1、 外文翻译 原文 Growth of industry clusters and innovation: Lessons from Beijing Zhongguancun Science Park Material Source: Journal of Business Venturing21 Author: Justin Tan The success of technology parks in promoting technology transfer and attracting clusters of highly innovative firms has motivated co
2、untries from around the world in an attempt to promote regional development, including the Peoples Republic of China. Due to its similarities with other formerly. Planned economies undergoing transition towards market economies, the Chinese model of technology parks has been closely watched and emul
3、ated by other transitional economies. However, despite its economic significance, such development has been largely ignored in organizational research. In this study, I investigate a specific example of an industry cluster in China, the Beijing Zhongguancun (ZGC) Science Park, which has seen the lar
4、gest cluster of semiconductor, computer, and telecommunication firms in China, consisting of both domestic and foreign invested firms. I examine the origin and growth of industry cluster in a traditionally heavily regulated economy and region, its role in promoting technology transfer and innovation
5、, and challenges firms face in the future. I close by proposing some issues for future research. Researchers in international strategy and entrepreneurship have become increasingly interested in the role of regional clusters as features of international industry. Meanwhile, technology parks have bee
6、n promoted to facilitate technology transfer and regional development, yet the issue has not attracted adequate attention, despite its role in creating industry clusters. Broadly, a technology park is a property-based activity configured around the following: formal operational links with a universi
7、ty or other higher education or research institution, the formation and growth of knowledge-based business and other organizations on site, and a management function that is actively engaged in the transfer of technology and business skills to the organizations on site. Typically, it leads to a terr
8、itorial system of small-and medium-sized firms clustered together, with spatially concentrated net works, often using flexible production technology and characterized by extensive local inter-firm linkages, and in as sense, can be seen as a collective entrepreneur. Among the emulators of technology
9、parks that have led to industry clustering and transfer of technology, one can easily find such enthusiasts in formerly centrally planned economies undergoing transition, such as the Peoples Republic of China. Despite its implications for strategic management and entrepreneurship, such development h
10、as in the most part been ignored, leaving most of the work to field specialists or other academic disciplines such as industrial economics or economic geography. Given the economic significance of China, especially since it became the newest member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the incr
11、easing number of foreign investors moving into regions where related industries have been vertically integrated and clustered, much can be learned by examining the emerging technology parks and their role in the transition. In this study, motivated by a deep conviction that organizational research h
12、as much to gain as well as to offer by studying emerging markets such as China, I investigate a specific example of a technology park, the Beijing Zhongguancun (ZGC), which has seen the largest cluster of semiconductor, computer, and telecommunication firms in China, consisting of both domestic and
13、foreign invested firms. Guided by the literature on industry clusters, I examine the birth and growth of the ZGC Science Park with the aim of understanding the origins and growth of this industry cluster in a traditionally heavily regulated economy and region, its role in promoting technology transf
14、er and innovation, and the challenges firms face in the future. I close by discussing implications for research and practice. Geographically clustered firms that function as strategic entities in global industries have become an issue of considerable interest to organizational scholars, corporate ma
15、nagers, and policymakers since the publication of The Competitive Advantage of Nations by Michael Porter in 1990. Such cluster shave played an important role in shaping the competitive landscape and technology transfer (Tallmanetal, 2004).As Porter (1990,p.120) noted, the geographic concentration of
16、 firms in the same industry is “strikingly common around the world.” Because firms in clusters play an increasingly important role in job creation and technological innovation, it is important to understand why clusters form, how geographical clustering affects the area over time, and what the ultim
17、ate effect of clustering is on firms innovation and success. Unfortunately, clusters are generally an under studied phenomenon in the organization sciences (DeNoble and Galbraith,1992; Pouder and St.John,1996).As Scott(1989,p.91) observed, “.the question of the initiation and early consolidation of
18、growth centers in capitalism(from19th century Lancashire to Henry Fords Detroit to Silicon Valley)has never really been satisfactorily addressed or resolved.” Such inquiry is important since it contributes tour understanding of how firm-level Decision making is significantly influenced by the behavi
19、or of the other firms in the region, rather than mainly determined by firm-specific capabilities or independent assessment of exogenous supply and demand conditions (Gimenoetal.,2005). The managerial implications are equally clear, while scholars of international strategy and entrepreneurship questi
20、on whether competitive advantage is sustainable for a cluster of firms and wonder what mechanisms might drive the phenomenon of cluster success, cities, regions, and countries seek the formula to becoming world powers in high-tech industries, and multinational corporations look to gain customers, su
21、ppliers, and strategic alliance partners by locating in the right clusters. Science parks are increasingly being promoted to facilitate technology transfer and regional development because they often lead to fast-growing, geographically clustered firms within industries. Among the emulators of scien
22、ce parks that have led to industry clustering and transfer of technology, one can easily find such enthusiasts in transitional economies such as the Peoples Republic of China. Yet despite its implications for theory and practice, such development has largely been ignored, leaving most of the work to
23、 field specialists or other academic disciplines such as industrial economics or economic geography. Given the economic significance of China, especially since it became the newest member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the increasing number of multinational corporations investing in regi
24、ons where related industries are vertically integrated and clustered, much can be learned by examining the emerging technology parks and their role in technology transfer and innovation. In this study, motivated by a deep conviction that the field of entrepreneurship has much to gain as well as to o
25、ffer by studying emerging markets such as China, I investigate the Beijing ZGC Science Park, which has been the site of the largest cluster of semiconductor, computer, and telecommunications firms in China, consisting of both domestic and foreign invested firms. Set in an environment undergoing fund
26、amental transition, I examine the evolution of the cluster in the Beijing ZGC Science Park. More specifically, I investigate the origin of the cluster and the convergence of clustered firms. I close by outlining the challenges faced by the cluster, e. g., firm reorientation, which includes a decline
27、 in the performance o the cluster. An industry cluster, according to Porter, is a “geographically proximate group of inter connected companies and associated institutions in a particular field, linked by commonalities and complementarities” (Porter, 1998, p. 199).As a new spatial organizational form
28、, clusters offer more flexibility to companies in the ever-changing industrial environments by offering apposition between the arms-length market on the one hand and hierarchies, or vertical integration, on the other. The dividing line between markets and hierarchies was successfully set and explain
29、ed in transaction cost theory (Williamson,1975) in that agglomeration economies were purported to improve the competitiveness of participating agents by lowering transaction costs (Scott,1988). However, the technological and sociological shifts of the late twentieth century have had a profound impac
30、t on the form and nature of organizations (Lewin and Stephens, 1993), and the dividing line between markets and hierarchies has blurred. Industrial systems built on regional networks have been suggested to be a main factor in shaping the competence of clusters (Saxenian, 1994). A regions industrial
31、system has three dimensions: local institutions and culture, industrial structure, and corporate organization. Industrial structure high lights the social division of labor, namely the degree of vertical integration in a specific industry. In other words, the extent and nature of links between custo
32、mers, suppliers, and competitors determine a clusters advantages with respect to industrial structure. Examining the contrasting experiences of Silicon Valley and Route128, Saxenian (1994) suggested that clusters with developed industrial systems are more flexible and technologically dynamic than th
33、ose in which experimentation and learning are confined to individual firms. Synthesizing the antecedent theories, Porter (1998) proposed the Diamond Metaphor to investigate the advantages of clusters and advocated clusters as a source of strategic competitive advantage for individual firms in cluste
34、rs as well as clusters as a whole to compete with other regions. Within clusters, firms have easy access to specialized in puts, employees, information, institutions, and public goods, and they also benefit from the presence of complementarities. Productivity and innovation is enhanced as a result.
35、The linkages between firms in clusters confer competitive advantage without requiring firms to sacrifice flexibility for economies of scale. Low barriers of entry in clusters produce high rates of new business formation, which further enhances cluster advantages through entrepreneurship and growth p
36、otential (Porter,1998). Similar to firm competitive advantage, cluster advantage implies that the cluster in question is more productive and more innovative than others. Porter (1998) explained the relationships between clusters and productivity, between clusters and innovation, and betweenclustersa
37、ndnewbusinessformation.Assuminghomogeneityofclusters, Porter advocated that clustering of companies leads to high productivity because of the access to specialized in put sand employees, access to information, complementarities across products in clusters, and access to institutions and public goods
38、. Proximity among rivals within clusters facilitates performance improvement and provides incentives for firms to improve productivity. More importantly, clusters such as those located in Silicon Valley facilitate technology transfer and become centers of gravity for attracting innovation. The next
39、section discusses institutional proximity, the clustering process, and cluster advantage associated with such process. 译文 产业集群的发展与创新 借鉴北京中关村科技园区 资料来源： 21 世纪企业创业 日志 2006 作者：贾斯丁 谈 技术园区的成功在促进技术转移和吸引高技术的产业集群，创新的动力来自世界各地的国家为了促进区域所做出的努力发展中包括了中华人民共和国。由于从前适用计划经济，现在正逐步向市场经济转变，中国模式的高技术园区正其他转型国家看齐。然而 ,虽然它重要的经济
40、意义，但是这种发展在很大程 度上忽略了组织的研究。 在这项研究中，产业集群研究具体以北京中关村科技园区为例 ， 中关村已经是中国最大的半导体、电脑和电信公司集群，同时包括国内和外商投资公司。我调查了经济区域在传统严格管制下产业集群的起源和发展，以及产业集群在技术转移和创新中起的作用，以及集群公司面临未来的挑战。我从个人的角度出发对未来的研究提出几项建议。 国际战略和企业家精神的研究人员对国际产业特点之一：区域集群，越来越有兴趣。同时 ,技术园区被提升为促进技术转移和区域发展的重要因素，但这个问题一直没有引起足够重视 ,尽管它在创造产业集群中扮 演着重要的角色。广义上讲 ,技术园区是一种属性活动
41、，配置围绕以下几个方面：同一所大学或其他更高教育的或研究机相互联系，同时建立和发展商业知识库以及其它其他的组织，并建立具有一个能够积极地进行知识和商务技能转移的管理组织。典型的是 ,它导致了一定区域内的中型小公司聚在一起，与空间集中网络相同，经常利用利用灵活的生产技术，以广泛本地企业内部联系为特点。在某种意义上可以被看作是一个企业家的集群。 技术园区的技术模拟器导致了产业集群和技术转移，人们从中很容易发现以前计划经济的热衷者正在进行转变，比如中华人民共和国。虽然 技术模拟器对战略管理和企业家精神意义重大，但是它的发展在很多方面常被人忽视，大部分的工作都脱离专业领域的专家或是或其他学术领域例如工
42、业经济或经济地理。中国的经济意义，自从它成为世界贸易组织的一员开始逐渐凸显，越来越多的国外投资者进入相关产业已经是垂直整合和聚集的区域内，并通过审查新出现的科技园区来进行学习，同时他们在经济中所扮演的角色也在逐步过渡。 在本次的研究中，深深理解到要更多得增加组织研究获而且提供通过研究新兴市场获得经验例如中国，我调查一个具体科技园区的例子，北京中关村 (中关村 )，它是中国最大半导， 计算机和电信公司的集群，包括国内和国外两种投资公司。相关文献指导产业的集群，为了了解在传统严格经济区域管制下产业集群的发展和起源，以及产业集群在技术转移和创新中起的作用，以及集群公司面临未来的挑战，我调查北京中关村
43、技术园区的起源和发展。同时我密切了探究了研究和实践的含义。 地理聚集公司它的功能就如全球产业中的战略实体的功能，对于组织的学者，社团的经理，决策者来说集群产生的巨大利润已经成为一个问题。来自迈克尔波特（ 1990）国家竞争优势。地理集群在竞争和技术转移中发了重要的作用（ Tallmanetal,2004）。正如波特（ 1990）解释到：“相同产业中的公司在地理上集聚，这在全世界是惊人的相似。”因为集群公司在创造就业和技术创新中发挥着重要的作用，所以对为何集群会形成，地理集群如何随着时间的推移对区域产生影响以及集群对公司的创新和成功所产生怎样的最终效果这些问题的理解非常重要。不幸的是，在组织科学
44、中常出现这样一种现象：集群被当作普通的替角（ DeNoble and Galbraith,1992;Pouder and St.John,1996） 。正如 Scott（ 1989,p.91）所观察到的“发展中心在资本 主义的起源和早期的合并（来自 19世纪 Lancashire to HenryFords Detroit to Silicon Valley）这些个问题从来没有被满意的处理和解决。” 这样的调查很重要，有助于我们了解相比企业依靠自身的能力做出重要的决策以及对外部供给和需求条件作出独立 的评估来说，公司的层次决策受到区域中其他企业行为的影响更为重要 （ Gimenoetal， 2
45、005）。 管理涵义一样清楚，国际战略的学者和企业家精神对于集群企业是否具有持续竞争优势这个问题以及机制是否可能驱动集群成功，城市，地区和国家寻 求适当的方式以取得在高技术产业的世界权威，同时跨国公司通过在集群中的正确定位来增加顾客，资源供应商和战略联盟伙伴。 科学园区日益被提升为便利技术转让，区域发展的地方，因为它能使产业中地理集群的企业快速发展起来。其中技术园区的技术模拟器导致了产业集群和技术转移，人们从中很容易发现以前计划经济的热衷者正在进行转变，比如中华人民共和国。虽然技术模拟器对理论和时间的意义重大，但是它的发展在很多方面常被人忽视，大部分的工作都脱离专业领域的专家或是或其他学术领域例如工业经济或经济地理。中国的经济意义，自从它成为世界贸易组织的一员开始逐渐凸显，越来越多的国外投资者进入相关产业已经是垂直整合和聚集的区域内，并通过审查新出现的科技园区，园 区带来的技术转移和科技创新来进行学习。 在本次的研究中，深深理解到要更多得增加组织研究获而且提供通过研究新兴市场获得经验例如中国，我调查一个具体科技园区的例子，北京中关村 (中关村 )，它是中国最大半导，计算机和电信公司的集群，包括国内和国外两种投资公司。开始在一种环境经历基本的变迁，我调查了北京中关村集群的变革。更具体得说，我研究了集群的起源和集群企业。我具体得描绘了企业集群所面临的挑战，公司的调整以及拒绝集群。
