经济学(季刊),2002,2.
[36]金祥荣,林承亮.对中国历次关税调整及其有效保护结构的实证研究..世界经济,1999,(8)：28～34.
[37]李京文,D.乔根森,郑友敬,黑田昌裕等.生产率与中美日经济增长研究.中国社会科学出版社,1993：1-410.
[38]李平.发展中国家和地区利用国际技术扩散的对策分析.贵州财经学院学报,2005b(2)：1-6.
[39]李平.国际贸易、技术扩散与发展中国家的技术创新.当代亚太,2005a(5)：41-46.
[40]李小平,卢现祥,朱钟棣.国际贸易、技术进步和中国工业行业的生产率增长.经济学(季刊),2008,7(2).
[41]李小平,朱钟棣.国际贸易、R&D溢出和生产率增长.经济研究,2006(2)
[42]李小平,朱钟棣.国际贸易的技术溢出门槛效应—基于中国各地区面板数据的分析.经济研究,2004(4).
[43]李治国,唐国兴.资本形成路径与资本存量调整模型.经济研究,2003,2.
[44]罗默,D. (Romer,David)高级宏观经济学(中译本).北京：商务印书馆,2004.
[45]马捷.国际多市场寡头条件下的贸易政策与产业政策.经济研究,2002,(5)：22～31.
[46]聂红隆,沈友华.非关税贸易壁垒的理论与政策效应分析.甘肃社会科学,2009.2.
[47]诺思.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效(中译本).上海：上海三联书店,1994.
[48]欧阳武.生产率度量方法.数量经济技术经济研究,1996,12.
[49]沈坤荣.新增长理论与中国经济增长.南京大学出版社,2003.
[50]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.世界经济,2008(3)
[51]盛斌.中国对外贸易政策的政治经济分析.上海人民出版社,2002.
[52]盛斌.中国贸易自由化福利效果的实证分析.经济研究,1995,(11)：40～46.
[53]施培公.后发优势——模仿创新的理论与实证研究.北京：清华大学出版社,1999.
[54]孙琳琳,任若恩.资本投入测量综述.经济学(季刊),2005,4.
[55]唐海燕.论适度开放.江西人民出版社,2000.
[56]唐晓云.国际技术转移的非线性分析与经济增长.上海：复旦大学出版社,2005.
[57]田志宏,王凯园,王伟.关税配额的经济理论与政策分析.中国农业大学学报,2005,4.
[58]佟家栋.贸易自由化,贸易保护与经济利益.北京：经济科学出版社,2003.
[59]王成歧,张建华,安辉.外商直接投资,地区差异与中国经济增长.世界经济,2002,4.
[60]王溪若,陈飞翔,肖峻.外商直接投资,技术转移与经济发展.国际经贸探索,2006,(6).
[61]王小鲁,樊纲.中国经济增长的可持续性.经济科学出版社,2000.
[62]王小鲁.中国经济增长的可持续性与制度变革.经济研究,2000,7.
[63]王益煊,吴优.中国国有经济固定资本存量的初步测算.统计研究,2003,5.
[64]吴方卫.我国农业资本存量的估计.农业技术经济,1999,6.
[65]小林达也.技术转移.日本文真堂,1986.
[66]谢建国.市场竞争、东道国引资政策与跨国公司的技术转移.经济研究,2007,(6).
[67]谢千里,罗基斯,郑玉歆.改革以来中国工业生产率变动趋势的估计及其可靠性分析.经济研究,1995,(12)：10-22.
[68]熊彼特.经济发展理论.何畏,易家详等译,北京：商务印书馆,1990.
[69]许长新.贸易保护的测度与政策解释.数量经济与技术经济研究,1999,9.
[70]许启发,蒋翠侠.对外贸易与经济增长的相关分析.预测,2002(2).
[71]许统生,聂红隆.贸易保护成本及估计方法研究的最新动态.经济评论,2008,2.
[72]许统生.开放中的贸易保护准则与实证分析.北京：经济管理出版社,2004.
[73]许统生.我国贸易保护成本估计的理论与经验.改革,2005,4.
[74]杨俊,李晓羽,杨尘.技术模仿、人力资本积累与自主创新.财经研究,2007,33(5)：18～28.
[75]易丹辉.数据分析与EVIEWS应用.中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[76]易纲,樊纲,李岩.关于中国经济增长与全要素生产率的理论思考.经济研究,2003,8.
[77]殷德生,唐海燕.内生技术进步、南北贸易与干预政策.财经研究,2006,32(4).
[78]尹翔硕.中国对外贸易改革的进程和效果.山西经济出版社,1998.
[79]袁欣.国际反倾销规则中的贸易保护主义因素分析.经济经纬,2006,1.
[80]张海洋.R&D两面性、外资活动与中国工业生产率增长.经济研究,2005,5.
[81]张军,施少华,陈诗.中国的工业改革与效率变化——方法、数据、文献和现有的结果.经济学季刊,2003,3(1)：1-38.
[82]张军,施少华.中国经济全要素生产率变动：1952-1998.世界经济文汇,2003,2.
[83]张军,章元.再论中国资本存量的估计方法.经济研究,2003,7.
[84]张军.改革以来中国的资本形成与经济增长：一些发现及其解释.世界经济文汇,2002(1).
[85]张军等.中国省际物质资本存量估算：1952-2000.经济研究,2004,10.
[86]张曙光,张燕生,万中心.中国贸易保护代价的实证分析.经济研究,1997(2)
[87]张涛.绿色贸易壁垒对我国蔬菜出口和生产的影响.南京农业大学博士学位论文,2004.
[88]张为付.倾销与反倾销的历史演变及时代特征.南京社会科学,2004,7.
[89]赵伟,马瑞永,何元庆.全要素生产率变动的分解——基于Malmquist生产力指数的实证分析.统计研究,2005,7.
[90]赵玉阁.警惕反补贴调查成为我国外贸出口的新障碍.国际贸易问题,2005,5.
[91]郑伟.技术转移与经济增长研究——基于科技支撑和引领经济发展的视角.数量经济技术经济研究,2008,(10)：3-16.
[92]郑玉歆.全要素生产率的测度及经济增长方式的“阶段性”规律.经济研究,1999,5.
[93]中华人民共和国海关总署.海关统计月刊.北京：中国海关杂志社,2007(12)
[94]钟契夫.投入产出分析.北京：中国财政经济出版社,1987.
[95]周申,杨传伟.我国关税的有效保护率及其变动——基于2004年数据的考察.财经研究,2006,(9)：134～143.
[96]朱春兰,严建苗.进口贸易与经济增长：基于我国全要素生产率的测度.商业经济与管理,2006(5).
[97]朱钟棣,鲍晓华.反倾销措施对产业的关联影响.经济研究,2004(1)
[1]Abraham L.Wickelgren.Innovation,Market structure and the holdup problem: Investment incentives and coordination. International Journal of industrial organization,2004,22:693-713.
[2]Aghion P.and Howitt.A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction. Econometrica,1992,(2):323-351.
[3]Aliee Shiu.Multilateral Comparison of Productivity, Terms of Trade and Factor Accumulation. Review of Income and wealth.2003,Series 49,NO.1.
[4]Anderson, J..Trade restrictiveness benchmarks. Economic Journal,1998,108(449) (July):1111-1125.
[5]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Trade reforms with quotas,partial rent retention arid tariffs.Econometrica,1992,60(1):57-76.
[6]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Measuring the restrictiveness of trade policy. World Bank Economic Review,1994,8(2)(May):151-169.
[7]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..A new approach to evaluating trade policy. Review of Economic Studies,1996,63(1)(January):107-125.
[8]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..The Mercantilist index of trade policy. International Economic Review,2003,44(2)(May):627-649.
[9]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Measuring the Restrictiveness of Trade Policy. Boston: MIT Press,2005.
[10]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Welfare versus market access:the implications of tariff structure for tariff reform. Journal of International Economics,2007,71(2)(March): 627-649.
[11]Anders Oestergard Nielsen.Patenting, R&D and Market structure:Manufacturing Firms in Denmark. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2001,66:47-58.
[12]Andriamananjara,S.,Dean,J.M.,Ferrantino,M.J.,et al.The effects of non-tariff measures on prices,trade, and welfare:CGE implementation of policyased price comparisons.Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=539705,2004.
[13]Andriamananjara,S.,Dean,J.M and Spinanger,D..Trading apparel:developing countries in 2005.mimeo. Kiel Institute of World Economics and USITC,2005.
[14]Angion P.Dewatripont & M.,P.Rey. Corporate Governnance,Competition Policy and Industrial Policy.European Economic Review,1997,41 (3-5):797-805.
[15]Antonelli.Localized Technological change and the evolution of standards as economic institutions.Information Economics and Policy,1994,(6):195-216.
[16]Arrow, Kenneth. The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing.Review of Economic Studies,1962,29:155-173.
[17]Arrow,K. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for inventions, In: Nelson, R.(Ed.) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1962:609-626.
[18]Bagwell,K.and R.W.Staiger.The Sensitivity of Strategic and Corrective R&D Policy in Oligopolistic Industries. Journal of International Economics,1994,36: 133-150
[19]Baizhu Chen and YIFeng.Openness and Trade Policy in China:An Industrial Analysis. China Economic Review,2000.
[20]Baldwin, R.E.. The Case Against Infant-Industry Protection. Journal of Political Economy,1969,77:295-305.
[21]Barba Navaretti, Giorgio and Anthony J. Venables. Multinational Firms in the World Economy, Princeton University Press,2004.
[22]Barro, Robert J. Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth. Journal of Political Economy,1990,98:103-125
[23]Barro,R.and Sala-I-Martin,X.Economic Growth.New York, McGraw-Hill Inc,1995: 251-265.
[24]Barro,R. J. and Lee. International Comparison of Educational Attainment. Journal of Monetary Economics,1993,32(3):363-394.
[25]Bela Balassa. Tariffs, Intermediate Goods, and Domestic Protection:Comment. The American economic Review,1970a,60(5):959-963.
[26]Bela Balassa. Tariffs, Intermediate Goods, and Domestic Protection:Further Comment.The American economic Review,1970b,60(5):968-969.
[27]Benhabib, J. and Spiege,l M.. The Role of Human Capital in Economic Development. Evidence from Aggregate Cross-country Data, Journal of Monetary Economics,1994,34:143-173.
[28]Bernstein,J.I..Costs of production, intra-industry and inter-industry R&D spillovers: Canadian evidence. Canadian Journal of Economics,1988(21):324-347.
[29]Bernstein,J.I..The structure of Canadian industrial R&D spillovers and the rates of return to R&D. Journal of Industrial Economics,1989,37:315-328.
[30]Bernstein,J.I..International R&D spillovers between industries in Canada and The United States,social rates of return and productivity growth. Canadian Journal of Economics,1996,(4):463-467.
[31]Bhagwati,Jagdish.Directly unproductive profit-seeking(DUP) activities Journal of Political Economy,1982,90:988-1002.
[32]Bin XU and JianMao Wang. Capital goods trade and R&D spillovers in the OECD. Canadian Journal of economics,1999,32(5):1258-1274.
[33]Bouet,A.,Decreux,I.,Fontaigne,L.,Jean,S.and Laborde,D..Computing an exhaustive and consistent, ad-valorem equivalent measure of applied protection:a detailed description of MAcMap-HS6 methodology.mimeo, CEPII,Paris,2004.
[34]Bradford,S..Paying the price:final goods protection in OECD countries.Review of Economic and Statistics,2003,85(1):24-37.
[35]Brander, J.A. and B.J. Spencer. Trade Warfare; Tariffs and Cartels.Journal of International Economics,1984a,16:227-242.
[36]Brander, J.A. and B.J. Spencer. Tariff Protection and Imperfect Competition.in H.Kierzkowski,ed.,Monopolistic Competition and International Trade,Oxford: Oxford University Press,1984b.194-206.
[37]Bruneau,J.F..A Note on Permits, Standards and Technological Innovation.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2004,48:1192-1199.
[38]Cameron,C.and Windmeijer,F.An R-squared measure of goodness of fit for some common nonlinear regression models. Journal of Econometrics,1997,77(2):329-342
[39]Canan Canga,A.(?)brahim GUR,Meryem Oflaz,HusnuTekin.Total factor productivity growth in Turkey, CEE Countries and EU-5. IMF working paper,2008.
[40]Caves,D.W.,Christensen,L.R.,and W.E.Diewart.The Economic Theory of Index Numbers and Measurement of Input,Output and Productivity.Econometrica,1982, 50.
[41]Charles V. Marrewijk and K. Berden. On the static and dynamic costs of trade restrictions for small developing countries. Working paper, the University of Adelaide, Australia,2006.
[42]Cheng Leonard K,Tao Zhi gang. The impact of public policies on innovation and imitation:The role of R&D technology in growth models. International Economic Review,1999,40:187-207.
[43]Chin,J.,Grossman,G.M.International property rights and North-South trade.In:Jones, R.W.,Krueger,A.O.(Eds.),The Political Economy of International Trade. Basil Blackwell,Cambridge,MA,1990:90-107.
[44]Chow,G.C..Capital Formation and Economic Growth in China.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1993,108(3):809-42.
[45]Chow, G.C. and Li, K-W..China's economic growth:1952-2010. Economic Development and Cultural Change,2002,51(1):247-56.
[46]Chow,G.C..Are Chinese Official Statistics Reliable? CESifo Economic Studies, 2006,52:396-414.
[47]Cohen, W.and D.Levinthal.Innovation and Learning:The Two Faces of R&D. Economic Journal,1989,99:569-596.
[48]Coe,D.T.,and E.Helpman.International R&D spillovers.European Economic Review, 1995,39(5):859-887.
[49]Coe,D.T.,E.Helpman,and A.W.Hoffmaister. North-South R&D spillovers. Economic Journal,1997,107:134-149.
[50]Corden,W.Max.The Effective protective Rate, the Uniform Tariff Equivalent and the average Tariff.Economic Record,1966,42:200-216.
[51]Davies, H..Technology Transfer through Commercial Transactions.Journal of Industrial Economics,1977,26:161-175.
[52]Deardorf,A.V.and R.M.Stern.A disaggregated model of world production and trade: an estimate of the impact of the Tokyo Round.Journal of policy Modeling,1981, (3): 127-152.
[53]Deardorff,A.V..Welfare effects of global patent protection.Economics,1992,59:35-51.
[54]Deardorff,A.and Stern,R..Measurement of non-tariff barriers.Economic Department Working Papers No.179,OECD,1997.
[55]Diana W. And James E. Raueh. OPenness, Specialization, and Productivity growth in less developed countries. Canadian Economics Association,1999,32(4).
[56]Dinopoulos E, Segerstrom P. A theory of North-South trade and globalization[R]. Stockholm School of Economics Working Paper, Center for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper,2003, No.4140.
[57]Diwan,I.,Rodrik,D.Patents,appropriate technology,and North-South trade.Journal of International Economics,1991,30:27-47.
[58]Dixit,A.and Stiglitz,J.Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity. American Economic Review,1977,67:297-308.
[59]Dominick Salvatore.International Economics (5th ed.).Prentice-Hall International, Inc.,1995.
[60]Either, Wilfred J. National and International Returns to Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade. American Economic Review,1982,72:389-405.
[61]Eaton, J., and S.Kortum. Trade in ideas:Patenting and productivity in the OECD. Journal of International Economics,1996,40:251-278.
[62]Ester Martinez-Ros.Explaining the decisions to carry out product and process innovation:the Spanish case. The Journal of High Technology Management Research,2000,10(2):223-242.
[63]Eswaran,M..Licensees as Entry Barriers. Canadian Journal of Economics,1994,27: 673-688.
[64]Eva Paus,Nola Reinhardt and Michael Robinson.Trade Liberalization And roductivity Growth in Latin American Manufacturing,1970-98.Policy Reform, March 2003,6(1).
[65]Everaert,L.,and F.N.D.Simone. Capital Operating Time and Total Factor Productivity Growth in France.IMF Working Paper 128,2003.
[66]Farrell,M.J.Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Part3, Serial A,1957.
[67]Feenstra,Robert C.,and Judd.Kenneth L.Tariffs,Technology Transfer,and Welfare. Journal of Political Economy,1982,90(6):1142-1165.
[68]Feenstra, Robert. How costly is protectionism. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Summer,1992,6(3):159-178.
[69]Feenstra,R..Estimating the effects of trade policy. in(G.Grossman&K.Rogoff, eds.), Handbook of International Economics,1995,3:1553-1595,Amsterdam:Elsevier.
[70]Ferreira,P.C.and J.L.Rossi.New evidence on trade liberalization and productivity growth. Ensaios Econo.da EPGE 433,2001.
[71]Ferreira,P.C.;Trejos.A. and Vargas,F.G.Measuring the TFP Costs of Barrier to Trade. NBER Working Paper,2006,April.
[72]Fischer,Stanley.The Role of Macroeconomic Factors in Growth.Journal of Monetary Economics,1993,32(3):485-512.
[73]Findlay,R. Relative Backwardness, Direct Foreign Investment, and the Transfer of Technology:A Simple Dynamic Model.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1978,62:1-16.
[74]Fosfuri, A. and Arora, A. Licensing the Market for Technology.Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,2003,52,277-295.
[75]Francisco,R.and D.Rodrik.Trade Policy and Economic Growth:A Skeptic Guide to the Cross-National Evidence. NBER Working Paper, No.7081,1999.
[76]Frankel, J. and Romer, D.. Does trade cause growth? American Economic Review, 1999,89(3)(June):379-399.
[77]Frans A.Vollenbroek.Sustainable development and the challenge of innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production,2002,(10):215-223.
[78]Gabrielle Antille and Emilio Fontela. The Terms of Trade and the International Transfers of Productivity Gains.Economic Systems Research,2003,15(1).
[79]Gallini,N.T. Deterrence by Market Sharing:A Strategic Incentive for Licensing. American Economic Review,1984,74:931-941.
[80]Gandal Neil and Oz Shy. Standardization policy and international trade.Journal of international economy,2001,53:363-383.
[81]Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Kimberly Ann Elliott.Measuring the costs of protection in the United States. Washington:Institute for International Economics,1996. http://www.iie.com.
[82]Gong, B.H.,and R.C.Sickles.Finite Sample Evidence on the Performance of Stochastic Frontiers and Data Envelopment Analysis Using Panel Data. Journal of Econometrics,1992,51.
[83]Greenaway, David and Chong H. Nam. Industrialization and Macroeconomic Performance in developing countries under Alternative trade strategies. Kyklos, 1988,41(3):419-435.
[84]Gregory Tassey. Standardization in technology-based markets.Research Policy, 2000,29:587-602.
[85]Griffith,R.,S.Redding,and J.Van Reenen.R&D and Absorptive Capacity:From Theory to Data.Mimeo:London School of Economics,2000, November.
[86]Griliches Z.Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth.The Bell Journal of Economics,2001.
[87]Grossman G. M., and Helpman E. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press,1991a:212-230.
[88]Grossman M.G. and Helpman E. Endogenous product cycles.Economic Journal, 1991b,101:1214-1229.
[89]Grossman G, Helpman E.Quality ladders and product cycles. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991c,106:557-586.
[90]Grossman,G.M.,Helpman,E.Technology and trade.In:Grossman,G.M.,Rogoff,K. (Eds.),Handbook of International Economics,vol.III.Elsevier, Amsterdam,1995.
[91]Grossman,G.and Helpman,E..Protection for sale. American Economic Review, 1994,84 (4)(September):833-850.
[92]Hakura,D.and F.Jaumotte.The Role of Inter-and Intra-Industry Trade in Technology Diffusion.IMF Working Paper,1999,No.WP/58.
[93]Halit Yaniaya.Trade Openness and Economic Growth:Across-Country Empirical Investigation. Journal of Development Economics72,2003.
[94]Harberger,Arnold,C..Reflections on Economic growth in Asia and the Pacific. Journal of Asian Economics,7,3:365-392.
[95]Harrison,A.Openness and Growth:A Time-series,Cross-country Analysis for Developing Countries. Journal of Development Economics,1996,48:419-447.
[96]Harry Johnson.The cost of protection and the scientific tariffs.Journal of political Economy 1960,68(4):327-345.
[97]Helpman,E..International trade in the presence of product differentiation,economies of scale and monopolistic competition:A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin Approach. Journal of international Economy,1981,11(8):305-340.
[98]Helpman E.Innovation, Imitation and intellectual property rights.Econometrica, 1993,61:1247-1280.
[99]Hiau Looi Kee, Alessandro Nicita and Marcelo Olarreaga.Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices.The Economic Journal,2009,119:172-199.
[100]Hoekman,B.,Ng,F.and Olarreaga,M.Agricultural tariffs versus subsidies: what's more important for developing countries?.World Bank Economic Review, 2004,18(2)(May):175-204.
[101]Holly J.Raider.Market Structure and Innovation.Social Science Research,1998, 27:1-21.
[102]Horowitz,A.W.,Lai,E.L.-C.Patent length and rate of innovation.International Economic Review,1996,37:785-801.
[103]Hufbauer,G.C.,D.T.Berliner,and K.A.Elliot.Trade Protection in theUnited States: 31 Case Studies.Washington, D.C.:Institute for International Economics,1986.
[104]Hulten,C.R..Total Factor Productivity:A Short Biography.NBER Working Paper 7471,2000.
[105]James D.Adams.Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth. Journal of Political Economy,1990,98(41).
[106]James Harrigan. Openness to Trade in Manufactures in the OECD.Journal of International Economies 40,1996.
[107]Jan Van Cuilenburg and Paul Slaa.Competition and innovation in telecommunications:An empirical analysis of innovative telecommunications in the public inerest.Telecommunications policy,1995,19(8):647-663.
[108]Javier Carrillo-Hermosilla. A policy approach to the environmental impacts of technological lock-in. Ecological Economics,2006,58:717-742.
[109]Jean-Claude Nachega and Thomson Fontaine.Economic Growth and Total Factor Productivity in Niger.IMF WP/06/208, September 2006.
[110]Jesus Felipe.Total Factor Productivity Growth In East Asia:A Critical Survey. Asian Development Bank (Economics and Development Resource Center), September 1997.
[111]John S.Wilson and Tsunehiro Otsuk. Standards and Technical Regulations and Firms in Developing Countries.The World Bank,2004.
[112]Joosung J.Lee and Kiminori Gemba, Fumio Kodama. Analyzing the innovation process for environmental performance improvement.Technological Forecasting &Social Change,2006,73:290-301.
[113]Jorge Crespo, Carmela Martin and Francisco J.Velzquez.International Technology Diffusion through Imports and Its Impact on Economic Growth. Working Paper,2002, No.12.
[114]Judith Jordan.Product Standards, Innovation and Regulation.Technology Analysis and Strategic Management,1994,6(3):341-354.
[115]Kamal Saggi.Trade, Foreign Direct Investment,and International Technology Transfer:A Survey.The world bank.
[116]Keller, W.. Are international R&D spillovers trade-related?Analyzing spillovers among randomly matched trade partners.European Economic Review 1998,42: 1469-1481.
[117]Keller W. Knowledge Spillovers at the World's Technology Frontier.CEPR Working Paper,2001a, No.2815.
[118]Keller W.Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion. American Economic Review,2001b,92:120-142.
[119]Keller W.Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion.The American Economic Review,2002a,92(1):120-142.
[120]Keller W.Trade and the Transmission of Technology.Journal of Economic Growth,2002b,7(1):5-24.
[121]Keller,W..International technology diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004(XLII):752-782.
[122]Kim, Euysung.Trade Liberalization and productivity growth in Korea manufacturing industries:price protection, market power, and scale efficiency. Journal of Development economics,2000,62(1):55-83.
[123]Kim,N. Measuring the Costs of Visible Protection in Korea.Washington: Institute for International,Economics,1996,http://www.ie.com.
[124]Knut Blind and Christiane Hipp. The role of quality standards in innovative service companies:An empirical analysis for Germany.Technological forecasting and social change,2003,70:653-669.
[125]Kraft,K. Are product-and process-innovations independent of each other. Applied Economics,1990,22:1029-1038.
[126]Kremer,M. Patent buy-out:a mechanism for encouraging innovation.NBER Working Paper No.6304,1997.
[127]Krishna,K..Trade Restrictions as Facilitating Practices.Journal of International Economics,1989,26:251-270
[128]Krueger,Anne. Foreign Trade Regimes and economic development.Cambridge: Ballinger,1978.
[129]Krugman, Paul R. Increasing Return, Monopolistic competition,and international trade. Journal of Iinternational Economy,1979a (9):467-479.
[130]Krugman, Paul R.A Model of innovation, Technology Transfer, and the World distribution of income. Journal of Political Economy,1979b,87(2):253-266.
[131]Krugman,Paul.The Myth of Asia's Miracle.Foreign Affairs,1994:62-78.
[132]Kwang H. and Watanabe C. Dynamic process of technology spillover:a transfer function approach. Tech-innovation,2002,22:437-444.
[133]Lai,E.L.-C..International intellectual property rights protection and rate of product innovation. Journal of Development Economics,1998,55:133-153.
[134]Lai,E.L.-C.,Qiu,L.D..The North's intellectual property rights standard for the South? ournal of International Economics,2003(59):183-209.
[135]Lancaster,K.J..Intra-industry trade under perfect monopolistic competition. Journal of Iinternational Economy,1980,10(5):151-175.
[136]Leamer,E..Cross-section estimation of the effects of trade barriers.in (Robert Feenstra, ed.),Empirical Methods for International Trade,Boston:MIT Press, 1988a:52-82.
[137]Leamer,E..Measuring of Openness, Trade Policy and Empirical Analysis. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1988b.
[138]Leamer,E..Latin America as a target of trade barriers erected by the major developed countries in 1983.Journal of Development Economics,1990,32(2) (April):337-368.
[139]Lee G. Direct versus indirect international R &D spillovers.lnformation Economics and Policy,2005,17:334-348.
[140]Lee, J. and Swagel, P..Trade barriers and trade flows across countries and industries. Review of Economics and Statistics,1997,79(3)(August):372-382.
[141]LEE,T. and L.L. Wilde. Market Structure and Innovation:A Reformulation. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1980,94:429-436.
[142]Li Chol-Won.On the policy implications of endogenous technological progress. The Economic Journal,2001,111:164-179.
[143]Lichtenberg,F.,and B.van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie.International R&D spillovers:a comment. European Economic Review,1998,42:1483-1491.
[144]Lin,P.and Saggi,K..Incentives for Foreign Direct Investment under Imitation. Canadian Journal of Economics,1999,32:1275-1298.
[145]Lionel Fontagn e, Friedrich von-Kirchbach and Mondher Mimouni.An Assessment of Environmentally-Related Non-Tariff Measures.The World Economy,2005,28(10):1417-1439.
[146]Lucas,R.E.Jr. On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics,1988,22:3-42.
[147]Mansfield.Edwin,Rappoport,J.,Romeo,A.,Wagner,S.,and Beardsley,G.Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovation. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1977,91:221-240.
[148]Mansfield.Edwin,Schwartz,Mark, and Wagner,Smuel. Imitation Costs and patents:An empirical study.The Economic Journal,1981,91:907-918.
[149]Mansfield, E.and A.Romeo. Technology Transfer to Overseas Subsidiaries by U.S. Based Firms. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1980,94(4):737-750.
[150]Mansfield,E. How rapidly does industrial technology leak out?.Journal of Industrial Economics,1988,34(2):217-223.
[151]Maria Leticia Santos-Vijande, Luis Ignacio Alvarez-Gonzalezb.Innovativeness and organizational innovation in total quality oriented firms:The moderating role of market turbulence. Techinnovation,2007,27:514-532.
[152]Mark Vancauteren. The impact of technical barriers to trade on home bias:an application to EU data. Working paper:20052/8/8.
[153]Markusen J,Venables A. Trade policy with increasing returns and imperfect competition:Contradictory results from competing assumptions. Journal of International Economics,1998,24:299-316.
[154]Maskus,K.E. The international regulation of intellectual property. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv,1998,134:186-208.
[155]Maskus,K.E.,Penubarti,M.How trade-related are intellectual property rights? Journal of International Economics,1995,39:227-248.
[156]Matsuyama, K..Perfect Equilibrium in a Trade Liberalization Game.American Economic Review,1990,80:480-492.
[157]Matsuyama K. Agricultural productivity, comparative advantage,and economic growth. Journal of Economic Theory,1992,58:317-334.
[158]McCulloch,R.and Yellen,Janet L.Technology Transfer and the National Advantage.Harvard Inst,Econ.Res.Discussion Paper no.526.Cambridge,Mass: Harvard Univ.,1976.
[159]Melitz, M..The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity.Econometrica,2003,71(6):1695-1725.
[160]Messerlin, P. and Owen, R.F.. Preliminary Study on Costs of Protection in the European Union. Washington:Institute for International Economics,1996.http:// www.iie.com.yoko.
[161]Miller.S.M.,Upadhyay.M.P..The Effects of Openness,Trade Orientation and Human Capital on Total Factor Productivity Journal of development Economics, 2000,63.
[162]Miyagiwa, K. and Y. Ohno.Closing. the Technology Gap Under Protection American Economic Review,199585:755-770.
[163]Miyagiwa,K.and Y.Ohno.Credibility of protection and incentives to innovate. International Economic Review,1999,40(1):755-770
[164]M. Scott Taylor. TRIPS, trade, and technology transfer. The Canadian Journal of Economics,1993,26(3):625-637.
[165]Neruh,Vikram and Asok Dhareshwar.A New Database on Human Physical Capital Stock:Sources, Methodology and Results. Revista de Analisis Economico (Economic Analysis Review),1993,8(1):37-59.
[166]Neruh, Vikram and Asok Dhareshwar. New Estimates of Total Factor Productivity growth for developing and industrial countries. Policy research Working paper 1313, The World Bank,1994.
[167]Nogues,J.,Olechowski,A.and Winters,L.A..Extent of non-tariff barriers to industrial countries imports. World Bank Economic Review,2003,1(1):181-199.
[168]North, Douglass.Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
[169]OECD. Patterns and pervasiveness of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in OECD member countries.ECO/CPE/WP1/GE(96)/3,1995, Paris.
[170]OECD.OECD Factbook 2008:Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics. ISBN 92-64-04054-4,2008.
[171]Pack,Howard and Kamal Saggi.Inflows of Foreign Technology and Indigenous Technological Development. Review of Development Economics,1997,1(1):81-98.
[172]Panagariya, A.. Alternative Approaches to Measuring the Costs of Protection. mimeo:University of Maryland,January,2002.
[173]Pardos, E. and Carmen, F.. Alternative Measures for Trade Restrictiveness:A Gravity Approach. Seventh Annual Conference Discussion Paper,8-10 September, 2005,University College Dublin.
[174]Paul Romer. New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions. Journal of Development Economics,1994(43):5-38.
[175]P.J.Lloyd and D.MacLaren. Measures of trade openness using CGE analysis. Journal of policy Modeling,2002.
[176]Porter, M.E. and C.van der Linde.Toward a new conception of the environment competitiveness relationship. Journal of economy perspective,1995,(9):97-118.
[177]Porter, M.E. and C.van der Linde..Green and competitiveness:ending the stalemate. Harvard business review,1995,73(5):120-134.
[178]Posner, M. International Trade and Technical Change. Oxford Economic Papers, 1961, (13):323-341.
[179]Pradeep Dubey and Chien-wei Wu. When less competition induces more product innovation. Economics Letters,2002,74:309-312.
[180]Prichett, Lant. Measuring Outward Orientation in Developing Countries:Can it be Done?.World bank,1991.
[181]Prichett,Lant and Sethi,Geeta.Tariff Rates,Tariff Revenue and Tariff Reform: Some New Facts.World Bank Economic Review,1994,8(1):1-16.
[182]Qiu, L.D., Lai, E.L.-C. Protection of trade for innovation:the role of Northern and Southern Tariffs. Japan and the World Economy,2004,(16):449-470.
[183]Quah, Danny, and James E. Rauch. Openness and the rate of economic growth. preliminary draft, UCSD,1990.
[184]Raymond Atje and Gary C. Hufbauer. The market structure benefits of trade and investment liberalization. Institute for International Economics,1996:1-47.
[185]Reingantum, J.F..The Timing of Innovation:Research, Development and Diffusion.in R.Schmalensee and R.D.Willig,eds.,Handbook of Industrial Organization (Amsterdam:North-Holland,1989,Chapter14).
[186]Renuka Mahadevan. Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth in Australian Manufacturing Industries. AEJ,June 2002,30(2).
[187]Richard Harris.Trade Liberalization and Industrial Organization:Some Estimates for Canada.Journal of Political Economy,February,1984:115-145.
[188]Richard G.Lipsey,Kenneth I.Carlaw.Total factor Production and The measurement of technological change.Canadian Journal of Economics,2004,37 (4): 1118-1150.
[189]Rivera-Batiz,L.A.and P.M.Romer.Economic integration andendogenous growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106:531-555.
[190]Robert,H.A.and Sriram,D.R..The role of standards in innovation.Journal of Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2000,64(6):171-181.
[191]Robert M. Solow. Technical Change and the Aggregate Productivity Function. The Review of Economics and Statistics,1957,39:312-320.
[192]Robert W.Vossen. Market Power, Industrial Concentration and Innovative Activity.
[193]Rockett, K. E..Choosing the Competition and Patent Licensing. RAND Journal of Economics,1990,21:161-171.
[194]Rodriguez and Carlos Alfredo. Trade in Technical Knowledge and the national Advantage.Journal of Political Economy,1975,83(1):121-135.
[195]Rodriguez, F. and Rodrik, D.. Trade policy and growth:a skeptic's guide to the cross national evidence.in (Ben Bernanke and Kenneth S. Rogoff,eds), Macroeconomics Annual 2000,2001:261-324, Cambridge:MIT Press for NBER.
[196]Rodrik,D.. Closing the Technology Gap:Does Trade Liberalization Really Help?. Cambridge NBER Working Paper, No.2654,1988.
[197]Romer P.M. Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 1990,98:71-102.
[198]Romer P.M.Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth. Journal of Political Economy,1986,94:1002-1037.
[199]Ruffin, Roy J.Tariffs,Intermediate Goods,and Domestic Protection.The American economic Review,1969,59(3):261-269.
[200]Ruffin, Roy J. Tariffs, Intermediate Goods, and Domestic Protection:Reply.The American economic Review,1970,60(5):964-967.
[201]Sachs J. D. and Warner A. Economic reform and the process of global integration. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,1995(1):1-118.
[202]Sadahiko,Kano.Technical innovations, standardization and regional comparison: a case study in mobile communications.Telecommunication Policy,2000,(24):305-321.
[203]Salim,R.A.. Capacity Realization and Productivity Growth in a Developing Country:Has Economic Reform Had Impact?. Ashgate Publishing Ltd,1999.
[204]Sang-Seung Yi. Market Structure and incentives to Innovate:the case of Cournot oligopoly. Economics Letters,1999,65:379-388.
[205]Satish Chand and Kunal Sen. Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth: Evidence from Indian Manufacturing. Review of Development Economies,2002,6 (1):120-132.
[206]Schiff M.,Wang Y. and OLarreaga M. North-south and south-south trade-related technology diffusion:an industry-level analysis[EB]. Policy Research Working Paper Series,No.2861,Development Research Group,The World Bank, 2002.
[207]Sebastian Edwards. Openness, Productivity Growth:What Do We Really Know?.The Economic Journal,1998,108(March):383-389.
[208]Selin Ozyurtl.Total Factor Productivity Growth in Chinese Industry,1952-2005. IMF working paper13,2007.
[209]Shane Greenstein. Market Structure and Innovation:A Brief Synopsis of Recent Thinking,2002,February,20.
[210]Shi, J. Are Currency Appreciations Contractionary in China? NBER Working Papers, Sep.2006,No.12551.
[211]Simon Cowan and Siclair P.Trade Technology and Growth:an Introduction. Oxford Economic Paper,51:1-3.
[212]Smith, P.J. Are weak patent rights a barrier to US exports? Journal of International Economics,1999,48:151-177.
[213]Solow, Robert M. A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1956,70:65-94.
[214]Solow, Robert M. Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function. Review of Economics and Statistics,1957,39:312-320.
[215]Spence,M.. Cost reduction, competition and industry performance. Econometrica,1984(LII):101-121.
[216]Spencer Henson. Costs associated with divergent national product standards and conformity assessment procedures and the impact on international trade. Regulatory reform in the global economy Asian and Latin American perspectives, OECD,1998.
[217]S.P.Magee,W.A.Brock and L.young.Black Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy Theory.Cambridge and New York:Cambridge University Press,1989.
[218]Staiger, R.W. and GTabellini. Discretionary Trade Policy and Excessive Protection. American Economic Review,1987,67:823-837.
[219]Stokey N. Human capital, product quality and growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106(2):587-616.
[220]Subal C. Kumbhakar. Estimation and decomposition of Productivity change when Production is not efficient:a Panel data approach.Econometric Reviews, 2000,19(4):425-460.
[221]Sun Ling Wang. Openness And Productivity Growth In Taiwan. Paper for Doctor's degree in the Graduate College at the University of Nebraska,2001.
[222]Taylor, M.S.. TRIPs, trade and technology transfer. Canadian Journal of Economics,1993,26:625-638.
[223]Taylor M. Quality ladders ad ricardian trade. Journal of International Economics,1993,34:225-243.
[224]Tornell, A.. Time Inconsistency of Protectionist Programs:On the Ineffectiveness of Investment-Contingent Subsidies. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106:963-974.
[225]Trefler,D.. Trade liberalization and the theory of endogenous protection:an econometric study of US import policy. Journal of Political Economy,1993,101(1) (February):138-160.
[226]UNCTAD. Trade and Development Report, Annex 1 to Chap ter III:"Growth and Classification of World Merchandise Exports",2002.
[227]Van Elkan, R. Catching up and Slowing down:Learning and Growth Patterns in an Open Economy. Journal of International Economics,1996,41:95-111.
[228]Vernon,R. International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1966,83:190-207.
[229]Vossen,R.W. and B.Nooteboom.. Firm Size and Participation in R&D, in A.H. Kleinknecht(ed.),Determinants of Innovation. The Message from New Indicators, 1996.
[230]Wang, X.H.. Fee versus rovalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model. Economics Letters,1998,60:55-62.
[231]W.Grains,Jaime de Melo and Shujiro Urata.A general equilibrium estimation of the effects of reduction in tariffs and quantitive restrictions in Turkey in 1978.,in Srinivasan, T.N. and John Whalley, General equilibrium Trade policy Modeling, Cambridge,Massachusetts:MIT press,1986:61-88.
[232]William H. Redmond. Interconnectivity in diffusion of innovations and market competition.Journal of Business Research,2004(57):1295-1302.
[233]Wolf, Holger. Trade Orientation:Measurement and Consequences.Estudios de Economia,1993.
[234]Wu,Y..China's Economic Growth. A miracle with Chinese Characteristics. London and New York:Routledge Curzon,2004.
[235]Yang G, Maskus K. Intellectual property rights, licensing and innovation in an endogenous product-cycle model. Journal of International Economics,2001,53: 169-187.
[236]Yan Wang and Yudong Yao.Sources of China's Economic Growth 1952-1999: Incorporating Human capital accumulation. China Economic Review,2003,(14): 32-52.
[237]Yi, S. S.. Whom to License Patented Technology. Managerial and Decision Economics,1998,19:189-195.
[238]Young, Allyn. Increasing Returns and Economic Progress. The Economic Journal,1928,38:527-542.
[239]Young, Alwyn. Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing. Journal of Political Economy,1993,101:443-472.
[240]Young Alwyn. Learning by doing and the dynamic effects of international trade.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106:369-406.
[241]Young, Alwyn.The Tyranny of Numbers:Confronting the Statistical Realities of the East Asian Growth Experience. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,109 (3):641-680.
[242]Zigic, K.. Strategic trade policy, intellectual property rights protection, and North-South trade. Journal of Development Economics 2000,61:27-60.
[2]包群,许和连,赖明勇.出口贸易如何促进经济增长?——基于全要素生产率的实证研究.上海经济研究,2003(3).
[3]包群,许和连,赖明勇.贸易开放度与经济增长：理论及中国的经验研究.世界经济,2003(2)：10～18.
[4]包群,许和连,赖明勇.贸易开放与经济增长：理论及中国的经验研究.世界经济,2003(2).
[5]鲍晓华.技术性贸易壁垒的双重性质及甄别机制.财贸经济,2005,10.
[6]编委会.中华人民共和国海关进出口税则(2007年版).北京：经济日报出版社,2007.
[7]查理·辛格.技术史(第六卷),王平(译),成都科技出版社,1995.
[8]陈飞翔,蔡茂森等.开放效率论.上海：同济大学出版社,2002.
[9]丹尼·罗德里克.新全球经济与发展中国家让开放起作用.世界知识出版社,2004.
[10]单豪杰.中国资本存量K的再估算：1952～2006年.数量经济技术经济研究,2008(10)：17-31.
[11]窦丽琛,李国平.技术创新扩散与区域生产率差异—对中国的实证分析.科学学研究,2004,(5)：538-542.
[12]方齐云.国际经济学.武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2002.1.142-147.
[13]方希桦,包群,赖明勇.国际技术溢出：基于进口传导机制的实证研究.中国软科学,2004,(7)：58-64.
[14]方希桦,包群.国际技术溢出：基于进口传导机制的实证研究.中国软科学,2007(7).
[15]冯宗宪,柯大钢.开放经济下的国际贸易壁垒.经济科学出版社,2001.
[16]傅家骥.技术创新学.北京：清华大学出版社,1998.
[17]郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国经济波动的解释：投资冲击与全要素生产率冲击.管理世界,2004b,7.
[18]郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国潜在产出与产出缺口的估算.经济研究,2004a,5.
[19]郭庆旺,贾俊雪.中国全要素生产率的估算：1979-2004.经济研究,2005,5.
[20]郭庆旺,赵志耘,贾俊雪：中国省份经济的全要素生产率分析.世界经济,2005,5..
[21]国家统计局.2002年度中国投入产出表.北京：中国统计出版社,2006.
[22]哈罗德·孔茨,海因茨·韦里克.管理学(第十版).经济科学出版社,1998.
[23]海关总署考试教材编写委员会.进出口商品名称与编码(2007年版).北京：中国海关出版社,2007.
[24]海闻.国际贸易理论的新发展.经济研究,1995,9：67-73.
[25]郝枫.中国省区资本存量估算：1952～2004.数据分析,2006,6.
[26]何枫,陈荣,何林.我国资本存量的估算及其相关分析.经济学家,2003,5.
[27]何建坤,吴玉鸣,周立.大学技术转移对首都区域经济增长的贡献分析.科学学研究,2007,(5).
[28]贺菊煌.我国资产的估算.数量经济技术经济研究,1992,8.
[29]胡兵,乔晶.对外贸易、全要素生产率与中国经济增长——基于LA-VAR模型的实证分析.财经问题研究,2006(5).
[30]黄繁华.90年代度量贸易开放度的新方法及其启示.外国经济与管理,2001,(23)：19-22.
[31]黄静波.国际技术转移.北京：清华大学出版社,2005.
[32]黄玖立.贸易开放、要素积累和经济增长—以东亚地区经济快速增长为例.南开经济研究,2004,(6)：59-64.
[33]黄先海,石东楠.对外贸易对我国全要素生产率影响的测度与分析.世界经济研究,2005(1).
[34]黄先海,张云帆.我国外贸技术溢出效应的国别差异分析.经济经纬,2004(1).
[35]黄勇峰,任若恩等.中国制造业资本存量永续盘存法估计.经济学(季刊),2002,2.
[36]金祥荣,林承亮.对中国历次关税调整及其有效保护结构的实证研究..世界经济,1999,(8)：28～34.
[37]李京文,D.乔根森,郑友敬,黑田昌裕等.生产率与中美日经济增长研究.中国社会科学出版社,1993：1-410.
[38]李平.发展中国家和地区利用国际技术扩散的对策分析.贵州财经学院学报,2005b(2)：1-6.
[39]李平.国际贸易、技术扩散与发展中国家的技术创新.当代亚太,2005a(5)：41-46.
[40]李小平,卢现祥,朱钟棣.国际贸易、技术进步和中国工业行业的生产率增长.经济学(季刊),2008,7(2).
[41]李小平,朱钟棣.国际贸易、R&D溢出和生产率增长.经济研究,2006(2)
[42]李小平,朱钟棣.国际贸易的技术溢出门槛效应—基于中国各地区面板数据的分析.经济研究,2004(4).
[43]李治国,唐国兴.资本形成路径与资本存量调整模型.经济研究,2003,2.
[44]罗默,D. (Romer,David)高级宏观经济学(中译本).北京：商务印书馆,2004.
[45]马捷.国际多市场寡头条件下的贸易政策与产业政策.经济研究,2002,(5)：22～31.
[46]聂红隆,沈友华.非关税贸易壁垒的理论与政策效应分析.甘肃社会科学,2009.2.
[47]诺思.制度、制度变迁与经济绩效(中译本).上海：上海三联书店,1994.
[48]欧阳武.生产率度量方法.数量经济技术经济研究,1996,12.
[49]沈坤荣.新增长理论与中国经济增长.南京大学出版社,2003.
[50]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.世界经济,2008(3)
[51]盛斌.中国对外贸易政策的政治经济分析.上海人民出版社,2002.
[52]盛斌.中国贸易自由化福利效果的实证分析.经济研究,1995,(11)：40～46.
[53]施培公.后发优势——模仿创新的理论与实证研究.北京：清华大学出版社,1999.
[54]孙琳琳,任若恩.资本投入测量综述.经济学(季刊),2005,4.
[55]唐海燕.论适度开放.江西人民出版社,2000.
[56]唐晓云.国际技术转移的非线性分析与经济增长.上海：复旦大学出版社,2005.
[57]田志宏,王凯园,王伟.关税配额的经济理论与政策分析.中国农业大学学报,2005,4.
[58]佟家栋.贸易自由化,贸易保护与经济利益.北京：经济科学出版社,2003.
[59]王成歧,张建华,安辉.外商直接投资,地区差异与中国经济增长.世界经济,2002,4.
[60]王溪若,陈飞翔,肖峻.外商直接投资,技术转移与经济发展.国际经贸探索,2006,(6).
[61]王小鲁,樊纲.中国经济增长的可持续性.经济科学出版社,2000.
[62]王小鲁.中国经济增长的可持续性与制度变革.经济研究,2000,7.
[63]王益煊,吴优.中国国有经济固定资本存量的初步测算.统计研究,2003,5.
[64]吴方卫.我国农业资本存量的估计.农业技术经济,1999,6.
[65]小林达也.技术转移.日本文真堂,1986.
[66]谢建国.市场竞争、东道国引资政策与跨国公司的技术转移.经济研究,2007,(6).
[67]谢千里,罗基斯,郑玉歆.改革以来中国工业生产率变动趋势的估计及其可靠性分析.经济研究,1995,(12)：10-22.
[68]熊彼特.经济发展理论.何畏,易家详等译,北京：商务印书馆,1990.
[69]许长新.贸易保护的测度与政策解释.数量经济与技术经济研究,1999,9.
[70]许启发,蒋翠侠.对外贸易与经济增长的相关分析.预测,2002(2).
[71]许统生,聂红隆.贸易保护成本及估计方法研究的最新动态.经济评论,2008,2.
[72]许统生.开放中的贸易保护准则与实证分析.北京：经济管理出版社,2004.
[73]许统生.我国贸易保护成本估计的理论与经验.改革,2005,4.
[74]杨俊,李晓羽,杨尘.技术模仿、人力资本积累与自主创新.财经研究,2007,33(5)：18～28.
[75]易丹辉.数据分析与EVIEWS应用.中国人民大学出版社,2008.
[76]易纲,樊纲,李岩.关于中国经济增长与全要素生产率的理论思考.经济研究,2003,8.
[77]殷德生,唐海燕.内生技术进步、南北贸易与干预政策.财经研究,2006,32(4).
[78]尹翔硕.中国对外贸易改革的进程和效果.山西经济出版社,1998.
[79]袁欣.国际反倾销规则中的贸易保护主义因素分析.经济经纬,2006,1.
[80]张海洋.R&D两面性、外资活动与中国工业生产率增长.经济研究,2005,5.
[81]张军,施少华,陈诗.中国的工业改革与效率变化——方法、数据、文献和现有的结果.经济学季刊,2003,3(1)：1-38.
[82]张军,施少华.中国经济全要素生产率变动：1952-1998.世界经济文汇,2003,2.
[83]张军,章元.再论中国资本存量的估计方法.经济研究,2003,7.
[84]张军.改革以来中国的资本形成与经济增长：一些发现及其解释.世界经济文汇,2002(1).
[85]张军等.中国省际物质资本存量估算：1952-2000.经济研究,2004,10.
[86]张曙光,张燕生,万中心.中国贸易保护代价的实证分析.经济研究,1997(2)
[87]张涛.绿色贸易壁垒对我国蔬菜出口和生产的影响.南京农业大学博士学位论文,2004.
[88]张为付.倾销与反倾销的历史演变及时代特征.南京社会科学,2004,7.
[89]赵伟,马瑞永,何元庆.全要素生产率变动的分解——基于Malmquist生产力指数的实证分析.统计研究,2005,7.
[90]赵玉阁.警惕反补贴调查成为我国外贸出口的新障碍.国际贸易问题,2005,5.
[91]郑伟.技术转移与经济增长研究——基于科技支撑和引领经济发展的视角.数量经济技术经济研究,2008,(10)：3-16.
[92]郑玉歆.全要素生产率的测度及经济增长方式的“阶段性”规律.经济研究,1999,5.
[93]中华人民共和国海关总署.海关统计月刊.北京：中国海关杂志社,2007(12)
[94]钟契夫.投入产出分析.北京：中国财政经济出版社,1987.
[95]周申,杨传伟.我国关税的有效保护率及其变动——基于2004年数据的考察.财经研究,2006,(9)：134～143.
[96]朱春兰,严建苗.进口贸易与经济增长：基于我国全要素生产率的测度.商业经济与管理,2006(5).
[97]朱钟棣,鲍晓华.反倾销措施对产业的关联影响.经济研究,2004(1)
[1]Abraham L.Wickelgren.Innovation,Market structure and the holdup problem: Investment incentives and coordination. International Journal of industrial organization,2004,22:693-713.
[2]Aghion P.and Howitt.A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction. Econometrica,1992,(2):323-351.
[3]Aliee Shiu.Multilateral Comparison of Productivity, Terms of Trade and Factor Accumulation. Review of Income and wealth.2003,Series 49,NO.1.
[4]Anderson, J..Trade restrictiveness benchmarks. Economic Journal,1998,108(449) (July):1111-1125.
[5]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Trade reforms with quotas,partial rent retention arid tariffs.Econometrica,1992,60(1):57-76.
[6]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Measuring the restrictiveness of trade policy. World Bank Economic Review,1994,8(2)(May):151-169.
[7]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..A new approach to evaluating trade policy. Review of Economic Studies,1996,63(1)(January):107-125.
[8]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..The Mercantilist index of trade policy. International Economic Review,2003,44(2)(May):627-649.
[9]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Measuring the Restrictiveness of Trade Policy. Boston: MIT Press,2005.
[10]Anderson,J.and Neary,P..Welfare versus market access:the implications of tariff structure for tariff reform. Journal of International Economics,2007,71(2)(March): 627-649.
[11]Anders Oestergard Nielsen.Patenting, R&D and Market structure:Manufacturing Firms in Denmark. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2001,66:47-58.
[12]Andriamananjara,S.,Dean,J.M.,Ferrantino,M.J.,et al.The effects of non-tariff measures on prices,trade, and welfare:CGE implementation of policyased price comparisons.Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=539705,2004.
[13]Andriamananjara,S.,Dean,J.M and Spinanger,D..Trading apparel:developing countries in 2005.mimeo. Kiel Institute of World Economics and USITC,2005.
[14]Angion P.Dewatripont & M.,P.Rey. Corporate Governnance,Competition Policy and Industrial Policy.European Economic Review,1997,41 (3-5):797-805.
[15]Antonelli.Localized Technological change and the evolution of standards as economic institutions.Information Economics and Policy,1994,(6):195-216.
[16]Arrow, Kenneth. The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing.Review of Economic Studies,1962,29:155-173.
[17]Arrow,K. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for inventions, In: Nelson, R.(Ed.) The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton:Princeton University Press,1962:609-626.
[18]Bagwell,K.and R.W.Staiger.The Sensitivity of Strategic and Corrective R&D Policy in Oligopolistic Industries. Journal of International Economics,1994,36: 133-150
[19]Baizhu Chen and YIFeng.Openness and Trade Policy in China:An Industrial Analysis. China Economic Review,2000.
[20]Baldwin, R.E.. The Case Against Infant-Industry Protection. Journal of Political Economy,1969,77:295-305.
[21]Barba Navaretti, Giorgio and Anthony J. Venables. Multinational Firms in the World Economy, Princeton University Press,2004.
[22]Barro, Robert J. Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth. Journal of Political Economy,1990,98:103-125
[23]Barro,R.and Sala-I-Martin,X.Economic Growth.New York, McGraw-Hill Inc,1995: 251-265.
[24]Barro,R. J. and Lee. International Comparison of Educational Attainment. Journal of Monetary Economics,1993,32(3):363-394.
[25]Bela Balassa. Tariffs, Intermediate Goods, and Domestic Protection:Comment. The American economic Review,1970a,60(5):959-963.
[26]Bela Balassa. Tariffs, Intermediate Goods, and Domestic Protection:Further Comment.The American economic Review,1970b,60(5):968-969.
[27]Benhabib, J. and Spiege,l M.. The Role of Human Capital in Economic Development. Evidence from Aggregate Cross-country Data, Journal of Monetary Economics,1994,34:143-173.
[28]Bernstein,J.I..Costs of production, intra-industry and inter-industry R&D spillovers: Canadian evidence. Canadian Journal of Economics,1988(21):324-347.
[29]Bernstein,J.I..The structure of Canadian industrial R&D spillovers and the rates of return to R&D. Journal of Industrial Economics,1989,37:315-328.
[30]Bernstein,J.I..International R&D spillovers between industries in Canada and The United States,social rates of return and productivity growth. Canadian Journal of Economics,1996,(4):463-467.
[31]Bhagwati,Jagdish.Directly unproductive profit-seeking(DUP) activities Journal of Political Economy,1982,90:988-1002.
[32]Bin XU and JianMao Wang. Capital goods trade and R&D spillovers in the OECD. Canadian Journal of economics,1999,32(5):1258-1274.
[33]Bouet,A.,Decreux,I.,Fontaigne,L.,Jean,S.and Laborde,D..Computing an exhaustive and consistent, ad-valorem equivalent measure of applied protection:a detailed description of MAcMap-HS6 methodology.mimeo, CEPII,Paris,2004.
[34]Bradford,S..Paying the price:final goods protection in OECD countries.Review of Economic and Statistics,2003,85(1):24-37.
[35]Brander, J.A. and B.J. Spencer. Trade Warfare; Tariffs and Cartels.Journal of International Economics,1984a,16:227-242.
[36]Brander, J.A. and B.J. Spencer. Tariff Protection and Imperfect Competition.in H.Kierzkowski,ed.,Monopolistic Competition and International Trade,Oxford: Oxford University Press,1984b.194-206.
[37]Bruneau,J.F..A Note on Permits, Standards and Technological Innovation.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2004,48:1192-1199.
[38]Cameron,C.and Windmeijer,F.An R-squared measure of goodness of fit for some common nonlinear regression models. Journal of Econometrics,1997,77(2):329-342
[39]Canan Canga,A.(?)brahim GUR,Meryem Oflaz,HusnuTekin.Total factor productivity growth in Turkey, CEE Countries and EU-5. IMF working paper,2008.
[40]Caves,D.W.,Christensen,L.R.,and W.E.Diewart.The Economic Theory of Index Numbers and Measurement of Input,Output and Productivity.Econometrica,1982, 50.
[41]Charles V. Marrewijk and K. Berden. On the static and dynamic costs of trade restrictions for small developing countries. Working paper, the University of Adelaide, Australia,2006.
[42]Cheng Leonard K,Tao Zhi gang. The impact of public policies on innovation and imitation:The role of R&D technology in growth models. International Economic Review,1999,40:187-207.
[43]Chin,J.,Grossman,G.M.International property rights and North-South trade.In:Jones, R.W.,Krueger,A.O.(Eds.),The Political Economy of International Trade. Basil Blackwell,Cambridge,MA,1990:90-107.
[44]Chow,G.C..Capital Formation and Economic Growth in China.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1993,108(3):809-42.
[45]Chow, G.C. and Li, K-W..China's economic growth:1952-2010. Economic Development and Cultural Change,2002,51(1):247-56.
[46]Chow,G.C..Are Chinese Official Statistics Reliable? CESifo Economic Studies, 2006,52:396-414.
[47]Cohen, W.and D.Levinthal.Innovation and Learning:The Two Faces of R&D. Economic Journal,1989,99:569-596.
[48]Coe,D.T.,and E.Helpman.International R&D spillovers.European Economic Review, 1995,39(5):859-887.
[49]Coe,D.T.,E.Helpman,and A.W.Hoffmaister. North-South R&D spillovers. Economic Journal,1997,107:134-149.
[50]Corden,W.Max.The Effective protective Rate, the Uniform Tariff Equivalent and the average Tariff.Economic Record,1966,42:200-216.
[51]Davies, H..Technology Transfer through Commercial Transactions.Journal of Industrial Economics,1977,26:161-175.
[52]Deardorf,A.V.and R.M.Stern.A disaggregated model of world production and trade: an estimate of the impact of the Tokyo Round.Journal of policy Modeling,1981, (3): 127-152.
[53]Deardorff,A.V..Welfare effects of global patent protection.Economics,1992,59:35-51.
[54]Deardorff,A.and Stern,R..Measurement of non-tariff barriers.Economic Department Working Papers No.179,OECD,1997.
[55]Diana W. And James E. Raueh. OPenness, Specialization, and Productivity growth in less developed countries. Canadian Economics Association,1999,32(4).
[56]Dinopoulos E, Segerstrom P. A theory of North-South trade and globalization[R]. Stockholm School of Economics Working Paper, Center for Economic Policy Research Discussion Paper,2003, No.4140.
[57]Diwan,I.,Rodrik,D.Patents,appropriate technology,and North-South trade.Journal of International Economics,1991,30:27-47.
[58]Dixit,A.and Stiglitz,J.Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity. American Economic Review,1977,67:297-308.
[59]Dominick Salvatore.International Economics (5th ed.).Prentice-Hall International, Inc.,1995.
[60]Either, Wilfred J. National and International Returns to Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade. American Economic Review,1982,72:389-405.
[61]Eaton, J., and S.Kortum. Trade in ideas:Patenting and productivity in the OECD. Journal of International Economics,1996,40:251-278.
[62]Ester Martinez-Ros.Explaining the decisions to carry out product and process innovation:the Spanish case. The Journal of High Technology Management Research,2000,10(2):223-242.
[63]Eswaran,M..Licensees as Entry Barriers. Canadian Journal of Economics,1994,27: 673-688.
[64]Eva Paus,Nola Reinhardt and Michael Robinson.Trade Liberalization And roductivity Growth in Latin American Manufacturing,1970-98.Policy Reform, March 2003,6(1).
[65]Everaert,L.,and F.N.D.Simone. Capital Operating Time and Total Factor Productivity Growth in France.IMF Working Paper 128,2003.
[66]Farrell,M.J.Measurement of Productive Efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Part3, Serial A,1957.
[67]Feenstra,Robert C.,and Judd.Kenneth L.Tariffs,Technology Transfer,and Welfare. Journal of Political Economy,1982,90(6):1142-1165.
[68]Feenstra, Robert. How costly is protectionism. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Summer,1992,6(3):159-178.
[69]Feenstra,R..Estimating the effects of trade policy. in(G.Grossman&K.Rogoff, eds.), Handbook of International Economics,1995,3:1553-1595,Amsterdam:Elsevier.
[70]Ferreira,P.C.and J.L.Rossi.New evidence on trade liberalization and productivity growth. Ensaios Econo.da EPGE 433,2001.
[71]Ferreira,P.C.;Trejos.A. and Vargas,F.G.Measuring the TFP Costs of Barrier to Trade. NBER Working Paper,2006,April.
[72]Fischer,Stanley.The Role of Macroeconomic Factors in Growth.Journal of Monetary Economics,1993,32(3):485-512.
[73]Findlay,R. Relative Backwardness, Direct Foreign Investment, and the Transfer of Technology:A Simple Dynamic Model.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1978,62:1-16.
[74]Fosfuri, A. and Arora, A. Licensing the Market for Technology.Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,2003,52,277-295.
[75]Francisco,R.and D.Rodrik.Trade Policy and Economic Growth:A Skeptic Guide to the Cross-National Evidence. NBER Working Paper, No.7081,1999.
[76]Frankel, J. and Romer, D.. Does trade cause growth? American Economic Review, 1999,89(3)(June):379-399.
[77]Frans A.Vollenbroek.Sustainable development and the challenge of innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production,2002,(10):215-223.
[78]Gabrielle Antille and Emilio Fontela. The Terms of Trade and the International Transfers of Productivity Gains.Economic Systems Research,2003,15(1).
[79]Gallini,N.T. Deterrence by Market Sharing:A Strategic Incentive for Licensing. American Economic Review,1984,74:931-941.
[80]Gandal Neil and Oz Shy. Standardization policy and international trade.Journal of international economy,2001,53:363-383.
[81]Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Kimberly Ann Elliott.Measuring the costs of protection in the United States. Washington:Institute for International Economics,1996. http://www.iie.com.
[82]Gong, B.H.,and R.C.Sickles.Finite Sample Evidence on the Performance of Stochastic Frontiers and Data Envelopment Analysis Using Panel Data. Journal of Econometrics,1992,51.
[83]Greenaway, David and Chong H. Nam. Industrialization and Macroeconomic Performance in developing countries under Alternative trade strategies. Kyklos, 1988,41(3):419-435.
[84]Gregory Tassey. Standardization in technology-based markets.Research Policy, 2000,29:587-602.
[85]Griffith,R.,S.Redding,and J.Van Reenen.R&D and Absorptive Capacity:From Theory to Data.Mimeo:London School of Economics,2000, November.
[86]Griliches Z.Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth.The Bell Journal of Economics,2001.
[87]Grossman G. M., and Helpman E. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press,1991a:212-230.
[88]Grossman M.G. and Helpman E. Endogenous product cycles.Economic Journal, 1991b,101:1214-1229.
[89]Grossman G, Helpman E.Quality ladders and product cycles. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991c,106:557-586.
[90]Grossman,G.M.,Helpman,E.Technology and trade.In:Grossman,G.M.,Rogoff,K. (Eds.),Handbook of International Economics,vol.III.Elsevier, Amsterdam,1995.
[91]Grossman,G.and Helpman,E..Protection for sale. American Economic Review, 1994,84 (4)(September):833-850.
[92]Hakura,D.and F.Jaumotte.The Role of Inter-and Intra-Industry Trade in Technology Diffusion.IMF Working Paper,1999,No.WP/58.
[93]Halit Yaniaya.Trade Openness and Economic Growth:Across-Country Empirical Investigation. Journal of Development Economics72,2003.
[94]Harberger,Arnold,C..Reflections on Economic growth in Asia and the Pacific. Journal of Asian Economics,7,3:365-392.
[95]Harrison,A.Openness and Growth:A Time-series,Cross-country Analysis for Developing Countries. Journal of Development Economics,1996,48:419-447.
[96]Harry Johnson.The cost of protection and the scientific tariffs.Journal of political Economy 1960,68(4):327-345.
[97]Helpman,E..International trade in the presence of product differentiation,economies of scale and monopolistic competition:A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin Approach. Journal of international Economy,1981,11(8):305-340.
[98]Helpman E.Innovation, Imitation and intellectual property rights.Econometrica, 1993,61:1247-1280.
[99]Hiau Looi Kee, Alessandro Nicita and Marcelo Olarreaga.Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices.The Economic Journal,2009,119:172-199.
[100]Hoekman,B.,Ng,F.and Olarreaga,M.Agricultural tariffs versus subsidies: what's more important for developing countries?.World Bank Economic Review, 2004,18(2)(May):175-204.
[101]Holly J.Raider.Market Structure and Innovation.Social Science Research,1998, 27:1-21.
[102]Horowitz,A.W.,Lai,E.L.-C.Patent length and rate of innovation.International Economic Review,1996,37:785-801.
[103]Hufbauer,G.C.,D.T.Berliner,and K.A.Elliot.Trade Protection in theUnited States: 31 Case Studies.Washington, D.C.:Institute for International Economics,1986.
[104]Hulten,C.R..Total Factor Productivity:A Short Biography.NBER Working Paper 7471,2000.
[105]James D.Adams.Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth. Journal of Political Economy,1990,98(41).
[106]James Harrigan. Openness to Trade in Manufactures in the OECD.Journal of International Economies 40,1996.
[107]Jan Van Cuilenburg and Paul Slaa.Competition and innovation in telecommunications:An empirical analysis of innovative telecommunications in the public inerest.Telecommunications policy,1995,19(8):647-663.
[108]Javier Carrillo-Hermosilla. A policy approach to the environmental impacts of technological lock-in. Ecological Economics,2006,58:717-742.
[109]Jean-Claude Nachega and Thomson Fontaine.Economic Growth and Total Factor Productivity in Niger.IMF WP/06/208, September 2006.
[110]Jesus Felipe.Total Factor Productivity Growth In East Asia:A Critical Survey. Asian Development Bank (Economics and Development Resource Center), September 1997.
[111]John S.Wilson and Tsunehiro Otsuk. Standards and Technical Regulations and Firms in Developing Countries.The World Bank,2004.
[112]Joosung J.Lee and Kiminori Gemba, Fumio Kodama. Analyzing the innovation process for environmental performance improvement.Technological Forecasting &Social Change,2006,73:290-301.
[113]Jorge Crespo, Carmela Martin and Francisco J.Velzquez.International Technology Diffusion through Imports and Its Impact on Economic Growth. Working Paper,2002, No.12.
[114]Judith Jordan.Product Standards, Innovation and Regulation.Technology Analysis and Strategic Management,1994,6(3):341-354.
[115]Kamal Saggi.Trade, Foreign Direct Investment,and International Technology Transfer:A Survey.The world bank.
[116]Keller, W.. Are international R&D spillovers trade-related?Analyzing spillovers among randomly matched trade partners.European Economic Review 1998,42: 1469-1481.
[117]Keller W. Knowledge Spillovers at the World's Technology Frontier.CEPR Working Paper,2001a, No.2815.
[118]Keller W.Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion. American Economic Review,2001b,92:120-142.
[119]Keller W.Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion.The American Economic Review,2002a,92(1):120-142.
[120]Keller W.Trade and the Transmission of Technology.Journal of Economic Growth,2002b,7(1):5-24.
[121]Keller,W..International technology diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004(XLII):752-782.
[122]Kim, Euysung.Trade Liberalization and productivity growth in Korea manufacturing industries:price protection, market power, and scale efficiency. Journal of Development economics,2000,62(1):55-83.
[123]Kim,N. Measuring the Costs of Visible Protection in Korea.Washington: Institute for International,Economics,1996,http://www.ie.com.
[124]Knut Blind and Christiane Hipp. The role of quality standards in innovative service companies:An empirical analysis for Germany.Technological forecasting and social change,2003,70:653-669.
[125]Kraft,K. Are product-and process-innovations independent of each other. Applied Economics,1990,22:1029-1038.
[126]Kremer,M. Patent buy-out:a mechanism for encouraging innovation.NBER Working Paper No.6304,1997.
[127]Krishna,K..Trade Restrictions as Facilitating Practices.Journal of International Economics,1989,26:251-270
[128]Krueger,Anne. Foreign Trade Regimes and economic development.Cambridge: Ballinger,1978.
[129]Krugman, Paul R. Increasing Return, Monopolistic competition,and international trade. Journal of Iinternational Economy,1979a (9):467-479.
[130]Krugman, Paul R.A Model of innovation, Technology Transfer, and the World distribution of income. Journal of Political Economy,1979b,87(2):253-266.
[131]Krugman,Paul.The Myth of Asia's Miracle.Foreign Affairs,1994:62-78.
[132]Kwang H. and Watanabe C. Dynamic process of technology spillover:a transfer function approach. Tech-innovation,2002,22:437-444.
[133]Lai,E.L.-C..International intellectual property rights protection and rate of product innovation. Journal of Development Economics,1998,55:133-153.
[134]Lai,E.L.-C.,Qiu,L.D..The North's intellectual property rights standard for the South? ournal of International Economics,2003(59):183-209.
[135]Lancaster,K.J..Intra-industry trade under perfect monopolistic competition. Journal of Iinternational Economy,1980,10(5):151-175.
[136]Leamer,E..Cross-section estimation of the effects of trade barriers.in (Robert Feenstra, ed.),Empirical Methods for International Trade,Boston:MIT Press, 1988a:52-82.
[137]Leamer,E..Measuring of Openness, Trade Policy and Empirical Analysis. Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1988b.
[138]Leamer,E..Latin America as a target of trade barriers erected by the major developed countries in 1983.Journal of Development Economics,1990,32(2) (April):337-368.
[139]Lee G. Direct versus indirect international R &D spillovers.lnformation Economics and Policy,2005,17:334-348.
[140]Lee, J. and Swagel, P..Trade barriers and trade flows across countries and industries. Review of Economics and Statistics,1997,79(3)(August):372-382.
[141]LEE,T. and L.L. Wilde. Market Structure and Innovation:A Reformulation. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1980,94:429-436.
[142]Li Chol-Won.On the policy implications of endogenous technological progress. The Economic Journal,2001,111:164-179.
[143]Lichtenberg,F.,and B.van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie.International R&D spillovers:a comment. European Economic Review,1998,42:1483-1491.
[144]Lin,P.and Saggi,K..Incentives for Foreign Direct Investment under Imitation. Canadian Journal of Economics,1999,32:1275-1298.
[145]Lionel Fontagn e, Friedrich von-Kirchbach and Mondher Mimouni.An Assessment of Environmentally-Related Non-Tariff Measures.The World Economy,2005,28(10):1417-1439.
[146]Lucas,R.E.Jr. On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics,1988,22:3-42.
[147]Mansfield.Edwin,Rappoport,J.,Romeo,A.,Wagner,S.,and Beardsley,G.Social and Private Rates of Return from Industrial Innovation. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1977,91:221-240.
[148]Mansfield.Edwin,Schwartz,Mark, and Wagner,Smuel. Imitation Costs and patents:An empirical study.The Economic Journal,1981,91:907-918.
[149]Mansfield, E.and A.Romeo. Technology Transfer to Overseas Subsidiaries by U.S. Based Firms. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1980,94(4):737-750.
[150]Mansfield,E. How rapidly does industrial technology leak out?.Journal of Industrial Economics,1988,34(2):217-223.
[151]Maria Leticia Santos-Vijande, Luis Ignacio Alvarez-Gonzalezb.Innovativeness and organizational innovation in total quality oriented firms:The moderating role of market turbulence. Techinnovation,2007,27:514-532.
[152]Mark Vancauteren. The impact of technical barriers to trade on home bias:an application to EU data. Working paper:20052/8/8.
[153]Markusen J,Venables A. Trade policy with increasing returns and imperfect competition:Contradictory results from competing assumptions. Journal of International Economics,1998,24:299-316.
[154]Maskus,K.E. The international regulation of intellectual property. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv,1998,134:186-208.
[155]Maskus,K.E.,Penubarti,M.How trade-related are intellectual property rights? Journal of International Economics,1995,39:227-248.
[156]Matsuyama, K..Perfect Equilibrium in a Trade Liberalization Game.American Economic Review,1990,80:480-492.
[157]Matsuyama K. Agricultural productivity, comparative advantage,and economic growth. Journal of Economic Theory,1992,58:317-334.
[158]McCulloch,R.and Yellen,Janet L.Technology Transfer and the National Advantage.Harvard Inst,Econ.Res.Discussion Paper no.526.Cambridge,Mass: Harvard Univ.,1976.
[159]Melitz, M..The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity.Econometrica,2003,71(6):1695-1725.
[160]Messerlin, P. and Owen, R.F.. Preliminary Study on Costs of Protection in the European Union. Washington:Institute for International Economics,1996.http:// www.iie.com.yoko.
[161]Miller.S.M.,Upadhyay.M.P..The Effects of Openness,Trade Orientation and Human Capital on Total Factor Productivity Journal of development Economics, 2000,63.
[162]Miyagiwa, K. and Y. Ohno.Closing. the Technology Gap Under Protection American Economic Review,199585:755-770.
[163]Miyagiwa,K.and Y.Ohno.Credibility of protection and incentives to innovate. International Economic Review,1999,40(1):755-770
[164]M. Scott Taylor. TRIPS, trade, and technology transfer. The Canadian Journal of Economics,1993,26(3):625-637.
[165]Neruh,Vikram and Asok Dhareshwar.A New Database on Human Physical Capital Stock:Sources, Methodology and Results. Revista de Analisis Economico (Economic Analysis Review),1993,8(1):37-59.
[166]Neruh, Vikram and Asok Dhareshwar. New Estimates of Total Factor Productivity growth for developing and industrial countries. Policy research Working paper 1313, The World Bank,1994.
[167]Nogues,J.,Olechowski,A.and Winters,L.A..Extent of non-tariff barriers to industrial countries imports. World Bank Economic Review,2003,1(1):181-199.
[168]North, Douglass.Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
[169]OECD. Patterns and pervasiveness of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in OECD member countries.ECO/CPE/WP1/GE(96)/3,1995, Paris.
[170]OECD.OECD Factbook 2008:Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics. ISBN 92-64-04054-4,2008.
[171]Pack,Howard and Kamal Saggi.Inflows of Foreign Technology and Indigenous Technological Development. Review of Development Economics,1997,1(1):81-98.
[172]Panagariya, A.. Alternative Approaches to Measuring the Costs of Protection. mimeo:University of Maryland,January,2002.
[173]Pardos, E. and Carmen, F.. Alternative Measures for Trade Restrictiveness:A Gravity Approach. Seventh Annual Conference Discussion Paper,8-10 September, 2005,University College Dublin.
[174]Paul Romer. New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions. Journal of Development Economics,1994(43):5-38.
[175]P.J.Lloyd and D.MacLaren. Measures of trade openness using CGE analysis. Journal of policy Modeling,2002.
[176]Porter, M.E. and C.van der Linde.Toward a new conception of the environment competitiveness relationship. Journal of economy perspective,1995,(9):97-118.
[177]Porter, M.E. and C.van der Linde..Green and competitiveness:ending the stalemate. Harvard business review,1995,73(5):120-134.
[178]Posner, M. International Trade and Technical Change. Oxford Economic Papers, 1961, (13):323-341.
[179]Pradeep Dubey and Chien-wei Wu. When less competition induces more product innovation. Economics Letters,2002,74:309-312.
[180]Prichett, Lant. Measuring Outward Orientation in Developing Countries:Can it be Done?.World bank,1991.
[181]Prichett,Lant and Sethi,Geeta.Tariff Rates,Tariff Revenue and Tariff Reform: Some New Facts.World Bank Economic Review,1994,8(1):1-16.
[182]Qiu, L.D., Lai, E.L.-C. Protection of trade for innovation:the role of Northern and Southern Tariffs. Japan and the World Economy,2004,(16):449-470.
[183]Quah, Danny, and James E. Rauch. Openness and the rate of economic growth. preliminary draft, UCSD,1990.
[184]Raymond Atje and Gary C. Hufbauer. The market structure benefits of trade and investment liberalization. Institute for International Economics,1996:1-47.
[185]Reingantum, J.F..The Timing of Innovation:Research, Development and Diffusion.in R.Schmalensee and R.D.Willig,eds.,Handbook of Industrial Organization (Amsterdam:North-Holland,1989,Chapter14).
[186]Renuka Mahadevan. Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth in Australian Manufacturing Industries. AEJ,June 2002,30(2).
[187]Richard Harris.Trade Liberalization and Industrial Organization:Some Estimates for Canada.Journal of Political Economy,February,1984:115-145.
[188]Richard G.Lipsey,Kenneth I.Carlaw.Total factor Production and The measurement of technological change.Canadian Journal of Economics,2004,37 (4): 1118-1150.
[189]Rivera-Batiz,L.A.and P.M.Romer.Economic integration andendogenous growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106:531-555.
[190]Robert,H.A.and Sriram,D.R..The role of standards in innovation.Journal of Technological Forecasting and Social Change,2000,64(6):171-181.
[191]Robert M. Solow. Technical Change and the Aggregate Productivity Function. The Review of Economics and Statistics,1957,39:312-320.
[192]Robert W.Vossen. Market Power, Industrial Concentration and Innovative Activity.
[193]Rockett, K. E..Choosing the Competition and Patent Licensing. RAND Journal of Economics,1990,21:161-171.
[194]Rodriguez and Carlos Alfredo. Trade in Technical Knowledge and the national Advantage.Journal of Political Economy,1975,83(1):121-135.
[195]Rodriguez, F. and Rodrik, D.. Trade policy and growth:a skeptic's guide to the cross national evidence.in (Ben Bernanke and Kenneth S. Rogoff,eds), Macroeconomics Annual 2000,2001:261-324, Cambridge:MIT Press for NBER.
[196]Rodrik,D.. Closing the Technology Gap:Does Trade Liberalization Really Help?. Cambridge NBER Working Paper, No.2654,1988.
[197]Romer P.M. Endogenous Technological Change. Journal of Political Economy, 1990,98:71-102.
[198]Romer P.M.Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth. Journal of Political Economy,1986,94:1002-1037.
[199]Ruffin, Roy J.Tariffs,Intermediate Goods,and Domestic Protection.The American economic Review,1969,59(3):261-269.
[200]Ruffin, Roy J. Tariffs, Intermediate Goods, and Domestic Protection:Reply.The American economic Review,1970,60(5):964-967.
[201]Sachs J. D. and Warner A. Economic reform and the process of global integration. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,1995(1):1-118.
[202]Sadahiko,Kano.Technical innovations, standardization and regional comparison: a case study in mobile communications.Telecommunication Policy,2000,(24):305-321.
[203]Salim,R.A.. Capacity Realization and Productivity Growth in a Developing Country:Has Economic Reform Had Impact?. Ashgate Publishing Ltd,1999.
[204]Sang-Seung Yi. Market Structure and incentives to Innovate:the case of Cournot oligopoly. Economics Letters,1999,65:379-388.
[205]Satish Chand and Kunal Sen. Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth: Evidence from Indian Manufacturing. Review of Development Economies,2002,6 (1):120-132.
[206]Schiff M.,Wang Y. and OLarreaga M. North-south and south-south trade-related technology diffusion:an industry-level analysis[EB]. Policy Research Working Paper Series,No.2861,Development Research Group,The World Bank, 2002.
[207]Sebastian Edwards. Openness, Productivity Growth:What Do We Really Know?.The Economic Journal,1998,108(March):383-389.
[208]Selin Ozyurtl.Total Factor Productivity Growth in Chinese Industry,1952-2005. IMF working paper13,2007.
[209]Shane Greenstein. Market Structure and Innovation:A Brief Synopsis of Recent Thinking,2002,February,20.
[210]Shi, J. Are Currency Appreciations Contractionary in China? NBER Working Papers, Sep.2006,No.12551.
[211]Simon Cowan and Siclair P.Trade Technology and Growth:an Introduction. Oxford Economic Paper,51:1-3.
[212]Smith, P.J. Are weak patent rights a barrier to US exports? Journal of International Economics,1999,48:151-177.
[213]Solow, Robert M. A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1956,70:65-94.
[214]Solow, Robert M. Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function. Review of Economics and Statistics,1957,39:312-320.
[215]Spence,M.. Cost reduction, competition and industry performance. Econometrica,1984(LII):101-121.
[216]Spencer Henson. Costs associated with divergent national product standards and conformity assessment procedures and the impact on international trade. Regulatory reform in the global economy Asian and Latin American perspectives, OECD,1998.
[217]S.P.Magee,W.A.Brock and L.young.Black Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy Theory.Cambridge and New York:Cambridge University Press,1989.
[218]Staiger, R.W. and GTabellini. Discretionary Trade Policy and Excessive Protection. American Economic Review,1987,67:823-837.
[219]Stokey N. Human capital, product quality and growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106(2):587-616.
[220]Subal C. Kumbhakar. Estimation and decomposition of Productivity change when Production is not efficient:a Panel data approach.Econometric Reviews, 2000,19(4):425-460.
[221]Sun Ling Wang. Openness And Productivity Growth In Taiwan. Paper for Doctor's degree in the Graduate College at the University of Nebraska,2001.
[222]Taylor, M.S.. TRIPs, trade and technology transfer. Canadian Journal of Economics,1993,26:625-638.
[223]Taylor M. Quality ladders ad ricardian trade. Journal of International Economics,1993,34:225-243.
[224]Tornell, A.. Time Inconsistency of Protectionist Programs:On the Ineffectiveness of Investment-Contingent Subsidies. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106:963-974.
[225]Trefler,D.. Trade liberalization and the theory of endogenous protection:an econometric study of US import policy. Journal of Political Economy,1993,101(1) (February):138-160.
[226]UNCTAD. Trade and Development Report, Annex 1 to Chap ter III:"Growth and Classification of World Merchandise Exports",2002.
[227]Van Elkan, R. Catching up and Slowing down:Learning and Growth Patterns in an Open Economy. Journal of International Economics,1996,41:95-111.
[228]Vernon,R. International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1966,83:190-207.
[229]Vossen,R.W. and B.Nooteboom.. Firm Size and Participation in R&D, in A.H. Kleinknecht(ed.),Determinants of Innovation. The Message from New Indicators, 1996.
[230]Wang, X.H.. Fee versus rovalty licensing in a Cournot duopoly model. Economics Letters,1998,60:55-62.
[231]W.Grains,Jaime de Melo and Shujiro Urata.A general equilibrium estimation of the effects of reduction in tariffs and quantitive restrictions in Turkey in 1978.,in Srinivasan, T.N. and John Whalley, General equilibrium Trade policy Modeling, Cambridge,Massachusetts:MIT press,1986:61-88.
[232]William H. Redmond. Interconnectivity in diffusion of innovations and market competition.Journal of Business Research,2004(57):1295-1302.
[233]Wolf, Holger. Trade Orientation:Measurement and Consequences.Estudios de Economia,1993.
[234]Wu,Y..China's Economic Growth. A miracle with Chinese Characteristics. London and New York:Routledge Curzon,2004.
[235]Yang G, Maskus K. Intellectual property rights, licensing and innovation in an endogenous product-cycle model. Journal of International Economics,2001,53: 169-187.
[236]Yan Wang and Yudong Yao.Sources of China's Economic Growth 1952-1999: Incorporating Human capital accumulation. China Economic Review,2003,(14): 32-52.
[237]Yi, S. S.. Whom to License Patented Technology. Managerial and Decision Economics,1998,19:189-195.
[238]Young, Allyn. Increasing Returns and Economic Progress. The Economic Journal,1928,38:527-542.
[239]Young, Alwyn. Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing. Journal of Political Economy,1993,101:443-472.
[240]Young Alwyn. Learning by doing and the dynamic effects of international trade.Quarterly Journal of Economics,1991,106:369-406.
[241]Young, Alwyn.The Tyranny of Numbers:Confronting the Statistical Realities of the East Asian Growth Experience. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1995,109 (3):641-680.
[242]Zigic, K.. Strategic trade policy, intellectual property rights protection, and North-South trade. Journal of Development Economics 2000,61:27-60.