跨国公司在华并购对我国产业发展影响的研究
|
摘要
企业并购浪潮在美国已经出现过六次之多,除第五次外,其余的每次并购浪潮之后都会出现严重的经济萧条,这并非一种偶然现象,其中必然隐含某种规律。而关于企业并购的研究,大多是从微观经济视角分析并购对企业本身能带来什么优势和额外收益,也有学者从宏观经济视角研究跨国公司并购对我国经济安全和市场结构的影响,但很少有学者从产业视角研究跨国公司在华并购所产生的影响。近年来,我国企业间的并购活动异常活跃,跨国公司在华并购也越来越多,企业间并购,特别是跨国公司在华并购如何影响我国产业的发展,是一个需要深入探讨的问题。目前,在我国主流经济学和地方政府招商引资的跨国公司情结下,全面分析跨国公司在华并购对我国产业发展的长期影响显得尤为重要。
首先,本文对比分析相关并购理论和企业并购绩效的实证研究,发现企业并购后的绩效并非一致支持相应的理论,而更多地显示出并购活动没有达到相关企业的预期目标,这说明企业并购理论与实证结果之间存在悖论。本文研究认为出现悖论的主要原因是:(1)并购理论在提出并购可以节省费用或并购协同时,忽略了由于并购而使得计划安排费用、部门协调费用等的增加;(2)并购绩效实证研究中所利用的数据大部分是针对上市公司,而一般来说参与并购活动的上市公司规模大,并购后规模更加庞大,并购后的整合成本超过并购收益;(3)企业并购的目的多样,而并购绩效实证研究一般仅仅以会计核算为基础的指标进行衡量。
其次,针对美国几乎每次并购浪潮后都会出现经济萧条这一现象,本文进行深入分析并给出解释。当把一个经济体划分为产业经济系统和非产业社会体系,可以发现,产业经济直接创造社会财富,而非产业社会体系中的部门则有更强的社会财富集聚和掠夺功能;金融资本和产业企业中脱离生产的资本,往往把并购活动作为社会财富集聚的工具,当它们通过频繁的企业并购活动集聚了大量社会财富时,一方面,这些社会财富不再进入产业生产过程,产业经济增长所必需的资本存量减少,这必将从数量上减少所能创造的社会财富;另一方面,社会大众的财富被集聚和掠夺使可用于消费的部分减少,抑制消费使市场萎缩。因此,并购浪潮后的经济衰退不可避免。
第三,本文利用复杂系统网络理论对产业经济运行机制进行分析后认为,(1)产业链在纵向分工和专业化过程中不断裂解而变长,在横向竞争、模仿和学习中分解而变宽,产业链中的企业不断超越所在产业链向其他产业链渗透,产业经济具有自增长机制;分工和专业化,竞争、模仿和学习促进产业的技术进步和升级。(2)企业并购,特别是大企业的并购行为破坏了产业经济自增长机制和技术进步升级机制,扭曲了产业发展方向和产业结构。(3)由于并购导致社会财富的集聚和掠夺,加剧了社会两极分化,阻碍了社会和谐发展。
第四,本文归纳提出跨国公司在华的三种典型性并购行为:市场挤出式并购、技术挤出式并购和品牌挤出式并购。进一步研究发现:(1)跨国公司在华市场挤出式并购可能导致我国产业发展的核心资源和关键环节被跨国公司控制,使我国产业成为跨国公司全球战略安排的一个“大车间”;(2)跨国公司在华技术挤出式并购可能导致我国产业发展所需要的技术积累机制被破坏,产业技术升级和产业技术发展的“跨国公司导向化”特征,从而使我国产业被跨国公司从技术上“外围化”;(3)跨国公司在华品牌挤出式并购将使我国产业市场中企业缺乏品牌核心,产业市场围绕跨国公司品牌运作,产业市场被跨国公司品牌主导可能使我国产业被市场“边缘化”。跨国公司在华三种挤出式并购可能形成我国企业在资源配置、技术发展和市场控制等方面失去主导地位,在经济衰退时,跨国公司的全球安排可能加剧我国经济恢复困难。
综上所述,跨国公司在华并购的长期结果对我国产业经济的发展具有副作用,政府必须加强企业并购的管理以使我国产业经济长期稳定发展的外部环境。
本研究工作的主要创新性集中在如下三个方面:(1)基于对大量有关并购绩效文献的分析研究,不仅提出(长期以来被国内外研究者通常忽视的)“并购悖论”问题,而且对该问题的产生进行了深入探讨并予以理论解释。(2)通过把社会经济划分为产业经济系统和非产业社会体系,基于对美国并购浪潮后伴随的经济危机的分析,深入研究了非产业社会系统通过并购集聚大量社会财富,抑制产业技术升级机制和破坏产业经济自增长机制的负面作用。这一研究成果至少在国内该领域具有明显的领先性和开拓性。(3)全面、系统研究了跨国公司在华的三类典型性并购行为(“市场挤出式”、“技术挤出式”和“品牌挤出式”)对我国产业发展的主要影响及其作用机制,据此,提出关于并购的政府治理选择理论和有关的对策建议。
There have been 6 merger waves occured in American history, and each wave except the fifth one is followed by serious depression. Thus the phenomenon took place not just by accident, but some kind of implications. Among literatures about mergers and acquisition(M&A), most of them are from the micro-level perspective to study the acquiring firm's obtainable strenth and additional profit created by M&A. And some are from the macro-level perspective to study the impact on economic security and market stucture by M&A. However, few of them are from the industry-level perspective to study the impact of cross-border M&A in China(acquisitions that initiated by multinational firms in China). In recent years, M&A in our country is extraordinary frequent, including the cross-border M&A. It's necessary to make a thorough study of the influence on industrial development by M&A, especially cross-border M&A. Under the circumstances of our country's mainstream economy and our governments' inviting investments from oversea, it's extremely important to have a more comprehensive analysis of long-term effects on industrial development, which is influenced by cross-border M&A in China.
First of all, this paper reviews the theories of M&A and the empirical studies of M&A, compares the post-merger performance of theoretical and empirical, finds out they are inconsistent, and the empirical studies show that the performance is more likely to not meet the expected goal. It indicates the paradox between theoretical and empirical. And the paper figures the main reasons which drive the paradox are: (1) While the theory of M&A emphasizes cost reduction and synergy, it disregards the expense of plan arrangement and department coordination increasing. (2) The empirical studies of M&A are mostly based on listed companies, whose asset sizes are generally large. And the sizes may become even much larger after mergers, thus the post-merger integration cost may exceed the value created by M&A. (3) Goals in M&A are various, some kind of objectives cannot be measured quantitatively just by accounting ratios. However, most of the empirical studies in M&A just measure them based on accounting.
Secondly, to the phenomenon of "each merger wave would be followed by serious depression", this paper will make a more comprehensive analysis and then interpret it. In case of dividing the economic system into industry system and non-industry system, we could discover that the industry system creats social wealth directly, while the non-industry system just accumulates and plunders social wealth. Financial capital, especially capital extracted from industrial production, tends to be used in M&A which is a tool of gathering social wealth. Once M&A activities become more and more frequent, a great quantity of social wealth would not be applied in industrial production. The required capital for economic growth is reduced, thus it will reduce the social wealth that can be created. On the other side, the accumulation and plunderage of social wealth would reduce the part that can be consumed, thus inhibit the consumption and let the market shrinking. Therefore, after merger wave, the depression is inevitable.
Thirdly, this paper makes an analysis of industrial operational mechanism based on the theory of complex network, and concludes that: (1) The industrial chain is decomposed and becomes longer while vertical specialization, and it is broader while horizontal competition, imitation and learning. Enterprises in one industrial chain are penetrating to other industrial chains constantly, the industrial economy has its own self-growth mechanism. Specialization, competition, imitation and learning enhance the technical progress and industrial upgrading. (2) M&A, especially of large firms, ruins the self-growth mechanism and technical upgrading, thus distorts the direction of industrial development and industrial structure. (3) The accumulation and plunderage of social wealth caused by M&A would exacerbate social polarization and impede the harmonious development of society.
Fourthly, this paper summarizes three typical cross-boader M&A in China: market power squeeze-out merger, technique squeeze-out merger and brand squeeze-out merger. With a further study, it finds out that: (1) Market power squeeze-out merger may let the core resources and the sticking point of industrial development dominated by multinational firms, thus our country's industry is just a "big shop" for their global strategy arrangement. (2) Technique squeeze-out merger may make the self-growth mechanism for industrial development destroyed, and let the upgrading of industrial technology and the direction of industrial development dominated by multinational firms, thus the technology of our country's industry is "peripheral". (3) Brand squeeze-out merger may result in the market that full of international brands rather than our own core brands, thus our country's industry is "marginalized" by their brand dominating. Therefore, the above three type of squeeze-out mergers could lead to our losing dominant positions in resource allocation, technology development and market power. And in times of economic depression, multinational firms' global arrangements may exacerbate economic hardship of our own.
In summary, the long-term consequence of cross-border M&A in China has side effects. Government must strengthen management of M&A so as to enable our country's industry be in the external environment that can bring long-term stable development.
Inovations of this paper concentrate on the following three aspects: (1)Based on a great deal of literature research on M&A, this paper not only figures out "paradox of M&A" (which is usually disregarded by studies at home or abroad in the long run), but also makes a more comprehensive analysis of the paradox generating and then gives the theoretical interpretation. (2)Dividing the economic system into industry system and non-industry system, grounding on the analysis of economic depression after merger wave in USA, this paper makes a thorough study, pointing out the non-industry system just accumulates and plunders social wealth through M&A, thus it has the side-effect of inhibiting industrial upgrading mechanism and destroying self-growth mechanism. Such research findings take the lead and also the pioneer in domestic research. (3) This paper makes a comprehensive and systematic study of effects and mechanism to industrial development by the three typical cross-boader M&A in China(market power squeeze-out merger, technique squeeze-out merger and brand squeeze-out merger), then brings forward the government Choice Theory to M&A and the related countermeasures accordingly.
首先,本文对比分析相关并购理论和企业并购绩效的实证研究,发现企业并购后的绩效并非一致支持相应的理论,而更多地显示出并购活动没有达到相关企业的预期目标,这说明企业并购理论与实证结果之间存在悖论。本文研究认为出现悖论的主要原因是:(1)并购理论在提出并购可以节省费用或并购协同时,忽略了由于并购而使得计划安排费用、部门协调费用等的增加;(2)并购绩效实证研究中所利用的数据大部分是针对上市公司,而一般来说参与并购活动的上市公司规模大,并购后规模更加庞大,并购后的整合成本超过并购收益;(3)企业并购的目的多样,而并购绩效实证研究一般仅仅以会计核算为基础的指标进行衡量。
其次,针对美国几乎每次并购浪潮后都会出现经济萧条这一现象,本文进行深入分析并给出解释。当把一个经济体划分为产业经济系统和非产业社会体系,可以发现,产业经济直接创造社会财富,而非产业社会体系中的部门则有更强的社会财富集聚和掠夺功能;金融资本和产业企业中脱离生产的资本,往往把并购活动作为社会财富集聚的工具,当它们通过频繁的企业并购活动集聚了大量社会财富时,一方面,这些社会财富不再进入产业生产过程,产业经济增长所必需的资本存量减少,这必将从数量上减少所能创造的社会财富;另一方面,社会大众的财富被集聚和掠夺使可用于消费的部分减少,抑制消费使市场萎缩。因此,并购浪潮后的经济衰退不可避免。
第三,本文利用复杂系统网络理论对产业经济运行机制进行分析后认为,(1)产业链在纵向分工和专业化过程中不断裂解而变长,在横向竞争、模仿和学习中分解而变宽,产业链中的企业不断超越所在产业链向其他产业链渗透,产业经济具有自增长机制;分工和专业化,竞争、模仿和学习促进产业的技术进步和升级。(2)企业并购,特别是大企业的并购行为破坏了产业经济自增长机制和技术进步升级机制,扭曲了产业发展方向和产业结构。(3)由于并购导致社会财富的集聚和掠夺,加剧了社会两极分化,阻碍了社会和谐发展。
第四,本文归纳提出跨国公司在华的三种典型性并购行为:市场挤出式并购、技术挤出式并购和品牌挤出式并购。进一步研究发现:(1)跨国公司在华市场挤出式并购可能导致我国产业发展的核心资源和关键环节被跨国公司控制,使我国产业成为跨国公司全球战略安排的一个“大车间”;(2)跨国公司在华技术挤出式并购可能导致我国产业发展所需要的技术积累机制被破坏,产业技术升级和产业技术发展的“跨国公司导向化”特征,从而使我国产业被跨国公司从技术上“外围化”;(3)跨国公司在华品牌挤出式并购将使我国产业市场中企业缺乏品牌核心,产业市场围绕跨国公司品牌运作,产业市场被跨国公司品牌主导可能使我国产业被市场“边缘化”。跨国公司在华三种挤出式并购可能形成我国企业在资源配置、技术发展和市场控制等方面失去主导地位,在经济衰退时,跨国公司的全球安排可能加剧我国经济恢复困难。
综上所述,跨国公司在华并购的长期结果对我国产业经济的发展具有副作用,政府必须加强企业并购的管理以使我国产业经济长期稳定发展的外部环境。
本研究工作的主要创新性集中在如下三个方面:(1)基于对大量有关并购绩效文献的分析研究,不仅提出(长期以来被国内外研究者通常忽视的)“并购悖论”问题,而且对该问题的产生进行了深入探讨并予以理论解释。(2)通过把社会经济划分为产业经济系统和非产业社会体系,基于对美国并购浪潮后伴随的经济危机的分析,深入研究了非产业社会系统通过并购集聚大量社会财富,抑制产业技术升级机制和破坏产业经济自增长机制的负面作用。这一研究成果至少在国内该领域具有明显的领先性和开拓性。(3)全面、系统研究了跨国公司在华的三类典型性并购行为(“市场挤出式”、“技术挤出式”和“品牌挤出式”)对我国产业发展的主要影响及其作用机制,据此,提出关于并购的政府治理选择理论和有关的对策建议。
There have been 6 merger waves occured in American history, and each wave except the fifth one is followed by serious depression. Thus the phenomenon took place not just by accident, but some kind of implications. Among literatures about mergers and acquisition(M&A), most of them are from the micro-level perspective to study the acquiring firm's obtainable strenth and additional profit created by M&A. And some are from the macro-level perspective to study the impact on economic security and market stucture by M&A. However, few of them are from the industry-level perspective to study the impact of cross-border M&A in China(acquisitions that initiated by multinational firms in China). In recent years, M&A in our country is extraordinary frequent, including the cross-border M&A. It's necessary to make a thorough study of the influence on industrial development by M&A, especially cross-border M&A. Under the circumstances of our country's mainstream economy and our governments' inviting investments from oversea, it's extremely important to have a more comprehensive analysis of long-term effects on industrial development, which is influenced by cross-border M&A in China.
First of all, this paper reviews the theories of M&A and the empirical studies of M&A, compares the post-merger performance of theoretical and empirical, finds out they are inconsistent, and the empirical studies show that the performance is more likely to not meet the expected goal. It indicates the paradox between theoretical and empirical. And the paper figures the main reasons which drive the paradox are: (1) While the theory of M&A emphasizes cost reduction and synergy, it disregards the expense of plan arrangement and department coordination increasing. (2) The empirical studies of M&A are mostly based on listed companies, whose asset sizes are generally large. And the sizes may become even much larger after mergers, thus the post-merger integration cost may exceed the value created by M&A. (3) Goals in M&A are various, some kind of objectives cannot be measured quantitatively just by accounting ratios. However, most of the empirical studies in M&A just measure them based on accounting.
Secondly, to the phenomenon of "each merger wave would be followed by serious depression", this paper will make a more comprehensive analysis and then interpret it. In case of dividing the economic system into industry system and non-industry system, we could discover that the industry system creats social wealth directly, while the non-industry system just accumulates and plunders social wealth. Financial capital, especially capital extracted from industrial production, tends to be used in M&A which is a tool of gathering social wealth. Once M&A activities become more and more frequent, a great quantity of social wealth would not be applied in industrial production. The required capital for economic growth is reduced, thus it will reduce the social wealth that can be created. On the other side, the accumulation and plunderage of social wealth would reduce the part that can be consumed, thus inhibit the consumption and let the market shrinking. Therefore, after merger wave, the depression is inevitable.
Thirdly, this paper makes an analysis of industrial operational mechanism based on the theory of complex network, and concludes that: (1) The industrial chain is decomposed and becomes longer while vertical specialization, and it is broader while horizontal competition, imitation and learning. Enterprises in one industrial chain are penetrating to other industrial chains constantly, the industrial economy has its own self-growth mechanism. Specialization, competition, imitation and learning enhance the technical progress and industrial upgrading. (2) M&A, especially of large firms, ruins the self-growth mechanism and technical upgrading, thus distorts the direction of industrial development and industrial structure. (3) The accumulation and plunderage of social wealth caused by M&A would exacerbate social polarization and impede the harmonious development of society.
Fourthly, this paper summarizes three typical cross-boader M&A in China: market power squeeze-out merger, technique squeeze-out merger and brand squeeze-out merger. With a further study, it finds out that: (1) Market power squeeze-out merger may let the core resources and the sticking point of industrial development dominated by multinational firms, thus our country's industry is just a "big shop" for their global strategy arrangement. (2) Technique squeeze-out merger may make the self-growth mechanism for industrial development destroyed, and let the upgrading of industrial technology and the direction of industrial development dominated by multinational firms, thus the technology of our country's industry is "peripheral". (3) Brand squeeze-out merger may result in the market that full of international brands rather than our own core brands, thus our country's industry is "marginalized" by their brand dominating. Therefore, the above three type of squeeze-out mergers could lead to our losing dominant positions in resource allocation, technology development and market power. And in times of economic depression, multinational firms' global arrangements may exacerbate economic hardship of our own.
In summary, the long-term consequence of cross-border M&A in China has side effects. Government must strengthen management of M&A so as to enable our country's industry be in the external environment that can bring long-term stable development.
Inovations of this paper concentrate on the following three aspects: (1)Based on a great deal of literature research on M&A, this paper not only figures out "paradox of M&A" (which is usually disregarded by studies at home or abroad in the long run), but also makes a more comprehensive analysis of the paradox generating and then gives the theoretical interpretation. (2)Dividing the economic system into industry system and non-industry system, grounding on the analysis of economic depression after merger wave in USA, this paper makes a thorough study, pointing out the non-industry system just accumulates and plunders social wealth through M&A, thus it has the side-effect of inhibiting industrial upgrading mechanism and destroying self-growth mechanism. Such research findings take the lead and also the pioneer in domestic research. (3) This paper makes a comprehensive and systematic study of effects and mechanism to industrial development by the three typical cross-boader M&A in China(market power squeeze-out merger, technique squeeze-out merger and brand squeeze-out merger), then brings forward the government Choice Theory to M&A and the related countermeasures accordingly.
引文
[1]艾青,向正军.企业并购的动因与理论分析[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2004(20)
[2]奥利弗 E 威廉姆森,西德尼 G 温特编.姚海鑫,邢源源译.企业的性质--起源、演变和发展[M].商务印书馆,2007
[3]奥利弗 E 威廉姆森.反托拉斯经济学--兼并、协约和策略行为[M].经济科学出版社,1999
[4]白光.“引狼入室”多敌手[M].中国物价出版社,2001
[5]曹建伟,张鹏.复制“群居链”-跨国公司加速将全球商业模式转移到中国闭[J].IT 经理世界,2001(18)
[6]陈佳贵,王钦.跨国公司并购与大型国有企业改革[J].中国工业经济,2003(4)
[7]陈琪,荀茂生.社会主义市场经济学[M].湖南人民出版社,第三版:34-35
[8]陈淑红.经济全球化趋势下的国家经济安全[M].湖南人民出版社,2005
[9]陈燕萍.中国外商并购投资的理性思考[J].武汉大学学报(社科版),2007(7):513-518
[10]戴维 C 科顿,王道勇译.当公司控制世界[M].广东人民出版社,2006
[11]邓伟根.产业转型:经验、问题与策略[M].经济管理出版社,2006
[12]董富华.政府在企业并购中的角色定位及制度创新.学术交流,2003(9)
[13]杜慕群.企业核心竞争力:理论、实证与案例[M].经济科学出版社,2004
[14]范从来,袁静.成长性、成熟性和衰退性产业上市公司并购绩效的实证分析[J].中国工业经济,2002(8):65-72
[15]方芳,闰晓彤.中国上市公司并购绩效与思考[J].经济理论与经济管理,2002(8):43-48
[16]方芳.中国上市公司并购绩效的经济学分析[M].北京,中国金融出版社,2003
[17]冯根福,吴林江.我国上市公司并购绩效的实证研究[J].经济研究,2001(1):54-68
[18]冯益湘.上市公司资产重组绩效的实证分析[J].湖南商学院学报,2001(8):60-62
[19]冯云,吴冲锋.经济全球化测度理论[M].上海交通大学出版社,2005
[20]冯子标.企业间的经济技术关系与并购模式[J].经济学家,2001(5):17-21
[21]高见,陈歆玮.中国证券市场资产重组效应分析[J].经济科学,2000(1):66-77
[22]高见,陈欲伟.我国证券市场资产重组效应分析[J].投资与证券,2000(3)
[23]顾保国,顾炜宇.跨国公司技术转移溢出效应理论模型分析[J].唯实探讨,2007:21-224
[24]顾自安.关于企业及其性质的比较分析.厦门大学经济研究所
[25]郭永清.我国上市公司资产并购绩效实证分析[J].青海金融,2000(6):41-44
[26]韩彩珍.外资并购国内企业的问题及政策取向[J].中国外资,2006(1)
[27]韩世坤.全球企业并购研究[M].人民出版社,2002
[28]胡峰.跨国公司在华并购论[M].广东经济出版社,2003
[29]黄正多,戴江涛.论跨国公司的技术转移与印度汽车工业发展[J].南亚研究季刊,2006(1):37-40
[30]吉昱华,杨克泉,马松.跨国公司技术转移与中国技术进步[J].重庆社会科学,2006(4):19-24
[31]贾建忠.老字号营销困境探析[J].经济管理,2005(23)
[32]贾建忠,邵希娟.跨国公司对中方品牌的“饥饿”策略及危害[J].经济管理,2006(13):15-17
[33]贾建忠,张志超.品牌“饥饿”策略的步骤与条件研究[J].山西大学学报,2007(6):40-43
[34]江小涓.中国外资经济对增长、结构升级和竞争力的贡献[J].中国社会科学,2002(6)
[35]江小娟.跨国投资、市场结构与外商投资企业的竞争行为[J].经济研究,2002(9)
[36]姜金娟.外商对华投资独资化趋势分析[J].价值工程,2007(8):129-131
[37]康荣平.大型跨国公司战略新趋势[M].经济科学出版社,2001
[38]冷伟俊,陈林.达能并购娃哈哈所引发的思考[J].财经界,2007(7):37-38
[39]李平.技术扩散中的溢出效应分析[J].南开学报,1999(2):28-33
[40]李肃,周放生,吕朴.美国五次企业兼并浪潮及启示[J].管理世界,1998(1)
[41]李太勇.跨国公司投资对我国市场结构的影响[J].中国工业经济,1999(11)
[42]鹿彭.跨国公司并购比较优势论与实证检验[J],世界经济研究2007(8):52-56
[43]李新平,陈涛.反并购的利益冲突及制度安排[J].经济论坛,2004:90
[44]李雪.外商直接投资的产业结构效应[J].经济与管理研究,2005(1)
[45]李亦亮.企业集群发展的框架分析[M].中国经济出版社,2006
[46]李玉萍.应对跨国公司并购中国企业的策略[J].中国城市经济,2007(8)
[47]梁琦.跨国公司海外投资与产业集聚[J].世界经济,2003(9)
[48]林毅夫,李永军.比较优势、竞争优势与发展中国家的经济发展[J].管理世界,2003(7)
[49]刘德英.外商投资方式变迁分析[J],合作经济与科技,2007(10):56-58
[50]刘南昌.强国产业论-产业政策若干理论问题研究[M].经济科学出版社,2006
[51]刘文纲.企业购并中的无形资产协同效应分析[J].经济体制改革,1999(6):74-78
[52]卢荻.外商投资与中国经济发展[J].经济研究,2003(9)
[53]罗浩,李心丹.并购的理论和实证研究发展[J].现代管理科学,2004(30)
[54]迈克尔·波特.竞争优势(中译本)[M].中国财政经济出版社,1988
[55]迈克尔·波特.国家竞争优势(中译本)[M].华夏出版社,2002
[56]迈克尔·波特.竞争论[M].中信出版社,2003
[57]南京大学管理科学与工程研究院课题组.中国上市公司并购绩效实证研究[J].上证研究,2003(1).
[58]南开大学课题组.并购重组是否创造价值-中国证券市场的理论与实证研究明.上证研究,2003(1)
[59]裴长洪.利用外资与产业竞争力.1998
[60]钱书法.产业组织演进的理论依据与经验检验:分工与专业化经济[J].经济社会体制 比较,2004(6)
[61]乔治·T·盖斯.并购成长[M].中国财政经济出版社,2002(5)
[62]屈艳芳.企业并购的社会福利效应分析[J].财经科学,2004(20)
[63]芮明杰,刘明宇.论产业链整合[M].复旦大学出版社,2006
[64]桑百川.外资并购国有企业条件与机制[J].经济研究参考,2002(10)
[65]桑百川.关于外资并购我国企业的争论[J].国际贸易问题,2007(7):128.
[66]单宝.外资并购垄断化的负面效应及对策[J].经济纵横,2007(7):6-8
[67]沈志渔.国外企业购并的特点、背景及其对我国的启示[J].中国工业经济,1997(7)
[68]盛世豪,朱家良.产业结构演变模式与专业化竞争优势[J].浙江社会科学,2003(3)
[69]史海昇.跨国公司在华直接投资控股的启示[J].天津经济,2007(5):47-51
[70]史建三.跨国并购论[M].立信会计出版社,1999
[71]史炜.跨国公司并购重组对中国企业重组的重要启示[J].经济研究参考,2007(16):2-14
[72]宋军.跨国并购与经济发展[M].中国财政经济出版社,2004
[73]宋玉华.全球性经济发展的比较制度研究[M].中国社会科学出版社,2006
[74]泰勒尔.产业组织理论[M].中国人民大学出版社,1997
[75]汤莹莹.跨国公司并购国有企业的政策有待完善[J].产权导刊,2007(7):42-44
[76]屠正锋.购并式外国直接投资在我国的趋势和影响[J].国际贸易问题,2007(5):9-12
[77]万杰,王楠.供应链结构对牛鞭效应的影响研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版),2001(9):22-25
[78]汪斌.全球化浪潮中当代产业结构的国际化研究.以国际区域为新切入点[M].中国社会科学出版社,2004
[79]王成昌,刘升福.当前跨国并购动因及其经济学解释[J].现代管理科学,2004(1)
[80]王洛林.大型跨国公司投资对中国产业结构、技术进步和经济国际化的影响[J].中国工业经济,2000(4,5)
[81]王巍.中国并购报告(2002)[M].华夏出版社,2002
[82]王巍.全球并购研究中心.中国并购报告(2004)[M].人民邮电出版社,2004
[83]王伟旭,曾秋根.警惕美国的第二次阴谋[M].人民日报出版社,2003
[84]王先庆.产业扩张[M].广州:广东经济出版社,1998
[85]王晓红.从国情实际出发认识外商直接投资.红旗文稿,2007(14):10-12
[86]王志乐.2003年跨国公司在中国投资报告[M].北京:中国经济出版社,2001
[87]王志乐.跨国公司在华发展新趋势[M].北京:新华出版社,2003
[88]王志乐.商务部研究院跨国公司研究中心.跨国公司在中国报告,2004
[89]王志鹏,李子奈.外商直接投资外溢效应与内生经济增长[J].世界经济文汇,2004(3):27-29
[90]威廉姆森.生产的纵向一体化:市场失灵的考察.陈郁编,企业制度与市场组织-交易费用经济学文选[M],上海三联书店,1998
[91]威廉姆森.交易费用经济学:契约关系的规制.载于陈郁编,企业制度与市场组织-交易费用经济学文选[M],上海三联书店,1998
[92]吴宝应.跨国并购的动因及影响[J].上海企业,2002(12)
[93]吴建伟.国际间产业竞争与市场容量[M].上海:上海三联出版社,1999
[94]冼国明.跨国公司与当代国际分工[M].天津:南开大学出版社,1994
[95]肖光恩.谁是外资青睐的猎物:外资在华并最新态势分析[M].湖北人民出版社,2004
[96]肖武岭.跨国公司技术转移内部化及对我国的启示[J].国际技术经济研究,2007(4):34-36
[97]谢建国.市场竞争、东道国引资政策与跨国公司的技术转移[J].经济研究,2007.6,P87-97
[98]徐立军,马安家.日本对并购式外资的法律规制及其启示[J].现代日本经济,2007(4):58-61
[99]徐艳.外资并购浙江民营企业的现状及影响分析[J].企业活力,2007(8):70
[100]宣烨,王新华.跨国公司在华并购:一个资源关的视角[J].世界经济研究,2007(6):49-53
[101]亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究(上卷)[M].商务印书馆,1974:8
[102]严东.外商在华直接投资的溢出效应[J].世界经济研究,2005(3):4-6
[103]杨丹辉.跨国公司对华技术转移的新动向与对策[J].中国外资,2004(10):54-56
[104]杨静.FDI对中国自主品牌的挤出效应分析及对策[J].现代管理科学,2007(8):19-21
[105]杨瑞龙.当代主流企业理论与企业管理[M].安徽大学出版社,1999:22
[106]杨文武,戴江涛.跨国公司对印度汽车制造业的技术转移及对我国的启示[J].科学经济社会,2006(2):32-36
[107]杨小凯,黄有光.专业化与经济组织[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[108]杨亚沙.跨国并购的发展及对我国的影响[J].国际经济合作,2004(1)
[109]杨艳红.外贸政策外商直接投资与我国经济增长[J].对外经贸大学学报,2005(5):73-75
[110]姚战琪.跨国公司、并购行为与市场结构[J].产业经济研究,2004(2)
[111]于春晖.企业兼并的产业组织理论评述[J].经济学动态,1999(8)
[112]于文超.并购中的公司控制权争夺[J].当代经理人,2004(30)
[113]于岩岩,蔺楠.跨国公司对话技术转移的封闭性及我国的对策研究[J].中国科技论坛,2007(8):88-92
[114]袁诚,陆挺.外商直接投资与管理知识溢出效应[J].经济研究,2005(3):69-70
[115]张德亮,王禅.企业并购动因的一种理论解析[J].经济管理,2002(10):20-24
[116]张德平.中国上市公司并购的经营业绩实证研究[J].中国软科学,2002(7):34-38
[117]张红霞,李平.外商直接投资与东道国出口贸易关系的理论探讨[J].外贸经济国际贸易,2005(2)
[118]张建勤.转移力度加大防扩散控制加强[J].国际贸易,2006(5):33-36
[119]张文璋,顾菲菲.我国上市公司并购绩效的实证研究[J].证券市场导报,2002(9)
[120]张新.并购重组是否创造价值?--中国证券市场的理论与实证研究[J].经济研究,2003(5)
[121]郑绍濂,傅烨.供应链效率损失的结构性分析[J].复旦学报(自然科学版),2001(4,2): 118-124
[122]郑迎飞,陈宏民.外资挤占式并购各地的市场条件识别[J].上海交通大学学报,2007(7):1102-1104
[123]周爱农,韩金红,王恕立.吸引外商直接投资对我国产业成长的实效分析[J].现代经济探讨,2003(7)
[124]周斌.外国直接投资溢出效应在国有企业的实现[J].国际贸易,2005(7):28-29
[125]周军.市场规则形成论[M].人民出版社,2005
[126]周维颖.新产业区演进的经济分析[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004
[127]朱桂龙.跨国公司在华技术转移[M].中国财政出版社,2007
[128]朱秀云.我国对外资并购政策的新变化及其完善方向[J].当代经济研究,2007(8):41-46
[129]左大培.外资企业税收优惠的非效率性[J].经济研究,2000(5)
[130]左大培.跨国公司及其对东道国经济影响的再分析[J].国际经济评论,2003(5):35-39
[131]Casson M C.Multinationals and World International Division of Labour.London,Allen:Vertical Integration and Unwin,1986.
[132]Coase R H.The Nature of the Firm.1937.
[133]Dunning J H.Trade,Location of Encomia Activity and the Multinational Enterprise:A Search of an Eclectic Approach.Macmillan,London,1977.
[134]Dunning J H.International Production and the Multinational Enterprise,London,George Allen and Unwin,1981:109-141.
[135]Dunning J H.The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production:A Restatement and Some Possible Extension[J].Journal of International Business Studies,1988(19).
[136]Dunning J H.Multinational Enterprises and The Global Economy.Unwin Hyman published,1992.
[137]Dunning J H.Globalization,Trade and Foreign Direct Investment.Oxford:Elsevier,1998.
[138]Domar E D.Capital expansion rate of growth,and employment[J].Econometrics,1946,14(2):137-147.
[139]Gassmann O,von Zedtwitz M.New concepts and trends in international R&D organization[J].Research Policy,1999:231-250.
[140]Grossman G M and Helpman E.Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy.Cambridge,MA:MIT Press,1991a.
[141]Grossman S And Hart O.The Costs and Benefits of Ownership:A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration[J].Political Economy,1986(94):691-719.
[142]Hall R E & Jones C I.Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker Than Others?[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1999,114(1):83-116.
[143]Hart O and Holmstrom B."Theory of Contracts " in Advances in Economic Theory.Fifth Word Congress,T.F.Bewley(ed),Cambridge Uni.Press,1987.
[144]Hart O D.Firm,Contracts and Financial Structure.Oxford University Press,1995.
[145]Hart O and Moore J.On the Design of Hierarchies:Coordination vs.Specialization. 1999(b).
[146] Hart O and Moore J. Foundations of Incomplete Contracts[J], Review of Economic Studies. 1999(66): 115-138.
[147] Hymen S H. The International Operational of National Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment. the MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, Previous Unpublished Ph. D Dissertation,1960.
[148] Hymer S H. The International Operations of National: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment. MIT Press, 1976.
[149] Hymer S H. The Multinational Corporation: A Radical Approach. London: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
[150] Klein A. The Timing and Substance of Divestiture Announcements: Individual, Simultaneous and Cumulative Effects[J]. Journal of Finance, 1986(41): 685-697.
[151] Klein B, Crawford R and Alchian A. Vertical Integration, Appropriate Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process[J]. Journal of Law and Economics, 1978(21): 297-326.
[152] Lall S. Transnational Domestic Enterprises, and Industrial Structure in Host LDCs: a survey. 1978.
[153] Lall S. VerticalInterfirm Linkages in LDCs: An Empirical Study[J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1980(42): 203-226.
[154] Lall S. Implications of Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions by TNCs in Developing Countries: a Beginner's Guide. QEH Working Paper 88,2002.
[155] Levin A, Raut K. Complementarities between Exports and Human Capital in Economic Growth: Evidence from the Semi-industrialized countries[J]. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1997,46(1):155-74.
[156] Lewis W A. Economic Development with Unlimited Supply of Labour[J]. Journal of The Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies, 1954,22(2): 139-191.
[157] Lucas R. On the Mechanics of Economic Development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1988,22(1):3-42.
[158] McMillan J, Whalley J & Zhu L. The Impact of China's Economic Reforms on Agricultural Productivity Growth [J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1989,97(4): 781-807.
[159] Nishimizu M & Page J M. Total Factor Productivity Growth, Technological Progress and Technical Efficiency Changes: Dimension of Productivity Change in Yugoslavia, 1965-78 [J]. The Economic Journal, 1982,92(368): 920-936.
[160] Ohlin. The International Allocation of Economic Activity[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 1997.
[161] Oliver E W. The Vertical Integration of Production: Market failure Considerations[J].American Economics Review, 1997(112).
[162] Penrose E T. The Theory of The Growth of The Firm. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1959.
[163] Perkins D H. Reforming China's Economic System [J]. Journal of Economic Literature,1988, 26(2): 601-645.
[164] Romer P M. Increasing returns and long-run growth[J]. Journal of Political Economy 1986,94(5): 1002-1037.
[165] Romer P M. Endogenous technological change[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1990,98:71-102.
[166] Romer P M. The origins of endogenous growth[J]. Journal of Economic Perspectives,1994, 8 (Winter): 3-22.
[167] Shephard R W. Theory of Cost and Production Function [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970: 58-70.
[168] Sherman G. Technology transfer, innovation, and international competitiveness. Willey,New York: 1981.
[169] Solow R A. Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1956, 70(1): 65-94.
[170] Solow R. Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Fuction[J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1957,39(3): 312-320.
[171] Stein J C. Internal capital and the competition for corporate resources[J]. Journal of Finance, 1997(52): 111-134.
[172] Williamson O E. Transition Costs Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations in Business Organization[J]. Journal of Law and Economics, 1979(22): 233-261.
[173] Williamson O E. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press, 1985.
[174] Zhang B & Carter C A. Reforms, the Weather,' and Productivity Growth in China's Grain Sector [J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1997,79(4): 1266-1277.
[2]奥利弗 E 威廉姆森,西德尼 G 温特编.姚海鑫,邢源源译.企业的性质--起源、演变和发展[M].商务印书馆,2007
[3]奥利弗 E 威廉姆森.反托拉斯经济学--兼并、协约和策略行为[M].经济科学出版社,1999
[4]白光.“引狼入室”多敌手[M].中国物价出版社,2001
[5]曹建伟,张鹏.复制“群居链”-跨国公司加速将全球商业模式转移到中国闭[J].IT 经理世界,2001(18)
[6]陈佳贵,王钦.跨国公司并购与大型国有企业改革[J].中国工业经济,2003(4)
[7]陈琪,荀茂生.社会主义市场经济学[M].湖南人民出版社,第三版:34-35
[8]陈淑红.经济全球化趋势下的国家经济安全[M].湖南人民出版社,2005
[9]陈燕萍.中国外商并购投资的理性思考[J].武汉大学学报(社科版),2007(7):513-518
[10]戴维 C 科顿,王道勇译.当公司控制世界[M].广东人民出版社,2006
[11]邓伟根.产业转型:经验、问题与策略[M].经济管理出版社,2006
[12]董富华.政府在企业并购中的角色定位及制度创新.学术交流,2003(9)
[13]杜慕群.企业核心竞争力:理论、实证与案例[M].经济科学出版社,2004
[14]范从来,袁静.成长性、成熟性和衰退性产业上市公司并购绩效的实证分析[J].中国工业经济,2002(8):65-72
[15]方芳,闰晓彤.中国上市公司并购绩效与思考[J].经济理论与经济管理,2002(8):43-48
[16]方芳.中国上市公司并购绩效的经济学分析[M].北京,中国金融出版社,2003
[17]冯根福,吴林江.我国上市公司并购绩效的实证研究[J].经济研究,2001(1):54-68
[18]冯益湘.上市公司资产重组绩效的实证分析[J].湖南商学院学报,2001(8):60-62
[19]冯云,吴冲锋.经济全球化测度理论[M].上海交通大学出版社,2005
[20]冯子标.企业间的经济技术关系与并购模式[J].经济学家,2001(5):17-21
[21]高见,陈歆玮.中国证券市场资产重组效应分析[J].经济科学,2000(1):66-77
[22]高见,陈欲伟.我国证券市场资产重组效应分析[J].投资与证券,2000(3)
[23]顾保国,顾炜宇.跨国公司技术转移溢出效应理论模型分析[J].唯实探讨,2007:21-224
[24]顾自安.关于企业及其性质的比较分析.厦门大学经济研究所
[25]郭永清.我国上市公司资产并购绩效实证分析[J].青海金融,2000(6):41-44
[26]韩彩珍.外资并购国内企业的问题及政策取向[J].中国外资,2006(1)
[27]韩世坤.全球企业并购研究[M].人民出版社,2002
[28]胡峰.跨国公司在华并购论[M].广东经济出版社,2003
[29]黄正多,戴江涛.论跨国公司的技术转移与印度汽车工业发展[J].南亚研究季刊,2006(1):37-40
[30]吉昱华,杨克泉,马松.跨国公司技术转移与中国技术进步[J].重庆社会科学,2006(4):19-24
[31]贾建忠.老字号营销困境探析[J].经济管理,2005(23)
[32]贾建忠,邵希娟.跨国公司对中方品牌的“饥饿”策略及危害[J].经济管理,2006(13):15-17
[33]贾建忠,张志超.品牌“饥饿”策略的步骤与条件研究[J].山西大学学报,2007(6):40-43
[34]江小涓.中国外资经济对增长、结构升级和竞争力的贡献[J].中国社会科学,2002(6)
[35]江小娟.跨国投资、市场结构与外商投资企业的竞争行为[J].经济研究,2002(9)
[36]姜金娟.外商对华投资独资化趋势分析[J].价值工程,2007(8):129-131
[37]康荣平.大型跨国公司战略新趋势[M].经济科学出版社,2001
[38]冷伟俊,陈林.达能并购娃哈哈所引发的思考[J].财经界,2007(7):37-38
[39]李平.技术扩散中的溢出效应分析[J].南开学报,1999(2):28-33
[40]李肃,周放生,吕朴.美国五次企业兼并浪潮及启示[J].管理世界,1998(1)
[41]李太勇.跨国公司投资对我国市场结构的影响[J].中国工业经济,1999(11)
[42]鹿彭.跨国公司并购比较优势论与实证检验[J],世界经济研究2007(8):52-56
[43]李新平,陈涛.反并购的利益冲突及制度安排[J].经济论坛,2004:90
[44]李雪.外商直接投资的产业结构效应[J].经济与管理研究,2005(1)
[45]李亦亮.企业集群发展的框架分析[M].中国经济出版社,2006
[46]李玉萍.应对跨国公司并购中国企业的策略[J].中国城市经济,2007(8)
[47]梁琦.跨国公司海外投资与产业集聚[J].世界经济,2003(9)
[48]林毅夫,李永军.比较优势、竞争优势与发展中国家的经济发展[J].管理世界,2003(7)
[49]刘德英.外商投资方式变迁分析[J],合作经济与科技,2007(10):56-58
[50]刘南昌.强国产业论-产业政策若干理论问题研究[M].经济科学出版社,2006
[51]刘文纲.企业购并中的无形资产协同效应分析[J].经济体制改革,1999(6):74-78
[52]卢荻.外商投资与中国经济发展[J].经济研究,2003(9)
[53]罗浩,李心丹.并购的理论和实证研究发展[J].现代管理科学,2004(30)
[54]迈克尔·波特.竞争优势(中译本)[M].中国财政经济出版社,1988
[55]迈克尔·波特.国家竞争优势(中译本)[M].华夏出版社,2002
[56]迈克尔·波特.竞争论[M].中信出版社,2003
[57]南京大学管理科学与工程研究院课题组.中国上市公司并购绩效实证研究[J].上证研究,2003(1).
[58]南开大学课题组.并购重组是否创造价值-中国证券市场的理论与实证研究明.上证研究,2003(1)
[59]裴长洪.利用外资与产业竞争力.1998
[60]钱书法.产业组织演进的理论依据与经验检验:分工与专业化经济[J].经济社会体制 比较,2004(6)
[61]乔治·T·盖斯.并购成长[M].中国财政经济出版社,2002(5)
[62]屈艳芳.企业并购的社会福利效应分析[J].财经科学,2004(20)
[63]芮明杰,刘明宇.论产业链整合[M].复旦大学出版社,2006
[64]桑百川.外资并购国有企业条件与机制[J].经济研究参考,2002(10)
[65]桑百川.关于外资并购我国企业的争论[J].国际贸易问题,2007(7):128.
[66]单宝.外资并购垄断化的负面效应及对策[J].经济纵横,2007(7):6-8
[67]沈志渔.国外企业购并的特点、背景及其对我国的启示[J].中国工业经济,1997(7)
[68]盛世豪,朱家良.产业结构演变模式与专业化竞争优势[J].浙江社会科学,2003(3)
[69]史海昇.跨国公司在华直接投资控股的启示[J].天津经济,2007(5):47-51
[70]史建三.跨国并购论[M].立信会计出版社,1999
[71]史炜.跨国公司并购重组对中国企业重组的重要启示[J].经济研究参考,2007(16):2-14
[72]宋军.跨国并购与经济发展[M].中国财政经济出版社,2004
[73]宋玉华.全球性经济发展的比较制度研究[M].中国社会科学出版社,2006
[74]泰勒尔.产业组织理论[M].中国人民大学出版社,1997
[75]汤莹莹.跨国公司并购国有企业的政策有待完善[J].产权导刊,2007(7):42-44
[76]屠正锋.购并式外国直接投资在我国的趋势和影响[J].国际贸易问题,2007(5):9-12
[77]万杰,王楠.供应链结构对牛鞭效应的影响研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版),2001(9):22-25
[78]汪斌.全球化浪潮中当代产业结构的国际化研究.以国际区域为新切入点[M].中国社会科学出版社,2004
[79]王成昌,刘升福.当前跨国并购动因及其经济学解释[J].现代管理科学,2004(1)
[80]王洛林.大型跨国公司投资对中国产业结构、技术进步和经济国际化的影响[J].中国工业经济,2000(4,5)
[81]王巍.中国并购报告(2002)[M].华夏出版社,2002
[82]王巍.全球并购研究中心.中国并购报告(2004)[M].人民邮电出版社,2004
[83]王伟旭,曾秋根.警惕美国的第二次阴谋[M].人民日报出版社,2003
[84]王先庆.产业扩张[M].广州:广东经济出版社,1998
[85]王晓红.从国情实际出发认识外商直接投资.红旗文稿,2007(14):10-12
[86]王志乐.2003年跨国公司在中国投资报告[M].北京:中国经济出版社,2001
[87]王志乐.跨国公司在华发展新趋势[M].北京:新华出版社,2003
[88]王志乐.商务部研究院跨国公司研究中心.跨国公司在中国报告,2004
[89]王志鹏,李子奈.外商直接投资外溢效应与内生经济增长[J].世界经济文汇,2004(3):27-29
[90]威廉姆森.生产的纵向一体化:市场失灵的考察.陈郁编,企业制度与市场组织-交易费用经济学文选[M],上海三联书店,1998
[91]威廉姆森.交易费用经济学:契约关系的规制.载于陈郁编,企业制度与市场组织-交易费用经济学文选[M],上海三联书店,1998
[92]吴宝应.跨国并购的动因及影响[J].上海企业,2002(12)
[93]吴建伟.国际间产业竞争与市场容量[M].上海:上海三联出版社,1999
[94]冼国明.跨国公司与当代国际分工[M].天津:南开大学出版社,1994
[95]肖光恩.谁是外资青睐的猎物:外资在华并最新态势分析[M].湖北人民出版社,2004
[96]肖武岭.跨国公司技术转移内部化及对我国的启示[J].国际技术经济研究,2007(4):34-36
[97]谢建国.市场竞争、东道国引资政策与跨国公司的技术转移[J].经济研究,2007.6,P87-97
[98]徐立军,马安家.日本对并购式外资的法律规制及其启示[J].现代日本经济,2007(4):58-61
[99]徐艳.外资并购浙江民营企业的现状及影响分析[J].企业活力,2007(8):70
[100]宣烨,王新华.跨国公司在华并购:一个资源关的视角[J].世界经济研究,2007(6):49-53
[101]亚当·斯密.国民财富的性质和原因的研究(上卷)[M].商务印书馆,1974:8
[102]严东.外商在华直接投资的溢出效应[J].世界经济研究,2005(3):4-6
[103]杨丹辉.跨国公司对华技术转移的新动向与对策[J].中国外资,2004(10):54-56
[104]杨静.FDI对中国自主品牌的挤出效应分析及对策[J].现代管理科学,2007(8):19-21
[105]杨瑞龙.当代主流企业理论与企业管理[M].安徽大学出版社,1999:22
[106]杨文武,戴江涛.跨国公司对印度汽车制造业的技术转移及对我国的启示[J].科学经济社会,2006(2):32-36
[107]杨小凯,黄有光.专业化与经济组织[M].北京:经济科学出版社,1999
[108]杨亚沙.跨国并购的发展及对我国的影响[J].国际经济合作,2004(1)
[109]杨艳红.外贸政策外商直接投资与我国经济增长[J].对外经贸大学学报,2005(5):73-75
[110]姚战琪.跨国公司、并购行为与市场结构[J].产业经济研究,2004(2)
[111]于春晖.企业兼并的产业组织理论评述[J].经济学动态,1999(8)
[112]于文超.并购中的公司控制权争夺[J].当代经理人,2004(30)
[113]于岩岩,蔺楠.跨国公司对话技术转移的封闭性及我国的对策研究[J].中国科技论坛,2007(8):88-92
[114]袁诚,陆挺.外商直接投资与管理知识溢出效应[J].经济研究,2005(3):69-70
[115]张德亮,王禅.企业并购动因的一种理论解析[J].经济管理,2002(10):20-24
[116]张德平.中国上市公司并购的经营业绩实证研究[J].中国软科学,2002(7):34-38
[117]张红霞,李平.外商直接投资与东道国出口贸易关系的理论探讨[J].外贸经济国际贸易,2005(2)
[118]张建勤.转移力度加大防扩散控制加强[J].国际贸易,2006(5):33-36
[119]张文璋,顾菲菲.我国上市公司并购绩效的实证研究[J].证券市场导报,2002(9)
[120]张新.并购重组是否创造价值?--中国证券市场的理论与实证研究[J].经济研究,2003(5)
[121]郑绍濂,傅烨.供应链效率损失的结构性分析[J].复旦学报(自然科学版),2001(4,2): 118-124
[122]郑迎飞,陈宏民.外资挤占式并购各地的市场条件识别[J].上海交通大学学报,2007(7):1102-1104
[123]周爱农,韩金红,王恕立.吸引外商直接投资对我国产业成长的实效分析[J].现代经济探讨,2003(7)
[124]周斌.外国直接投资溢出效应在国有企业的实现[J].国际贸易,2005(7):28-29
[125]周军.市场规则形成论[M].人民出版社,2005
[126]周维颖.新产业区演进的经济分析[M].上海:复旦大学出版社,2004
[127]朱桂龙.跨国公司在华技术转移[M].中国财政出版社,2007
[128]朱秀云.我国对外资并购政策的新变化及其完善方向[J].当代经济研究,2007(8):41-46
[129]左大培.外资企业税收优惠的非效率性[J].经济研究,2000(5)
[130]左大培.跨国公司及其对东道国经济影响的再分析[J].国际经济评论,2003(5):35-39
[131]Casson M C.Multinationals and World International Division of Labour.London,Allen:Vertical Integration and Unwin,1986.
[132]Coase R H.The Nature of the Firm.1937.
[133]Dunning J H.Trade,Location of Encomia Activity and the Multinational Enterprise:A Search of an Eclectic Approach.Macmillan,London,1977.
[134]Dunning J H.International Production and the Multinational Enterprise,London,George Allen and Unwin,1981:109-141.
[135]Dunning J H.The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production:A Restatement and Some Possible Extension[J].Journal of International Business Studies,1988(19).
[136]Dunning J H.Multinational Enterprises and The Global Economy.Unwin Hyman published,1992.
[137]Dunning J H.Globalization,Trade and Foreign Direct Investment.Oxford:Elsevier,1998.
[138]Domar E D.Capital expansion rate of growth,and employment[J].Econometrics,1946,14(2):137-147.
[139]Gassmann O,von Zedtwitz M.New concepts and trends in international R&D organization[J].Research Policy,1999:231-250.
[140]Grossman G M and Helpman E.Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy.Cambridge,MA:MIT Press,1991a.
[141]Grossman S And Hart O.The Costs and Benefits of Ownership:A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration[J].Political Economy,1986(94):691-719.
[142]Hall R E & Jones C I.Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker Than Others?[J].The Quarterly Journal of Economics,1999,114(1):83-116.
[143]Hart O and Holmstrom B."Theory of Contracts " in Advances in Economic Theory.Fifth Word Congress,T.F.Bewley(ed),Cambridge Uni.Press,1987.
[144]Hart O D.Firm,Contracts and Financial Structure.Oxford University Press,1995.
[145]Hart O and Moore J.On the Design of Hierarchies:Coordination vs.Specialization. 1999(b).
[146] Hart O and Moore J. Foundations of Incomplete Contracts[J], Review of Economic Studies. 1999(66): 115-138.
[147] Hymen S H. The International Operational of National Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment. the MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, Previous Unpublished Ph. D Dissertation,1960.
[148] Hymer S H. The International Operations of National: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment. MIT Press, 1976.
[149] Hymer S H. The Multinational Corporation: A Radical Approach. London: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
[150] Klein A. The Timing and Substance of Divestiture Announcements: Individual, Simultaneous and Cumulative Effects[J]. Journal of Finance, 1986(41): 685-697.
[151] Klein B, Crawford R and Alchian A. Vertical Integration, Appropriate Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process[J]. Journal of Law and Economics, 1978(21): 297-326.
[152] Lall S. Transnational Domestic Enterprises, and Industrial Structure in Host LDCs: a survey. 1978.
[153] Lall S. VerticalInterfirm Linkages in LDCs: An Empirical Study[J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1980(42): 203-226.
[154] Lall S. Implications of Cross-Border Mergers and Acquisitions by TNCs in Developing Countries: a Beginner's Guide. QEH Working Paper 88,2002.
[155] Levin A, Raut K. Complementarities between Exports and Human Capital in Economic Growth: Evidence from the Semi-industrialized countries[J]. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 1997,46(1):155-74.
[156] Lewis W A. Economic Development with Unlimited Supply of Labour[J]. Journal of The Manchester School of Economics and Social Studies, 1954,22(2): 139-191.
[157] Lucas R. On the Mechanics of Economic Development[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics, 1988,22(1):3-42.
[158] McMillan J, Whalley J & Zhu L. The Impact of China's Economic Reforms on Agricultural Productivity Growth [J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1989,97(4): 781-807.
[159] Nishimizu M & Page J M. Total Factor Productivity Growth, Technological Progress and Technical Efficiency Changes: Dimension of Productivity Change in Yugoslavia, 1965-78 [J]. The Economic Journal, 1982,92(368): 920-936.
[160] Ohlin. The International Allocation of Economic Activity[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 1997.
[161] Oliver E W. The Vertical Integration of Production: Market failure Considerations[J].American Economics Review, 1997(112).
[162] Penrose E T. The Theory of The Growth of The Firm. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1959.
[163] Perkins D H. Reforming China's Economic System [J]. Journal of Economic Literature,1988, 26(2): 601-645.
[164] Romer P M. Increasing returns and long-run growth[J]. Journal of Political Economy 1986,94(5): 1002-1037.
[165] Romer P M. Endogenous technological change[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1990,98:71-102.
[166] Romer P M. The origins of endogenous growth[J]. Journal of Economic Perspectives,1994, 8 (Winter): 3-22.
[167] Shephard R W. Theory of Cost and Production Function [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970: 58-70.
[168] Sherman G. Technology transfer, innovation, and international competitiveness. Willey,New York: 1981.
[169] Solow R A. Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1956, 70(1): 65-94.
[170] Solow R. Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Fuction[J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1957,39(3): 312-320.
[171] Stein J C. Internal capital and the competition for corporate resources[J]. Journal of Finance, 1997(52): 111-134.
[172] Williamson O E. Transition Costs Economics: The Governance of Contractual Relations in Business Organization[J]. Journal of Law and Economics, 1979(22): 233-261.
[173] Williamson O E. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press, 1985.
[174] Zhang B & Carter C A. Reforms, the Weather,' and Productivity Growth in China's Grain Sector [J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1997,79(4): 1266-1277.