1、 外文翻译 原文 Industry Cluster Literature Review Material Source: Plan 261: Urban and Regional Development ,March 1998 Author:Jessica LeVeen Industry Cluster Definition The majority of the literature on industry clusters is focused on the actual definition of a cluster. The very basic definition of an in
2、dustry cluster is “ geographical concentrations of industries that gain performance advantages through co-location (Doeringer and Terkla 1995, pg.225).” This definition of clusters is similar to that of agglomeration economies, but in fact, it is within industry clusters that agglomeration economies
3、 are likely to be observed. Beyond the basic definition, however, there is little consensus on how to define an industry cluster. Michael Porter popularized the concept of industry clusters is his book The Competitive Advantage of Nations (1990). Porter developed the “ Diamond of Advantage,” which i
4、s four factors he determined create a competitive advantage for firms. The four corners of the diamond include factor conditions, demand conditions, industry strategy/rivalry, and related and supporting industries. Porter used this diamond to determine which firms and industries had competitive adva
5、ntages, and his emphasis of the importance of related and supporting industries encouraged interest in clusters. While his original thesis was applied to nations as a whole, Porter recognized that the majority of economic activity takes place at the regional level. Thus, his ideas are commonly appli
6、ed to cities and regions. The bulk of Porters thesis deals with the competitive advantages of clustering for industries. This aspect of his work is discussed in the Section III. Porter provides a simple definition of two types of clusters: vertical clusters, and horizontal clusters. Vertical cluster
7、s are made up of industries that are linked through buyer-seller relationships. Horizontal clusters include industries which might share a common market for the end products, use a common technology or labor force skills, or require similar natural resources (Porter 1990). Jacobs and DeMan (1996) an
8、d Rosenfeld (1996,1997) present more in-depth discussions of the different definitions of industry clusters, although these authors also use the definitions of vertical and horizontal clusters as the basis for their definitions. Jacobs and DeMan (1996, pg.425) argue that “ there is not one correct d
9、efinition of the cluster concept different dimensions are of interest.” They expand from the definitions of the vertical and horizontal industry clusters to identify key dimensions that may be used to define clusters. These include the geographic or spatial clustering of economic activity, horizonta
10、l and vertical relationships between industry sectors, use of common technology, the presence of a central actor (i.e., a large firm, research center, etc.), and the quality of the firm network, or firm cooperation (Jacobs and DeMan 1996). In addition to vertical and horizontal relationships, Rosenf
11、eld (1997) includes criteria for defining a cluster, including the size of the cluster, the economic or strategic importance of the cluster, the range of products produced or services used, and the use of common inputs. He does not encourage defining clusters exclusively by the size of the constitue
12、nt industries or the scale of employment, pointing out that many effective clusters are located in small inter-related industries which do not necessarily have pronounced employment concentrations. According to Rosenfeld (1997 pg.10), an industry cluster is: “ a geographically bounded concentration
13、of similar, related or complementary businesses, with active channels for business transactions, communications and dialogue, that share specialized infrastructure, labor markets and services, and that are faced with common opportunities and threats.” Rosenfelds definition clearly emphasizes the imp
14、ortance he places on the role of social interaction and firm cooperation in determining the dynamic nature of a cluster. Identification of Industry Clusters The varying definitions of industry clusters helps explain the differing arguments regarding the methodology to identify clusters. One of the c
15、ommon approaches to identifying clusters is based on quantitative techniques, including location quotients and input-output (I-O) analyses (Rosenfeld 1997). These tools help identify relative concentrations of industries in the region, as well as identify the buyer-seller linkages in different indus
16、try sectors. Michael Porter relied heavily on this type of analysis to form the basis of his international study of industry clusters. I-O analyses and other quantitative tools were also the basis for identifying clusters in several other studies, including the Twin Cities Industry Cluster Project (
17、State and Local Policy Program 1998) and UNC-Chapel Hills study of North Carolinas industries (Bergman, Feser and Sweeney 1996). The quantitative approach towards identifying industry clusters is generally regarded as a critical component of a cluster analysis. This type of analysis will provide an
18、initial tool for identifying potential clusters and will indicate the relative presence of different industries in the local region. An I-O analysis is especially useful in the analysis of a vertically-integrated cluster, when the buyer-seller linkages are more obvious. However, the quantitative ana
19、lysis does not address whether relationships really exist between the individual firms, and it does not account for other factors beyond the product-market relationships, such as industry collaboration and information flow (Doeringer and Terkla 1995, Jacobs and DeMan 1996, Rosenfeld 1996,1997). “ Al
20、though inter-industry transactions incorporated within production channels can sometimes be detected in input-output tables, neither the character or relationships among firms nor the benefits of clustering can be discerned in this way (Doeringer and Terkla 1995, pg.228).” There is a general consens
21、us in the literature that in order to truly identify industry clusters it is necessary to conduct a qualitative analysis in addition to the quantitative analysis. Surveys and interviews of key industry representatives will help expand an understanding of the buyer-supplier relationships, as well as
22、further identifying commonalties between industries (i.e., workforce or infrastructure needs, or technologies used). The use of the qualitative analysis will both confirm the findings of the quantitative analysis, as well as help identify potential industry clusters that may have been overlooked by
23、the conventional data analysis (Doeringer and Terkla 1995, Jacobs and DeMan 1996, Sternberg 1991, State and Local Policy Program 1998). Factors Driving Industry Cluster Growth and Development The factors which drive industry cluster development and growth are also the subject of debate in the litera
24、ture. In general, businesses locate where it makes the greatest economic sense, either in terms of accessing the market for their product, the labor pool, or required resources. The basic factors that drive industry clustering are very similar to the factors that encourage urban or locational agglom
25、eration economies. As stated by Doeringer and Terkla, “ The presence of positive externalities explains the clustering process, whereas specific location sites for each cluster depend on either historical accident or the cost advantages provided by immobile factors that attracted the firms anchoring
26、 the cluster (Doeringer and Terkla 1995, pg.226).” While there is consensus among the researchers that firms will cluster because they receive some type of benefit, the factors that create those benefits are debated. Michael Porter (1990) argues competition is a driving force behind cluster developm
27、ent. Clustering is a dynamic process, and as one competitive firm grows, it generates demand for other related industries. As the cluster develops it becomes a mutually reinforcing system where benefits flow backwards and forwards throughout the industries in the cluster. Porter argues that it is th
28、e competition between rival firms in the cluster that drives growth because it forces firms to be innovative and to improve and create new technology. This, in turn, leads to new business spin-offs, stimulates R through this collaboration, clusters develop (Rosenfeld 1997). The social infrastructure
29、 within the cluster helps facilitate technology and knowledge transfer, which strengthens the cluster and promotes future growth. The importance of face-to-face interaction is cited in Rosenfelds case studies of the furniture industry in Mississippi and the apparel/hosiery industry in Northern Italy
30、 (Rosenfeld 1997). Saxenian also discusses the importance of this interaction in the growth of Silicon Valley, and attributes much of the early success of the area to the social infrastructure (Saxenian 1994). In summary, cluster development is attributable to several key factors, including technolo
31、gy transfer, knowledge transfer, development of a skilled labor force in related industries, the benefits of agglomeration economies, and social infrastructure. However, researchers differ on how these factors promote cluster growth. On the one hand, Porter attributes cluster development and growth
32、to competition, and focuses on how these key factors drive competition (Porter 1990). On the other hand, the other authors cited above, say cluster development is promoted by collaboration among related firms that is encouraged by face to face contact. Through social interaction, technology and know
33、ledge transfer occurs, therefore leading to the development and growth of clusters. Reference Jacobs, Dany and Ard-Pieter De Man. 1996. Porter, Michael. 1990. The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Basic Books. Saxenian, AnnaLee. 1994. Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon
34、Valley and Route 128. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Bergman, E., E. Feser, and S. Sweeny. 1996. Targeting North Carolina Manufacturing: Understanding the States Economy through Industrial Cluster Analysis. Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Institute for Economic Development. Bosworth, Brian and Daniel
35、 Broun. 1996. “ Connect the Dots: Using Cluster-Based Strategies to Create Urban Employment.” Firm Connections 4(2): 1,6. Boekholt, Patries. 1997. “ The public sector at arms length or in charge? Towards a typology of cluster policies.” Paper for the OECD programme National Innovation Systems, prese
36、nted in Amerstdam, October 1997. Doeringer, P.B., and D.G. Terkla. 1995. “ Business strategy and cross-industry clusters.” Economic Development Quarterly 9: 225-3 Rosenfeld, Stuart A. 1996. Overachievers, Business Clusters that Work: Prospects for Regional Development. Chapel Hill, NC: Regional Tech
37、nology Strategies. 译文 产业集群文献 回顾 资料来源 : 261 计划 : 城市与区域发展 1998 年 3 月 作者： Jessica LeVeen 产业集群的定义 迈克尔 波特在国家竞争优势论（ 1990 年）推广了产业集群这个概念。波特的“钻石理论”的四个要素，并决定为公司创造竞争优势。“钻石理论”的四要素包括要素条件，需求条件，企业战略、结构与竞争，相关产业与支持产业。波特用这套“钻石理论一确定哪些企业与行业有竞争优势，他的重点在于鼓励相关与支持产业的形成。虽然他的论文是以一个国家为原相的，但波特也认识到多数经济活动发生在一个区域。因此，他的理论也普遍适用于一个城市
38、和地区。 波特论文的大部分是涉及产业集群竞 争优势的。这一方面在本文第三节讨论。他简单讨论了集群的两种类型：纵向集群与横向集群。纵向集群的有关行业是通过买卖双方的关系联系起来的。横向集群包括最终产品的共同市场，使用共同技术和劳动技能，货需要类似天然资源的产业（波特 ， 1990）。 雅各布斯 和德曼，罗森菲尔德提出了更多关于产业集群定义不同层面的深入讨论。尽管他们还是以纵向集群与横向集群为基础来定义。 雅各布斯 和德曼（ 1996， pg425）认为，“没有一个正确的集群概念的定义 定义不同层面。”他们扩大了纵向集群与横向集群的定义，以确定关键集群的关键因素。包括 经济活动的地域或空间，产业分
39、支机构的纵向与横向的关系，共型技术的应用，公司网络与公司合作（ 雅各布斯 ，德曼 ， 1996）。 除了纵向与横向集群的关系，罗森菲德尔（ 1997）包括集群的界定标准，集群大小，经济与战略对集群的重要性，产品的生产与服务使用的范围和共同投入的使用。他不鼓励用产业的大小或雇佣规模来专门界定集群，并指出许多行之有效的集群浓度位于相互关联的小行业，不一定有明显的就业机会。根据罗森菲尔德（ 1997,pg10），一个产业集群是：“ 一个区域集中了相似，关联或者互补的商业，和现有的商业交易沟通与对话渠 道，共享专门的基础设施，劳动力市场和服务，并且面临着相同的机遇和挑战。”罗森菲尔德的定义明确强调集群
40、在一个地方的社会交往中的作用和企业合作性质决定的动态的 重要性。 产业集群 的确定 产业集群的不同定义，有助于解释关于不同论点的方法来识别集群。普遍采用的一种识别集 群的方法是基于定量方法的基础上的，包括智商位置和输入输出的分析 （罗森菲尔德 ， 1997）。这些工具有利于确定 该区域相对集中的行业，以及确定不同行业之间联系的买卖双方。波特的国际研究很大程度上依赖于形成产业集群 的 基础上的这一类型的分析。 输入输出分析 和其他定 量分析工具是许多其他研究确定集群的基础，包括双城产业 和 UNC-查普尔 希尔的北卡罗莱纳州的研究 （伯格曼，菲瑟和斯威尼 ， 1996）。 产业集群定量方法被普遍
41、认为是集群分析的重要组成部分。这种类型的分析为确定潜在集群 提供了初步工具，并显示不同区域产业的相对存在性。输入输出分析尤其适用于当买方与卖方之间的联系更加明显，以分析 公司 纵向整合的产业集群 。然而，定量分析并不涉及是否真 正存在个人之间的关系 ，并且它不考虑 产品是否超越市场关系 渠道 的其他因素 ，如产业合作 与产业信息流（雅各布斯 和德曼 ， 1996，罗森菲尔德 ， 1996,1997）。 “ 虽然行业间的生产和交易可以在生产线的 投入产出表 被检测出来 ，不是公司间的特征与关系，也不是集群企业间的利益关系。 （ 窦瑞 格，特克拉 ， 1995， pg228）。 在文学界 有一 个
42、普遍共识 ，为了找出真正的产业集群，有必要进行 定性分析之外的定量分析 。 对重要 产业代表的 采访调查 将有助于扩大 买方和供应方关系 以及技术使用 的理解 ，进一步确定产业之间的共同点。定性 分析 的使用 将 同时 确认调查结果的定量分析，以及帮助确定 可能被传统数据分析所忽视潜在产业集群分析 ，（ 窦瑞格，特克拉 ， 1995， 雅各布斯 和德曼 ， 1996，伯格 ， 1991，国家和地方政策项目 ， 1998）。 推动产业集群成长与发展 的因素 哪些因素推动产业集群发展和成长也是文学主题的辩论。 一般来说，企业在哪里找 到他的最大经济意义，不是访问他们的产品市场，就是资源需求条件，劳
43、动力市场。产业集群的基本驱动因素跟鼓励城市或某个地区的聚集经济是非常相似的。正如 窦瑞格 和 特克拉 指出， 积极的外部性存在解释了集群的聚集过程，由于每个集群不是基于“历史事件”就是不动因素的成本的不同 地位，吸引了集群产业的集聚（ 窦瑞格 和 特克拉 ， 1995, pg226）。虽然研究人员打成共识，企业因为能获得一些利益而集聚，事实上所创造的那些利益是有争议的。 迈克尔 波特（ 1990）认为竞争是集群发展的原动力。集群是一个动态的过程，作为一个竞争性企 业的发展，它的产生需要其他相关产业。由于集群发展成为一个相辅相成的系统，利益倒流与 顺流贯穿于整个产业集群。波特认为，这是企业竞争对
44、手之间推动经济增长的竞争，因为它迫使企业去创新，改善和创造新技术。 反过来说，致使新业务分立，刺激研发，并强制企业引进新技术和服务。劳工因为产业集群中许多类似的企业需要劳动力，劳动力可以自由移动到集群中的其他相关产业，从而传递知识到新的企业，并继续促进竞争促使增长。这种增长 即 导致增加集群垂直整合，也可以导致该部门的横向一体化。使得垂直整合发生的劳动分工变得更加专门化，同时新公司能够 确定新的市场定位。由于新技术与劳动劳动技能应用到相关产业的不同领域使得横向集群的产生。 波特以硅谷为例提出如何促使横向集群竞争。 还有一些学术论文讨论集群发展的关键因素，并为此作了贡献。 窦瑞格 和特克拉 （
45、1995）引用聚集经济的好处观察产业集群作为一项推动集群发展的因素。企业的利益 在于企业紧密空间 定位从降低运输和交易成本，以及获得有技能的劳动力。集聚经济还可以推动竞争，鼓励 关联公司之间信息，知识和技术的转让。这些公司转让知识和技术等可导致新的产业增长，并 有助于推动产业集 群的整体增长。 面对面的互动也被作为集群 发展的关键因素而引用（ 窦瑞格 和 特克拉 ，1995，罗森菲尔德 ， 1997） 。这种互动是最有利于专业化的小公司，它可以灵活应用最终需求与技术革新来填补形成新的市场定位（ 窦瑞格 和 特克拉 ， 1995）。接近本地分销企业在各方面的装配生产过程，如供应商，机器制造商，加
46、工装配者，分销商，以及最终客户公司间合作迅速采用新技术和创新，因此增加了生产流程的整体效率。这些公司合作提供专业化服务，通过这项合作使得集群发展（罗森菲尔德 ， 1997）。 集群内存在的社会基础设施有助于减轻技术与知识的转移。，从而加强和提供集群的长远发展 。面 对面互动的重要性被罗森菲德尔在对意大利密西西比河的家具业服装 /织袜业的研究中引用。 (罗森菲尔德 ， 1997).萨克森 还讨论了这种互动在硅谷成长中的重要性。并为这一区域早期成功的社会基础设施建设的重要性 (萨克森 ， 1994)。 总之，集群发展是由于几个关键因素，包括技术转移，知识转移，在相关产业中熟练劳动力的培养，集聚经济的好处以及社会基础设施。然而，研究人员在这些因素如何 促进集群成长有不同意见。一方面，波特认为竞争为集群成长与发展作了贡献，并集中于这些因素如何促使竞争 (波特 ， 1990)。另一方面，上面提到的其他 作者，认为集群发展是由于鼓励协作促进相关企业之间的面对面接触。通过社会互动，技术和知识转移发生，促使集群的发展和增长。
