文献出处：De Maeseneire W, Claeys T. Foreign direct investment in Hungary [J]. International Business Review, 2014, 21(3): 408-424.
原文
Foreign direct investment in Hungary
De Maeseneire W, Claeys T
Due to factors such as geographic location and traditional relationship, like other central and eastern Europe, Hungary FDI79 % from the eu 15 countries, including Germany, accounting for 25% of the Hungarian FDI, followed by the Netherlands, Austria, 14% and 13%, respectively. The United States is outside the European Union in Hungary's largest investor, accounted for 5% of the total amount of Hungarian FDI, actually some FDI from the Netherlands and other European countries is also by the American companies to invest in these countries. In recent years, the Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea in the austro-hungarian FDI growth step by step. In 2009, the Hungarian FDI is still mainly comes from the European Union, but the German investment has fallen sharply, relegated to the second from bottom, the fewest since 2001 to invest in Hungary.
As the decision depends on interregional differences in factor and resource endowments. Because countries cannot be considered as homogeneous spaces, individual firms have to choose between a variety of locations and tend to concentrate in favorably endowed regions. Such clustering of firms, by leading to agglomeration externalities, adds further to the attractiveness of the location (Head et al. , 1995). Thus, firms tend also to cluster because of the positive externalities generated by proximity. Hence in addition to the endowment-driven localization theory, explanations of the location choice of MNEs can also be drawn from economic geography. In this respect, externalities related to proximity become a major explanation for the location choice of MNEs.
According to Marshall (1920), three sources of positive externalities can be identified. Locating near to each other provides firms variously with access to
specialized input suppliers and customers, a shared pooled market for skilled labour, and technological spillovers through facilitating information exchange. To these three traditional sources of positive externalities should be added the many different forms of localized externalities, namely backward and inward linkages issuing from the dynamics of the interaction of firms with other firms, institutions and infrastructures (Nachum, 2000). This line of reasoning is all the more relevant since the organizational structure of MNEs has changed since the end of the ‘golden age’of Western economic growth. The greater volatility of the international business environment has led to a search for more flexible forms of organization (Buckley and Casson, 2000), and therefore to the end of hierarchical capitalism (Dunning, 1995). This in turn has changed the nature of the external linkages of the firms (Nachum, 2000), both in terms of design and location. Firms focus on their core competence while increasing outsourcing. In other words, vertical integration has been discouraged and networks of independent firms have emerged (Harrison,1994, Part III). These firms are often neighbors.
In the light of these theoretical issues and, as raised by Head et al. (1995, p. 224),the question is a matter of deciding to what extent the pattern of FDI location within a country ‘ support[s] an agglomeration–externalities theory of industry localization rather than a theory based on inter-state differences in endowments of natural resources, labor and infrastructures ’. In this respect, the aim of this paper is to assess the determinants of location choice by foreign investors in Hungary, with particular emphasis on the existence and magnitude of agglomeration economies. Both theoretical and empirical work has addressed the process of location choice at the international level, but has rarely analyzed the sub-national (i.e., regional) distribution of FDI with a focus on agglomeration effects; even less has this been done in relation to Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) (see Table 1 below). Many academic papers have explored the determinants of location choice by foreign investors within the USA (Bartik, 1985; Carlton, 1983; Coughlin et al. , 1991; Friedman et al. , 1992; Head et al. , 1998; Head et al. , 1994, 1995, 1999; Luger and Shetty, 1985; Nachum, 2000; Woodward, 1992). Other papers have done the same for
large countries other than the USA or unions of countries in relation to foreign investors as a whole or investors originating from a particular country.Among recent studies, some have focused on the regional choices of foreign investors in China (Head and Ries, 1996; Cheng and Kwan, 1999, 2000; He, 2002), while others have been concerned with the choices of foreign investors in Europe (Barrell and Pain, 1999; Clegg and Scott-Green, 1998; Devereux and Griffith, 1998; Ferrer, 1998; Mayer and Mucchielli, 1998, 1999; Mucchielli and Puech, 2003; Scaperlanda and Balough, 1983). Only a few empirical studies have assessed the location motivations of FDI at a more local level. For example, Guimar?es et al. (2000) have examined such motivations for Portugal, and Cantwell and Iammarino (2000) for the United Kingdom. But among recent studies, by far and away the most comprehensive at a local level is that by Crozet et al. (2003) for France.
As far as the CEECs are concerned, there have been few empirical studies of the location determinants of FDI and of the agglomeration effects among determinants (Kinoshita and Campos, 2003; Lankes and Venables, 1996). To my knowledge, there is no existing study of this pattern for one particular transition country. Indeed, this type of research faces difficulties at an empirical level. Due to data collection problems (data for state, regional and county levels is scarce and not always mutually consistent), the measurement of agglomeration effects in transition economies may be particularly problematic. In addition, the period of time over which transition has been underway in CEECs is relatively short. Both these reasons can make any econometric test problematic.
Spatial patterns of FDI in Hungary
Since the beginning of the transition process, Hungary has attracted a noteworthy amount of FDI, mainly targeting the tertiary sector and originating mostly in the EU. But FDI is unevenly distributed among the Hungarian regions.
A major capital city effect
Table 2 shows the distribution of inward FDI across Hungarian counties over the period 1990 – 2000. Foreign-owned branch plants are concentrated in Budapest and therefore in the region of Central Hungary, which accounted for 69 percent of inward
FDI stock attracted by Hungary in 2000. Of the other regions, Western Transdanubia and Central Transdanubia are the most attractive to FDI. The proximity effect plays an important role, particularly in the case of Western Transdanubia, which is the only Hungarian region having a common border with the EU (Austria). Conversely, the least attractive Hungarian region is Southern Transdanubia, a predominantly agricultural region that has been completely marginalised since 1995.
Over the ten-year period, Central Hungary has accounted for approximately two-thirds of FDI, a polarization on the Hungarian capital which became more pronounced in 2000. It is possible that data may be skewed towards FDI in Budapest because MNEs declare their investments at the headquarters, which are often located in the capital, in contrast to their production units which may be elsewhere; nonetheless, the data suggest that there is a strong capital effect, in that firms tend to agglomerate in or around the capital city.
Relative regional attractiveness
In order to take account of the varying size of the regions, the above table on regional distribution of FDI in Hungary was completed using a relative regional attractiveness index. This was calculated by dividing the regional share of total FDI by the regional share of gross fixed capital formation.
Because of the disproportionate weight of Budapest, the index was calculated without taking into account Central Hungary. In Table 3, which displays this index, only two regions are less attractive for FDI than for investment in general: Northern Great Plain and Southern Transdanubia, both of whose indexes are less than 1. This confirms the earlier observation that Southern Transdanubia was the least attractive region for FDI (see Section 2.1 above). Central Transdanubia experienced a relative downturn in attracting inward FDI between 1995 and 1998, but then recovered in 1999.
In relation to the size of the regions, there is no great variation in regional attractiveness for FDI. In fact, Hungary is very clearly split in two along a northwest/ southeast axis (see map above). In relative terms, the western and northern Hungarian regions (Central Hungary, Central Transdanubia, Western Transdanubia and Northern
Hungary) have clearly fared better than those of the south and east (Southern Transdanubia, Northern Great Plain and Southern Great Plain). These marked patterns of geographic concentration suggest the need to go further in assessing the location determinants of FDI in Hungary and the agglomeration effects among them. Concluding remarks and prospects
This research provides an empirical approach to the regional determinants of FDI in CEECs. It may be considered as innovative in as much as this kind of study has never, to my knowledge, been carried out for these countries due to the lack of firm-based data and the consequent difficulty of measuring and assessing the determinants of FDI.
The results indicate that labor availability, demand conditions and agglomeration economies all have a significant and positive influence on the inward FDI attracted by Hungarian counties. Surprisingly, unit labor costs are positively associated with FDI. However, when the geographical division of Hungary is taken into account, the coefficient of the labor cost variable becomes negative for the more labor-intensive southern and eastern counties. The biggest problem faced in defining the location determinants is how to define a demand variable. First, it is difficult to define the geographical extent of demand. Hungarian demand does not end at Hungary’s borders but, especially since its integration into the EU, extends to neighboring countries. Second, traditional location determinants, among them demand, overlap with agglomeration economies, thereby making it more difficult to interpret the findings.
Finally, the scope of the current research suffers from a lack of sect oral study of localization factors, which take into account the differing conditions of competition across sectors. Ideally such research would aim to analyze the localization factors of FDI across home countries and sectors. But the lack of available data forced this study to refer to the aggregated figures for all industries within the counties. This limitation prevented us from testing the extent to which the location choice of MNEs in Hungary is motivated by a strategy of low cost production with access to adjacent EU markets or to CEEC markets, and from establishing whether firms tend to make location choices on a specific national basis.
Nevertheless, this research is an initial exploration of a topic that is of increasing importance given that eight of the Central and Eastern European countries have recently become members of the EU and hence of a single market in which national boundaries matter less and less while the importance of regional factors is on the increase.
译文
外商直接投资:匈牙利的案例
De Maeseneire W, Claeys T
由于地理位置和传统关系等因素，如其他中东欧国家一样，匈牙利FDI79%来自欧盟15国，其中德国最多，占匈FDI的25%，其次为荷兰、奥地利，分别为14%和13%。美国是欧盟以外在匈最大投资国，占匈FDI总额的5%，实际上一些来自荷兰和其他欧洲国家的FDI也是由设在这些国家的美资企业投资的。近年来，日本和韩国等亚洲国家在匈FDI逐步增长。2009年，匈牙利FDI仍主要来自欧盟，但其中德国投资大幅下降，退居倒数第二位，创2001年以来对匈投资最少的纪录。
导致这种情况，不禁要问这样一个问题：是什么因素决定了跨国公司的区位选择问题，以匈牙利作为案例。一旦一个跨国企业已经决定在匈牙利开设工厂，为什么决定在一个特定别的县而不是另一个县成立？
按照传统的贸易理论，这一决定依赖于要素资源禀赋和区域间的差异。由于国家不能被认为是齐性空间，个别企业在不同的地点之间进行选择，往往倾向在区位有利地区进行投资。
这些由外部因素导致结块的产业群企业，进一步增加了吸引力的位置（黑德et al,1995）。因此，企业往往也由于正外部效应就近集聚。因此，除了向要素禀赋驱动的定位理论，对跨国公司区位选择的解释，也可以来自经济地理。在这方面，外部相关的地缘关系成为跨国公司区位选择的主要解释。
马歇尔（1920），积极的外部经济效应是可识别的。接近彼此定位可以为企业带来特定的供应商和客户，共同的熟练劳动力市场，并促进信息交流技术外溢。这三个传统的积极的外部经济效应，带来许多不同的本地化的外部形式，即向后
和向内的联系从与其他公司机构的动态互动公司和基础设施（那切尔，2000）。这种推论与自西方经济增长黄金时代终结跨国公司机构改变相关。国际商业环境出现较大波动，带来了更多灵活组织形式的研究（巴克利和卡森，2000），以及分层资本主义的结束（邓宁，1995）。这反过来又改变了公司的对外关联的性质，无论在组织结构和还是区位选择（拉切姆，2000年）。公司专注于他们的核心竞争力，同时增加外包。换言之，垂直整合已削弱和独立企业网络已经出现（哈里森, 1994, Part III）。这些公司往往相互比邻。在这一理论问题的研究过程中，由黑德 et al.(1995, p.224),提出，关于是什么拓展了FDI在一个国家内的投资模式，支持这是一个产业集聚外部性理论，而不是一个基于国家间天然资源，劳动力禀赋和基础设施资源禀赋差异理论'。在这方面，本文的目的是评估外国投资者在匈牙利区位选择的决定因素，重点研究集聚经济的存在及其重要性。关于这方面的理论和实证工作都着重强调国际化方面，但很少分析了外国直接投资次国家（即区域）的一个集中分布集聚效应，而且更少关于中东欧地区的研究（见表1所示）。许多学术文章都探讨了外国投资者的区位选择的决定因素，如在the USA (巴蒂克, 1985; 卡尔顿, 1983;弗里德曼 et al., 1992; 黑德 et al., 1994, 1995, 1999; 鲁格和舍弟, 1985; 伍德沃, 1992)。其他论文用了同样的做法把除美国欧盟以外的国家作为外商直接投资的整体或者投资特定来源国。在最近的研究，主要集中在一些在中国外商直接投资者的区域选择（(黑德和里斯, 1996; 陈和关, 1999, 2000; 赫, 2002)，而其他已与外国投资者的选择，在有关欧洲（巴雷尔和佩, 1999; 克莱格和斯科特， 1998;德弗罗和格里菲斯, 1998; 费勒, 1998; 迈尔和迈切尔, 1998;庞彻, 2003）。只有少数的实证研究评估在地方一级的外国直接投资地点的动机。例如，利马雷斯 et al. (2000) （2000年）在葡萄牙的研究，坎特维尔(2000)英国的研究。最近的研究中，最全面的地方一级研究，是由克洛泽et al. (2003)法国的研究。
对于东欧国家而言，也出现了外国直接投资区位选择决定因素以及把集聚效应作为影响因素研究(木下和坎波斯, 2003;兰克斯和维纳布斯, 1996)。据我所知，还没有关于特定的模式转型国家现有研究。事实上，这类研究面临着一个经验层面的困难。由于数据收集问题（州，地区和县三级数据很稀少，而且并不总是一致），在过渡时期的国家集聚效应测量尤其成为一个主要问题。此外，过
外商在华直接投资的影响因素及效益分析 第一章外商在华直接投资的现状及特点 伴随经济全球化的加速和国际分工的细化，新一轮产业结构调整在全球范围内展开，我国经济在经历了近20年的持续高增长之后也开始步入以增长方式转变和结构调整为主的转型时期。市场容量的扩大、需求的多层次性、工资差距的变动以及“消费断层”的存在促使在华外商直接投资无论在投资动机、投资方式还是在投资类型方面均呈现出新的特点。 1.1外商在华直接投资的现状 1.1.1投资规模不断扩大 从外商直接投资项目规模看，2002年我国批准外商直接投资项目34171项，是1983年的54倍、1990年的约5倍；其次，从外商直接投资的合同外资金额规模看，2002年外商对华直接投资的合同外资金额达827.68亿美元，分别是1983年和1990年的约43倍和13倍；最后，从外商对华实际投资规模看，2002年我国实际利用外商直接投资金额达527.43亿美元，是1983年的65倍、1990年的15倍。2008年，外商投资企业的工业产值和纳税分别已经占全国的30%和21%，占出口的比重高达55%，直接吸纳的就业人数达到4500万，在全球最大的500家跨国公司中，在中国投资的达到480家。截至2009年5月底，中国累计实际吸收外商直接投资约9000亿美元。外资经济已经成为中国经济的重要组成部分。 1.1.2增长速度持续稳定 改革开放20多年来，外商对华直接投资无论在批准项目数、合同外资额，还是在实际利用外资额上都保持着稳定的增长速度。1984-2002年全国批准外商
直接投资项目平均增长率为24.91%，其中，1984-1998年均增长率更高达59.4% 。合同外资额增长率总体上也保持着增长的态势，1984-2002年均增长率为21.47%。实际利用外资金额1999年出现下降外，其余年份均保持增长，1983-2002 年，我国实际利用外商直接投资年均增速高达33.5%。近几年来，中国的对外开放战略，也从过去以“引进来”为主要特征调整为“引进来”和“走出去”相结合。2007年，中国企业的非金融类对外投资额达到190亿美元，是2004年的3.4倍，2008年又增长到410亿美元。由此可见，外商对华直接投资额仍持续稳定并且保持着快速增长的状态。 1.2外商在华直接投资的特点 1.2.1外商投资产业结构进一步优化 外商在我国的投资过去主要集中于以轻纺为主的传统工业，近年来开始转向重工业方面投资,逐步投向石油化工、冶金、汽车和飞机等工业。另外，设备制造业、电气机械及器材制造业等高技术领域吸收外商投资持续大幅增长，外商投资设立研发中心和地区总部数量也迅速增加，钢铁、水泥、电解铝等行业新增外商投资也得到了有效遏制，使得外商在华投资的产业结构进一步优化。 最近几年外商在我国制造业中的投资发生了重要变化，我国制造业正在从加工组装基地向全球制造基地转变。随着跨国公司投资规模的扩大和投资水平的提高，中国在继续保持劳动密集型产业优势的同时，在高附加值产品和技术研发上的优势也开始形成。以往许多跨国公司不愿意向中国转移最先进的产品和技术，但这种状况最近几年发生了明显变化，大量日本企业正在将最先进的制造技术和产品转移到在华投资企业。例如东芝在华投资已由以往集中于家电、机电、能源领域转向信息技术及软件领域，并将在今后加大IT业方面的投资。阿尔卡特将其全球先进技术和产品向在华合资企业和中国市场全面开放，上海贝尔阿尔卡特有限公司将全面获得阿尔卡特开发的最新技术和产品。柯达公司已经将全球的Easyshare数码相机生产转移到上海。医药行业中的大型跨国公司，开始在中国生产其最新产品，将中国列入全世界其新药上市首批名单等等。 2
外文翻译 原文 World Trade and International Trade Material Source:https://www.doczj.com/doc/dd14255842.html, Author: Ted Alax In today’s complex economic world, neither individuals nor nations are self-sufficient. Nations have utilized different economic resources; people have developed different skills. This is the foundation of world trade and economic activity. As a result of this trade and activity, international finance and banking have evolved. For example, the United States is a major consumer of coffee, yet it does not have the climate to grow any or its own. Consequently, the United States must import coffee from countries (such as Brazil, Colombia and Guatemala) that grow coffee efficiently. On the other hand, the United States has large industrial plants capable of producing a variety of goods, such as chemicals and airplanes, which can be sold to nations that need them. If nations traded item for item, such as one automobile for 10,000 bags of coffee, foreign trade would be extremely cumbersome and restrictive. So instead of batter, which is trade of goods without an exchange of money, the United State receives money in payment for what it sells. It pays for Brazilian coffee with dollars, which Brazil can then use to buy wool from Australia, which in turn can buy textiles Great Britain, which can then buy tobacco from the United State. Foreign trade, the exchange of goods between nations, takes place for many reasons. The first, as mentioned above is that no nation has all of the commodities that it needs. Raw materials are scattered around the world. Large deposits of copper are mined in Peru and Zaire, diamonds are mined in South Africa and petroleum is recovered in the Middle East. Countries that do not have these resources within their own boundaries must buy from countries that export them. Foreign trade also occurs because a country often does not have enough of a particular item to meet its needs. Although the United States is a major producer of sugar, it consumes more than it can produce internally and thus must import sugar.
中国对外直接投资存在的现状及问题探析 [摘要]当前我国对外直接投资存在的主要问题是地区分布不尽合理,投资规模小,经济效益偏低;投资存在一定的盲目性,缺乏高效统一的宏观管理与协调机构;海外企业缺乏高素质的人才,经营管理水平不高;我国海外投资风险尚缺乏有效的防范制度和措施。 [关键词] 对外直接投资问题 一、我国对外直接投资的现状 1.对外直接投资存量与流量 从我国近几年来对外直接投资的发展情况可以看出, 虽然对外直接投资规模不断扩大, 但从总体规模上我国与部分发达国家或发展中国家还存在一定差距。根据商务部发布的数据,截至2003年底,中国累计对外直接投资净额332亿美元,相当于1990 年的13倍。2004年延续了对外直接投资的上升势头,中国2004年对外直接投资流量为36. 2亿美元,年末存量接近370亿美元。2008年,中国对外直接投资更是增速惊人。在5月举行的第四届东亚投资论坛上,中国商务部副部长陈健在论坛上透露,该年一季度,中国对外直接投资( FDI) 为193. 4 亿美元, 同比增长353%。 2.对外直接投资区域选择 从投资区域结构看, 近年来我国对外直接投资分布区域更为广泛, 2006年我国对外投资合作业务已经遍及世界约200个国家和地区,其中, 在亚洲的直接投资额占我国对外直接投资额的30%,在非洲的直接投资额占我国对外直接投资额的比例约为3%,在拉美国家的直接投资额占我国对外直接投资总额的60%,拉美已经取代亚洲成为我国对外投资的第一大目的地。可以说, 我国90%以上的对外直接投资投向了亚太地区, 相比之下, 欧洲其他地区所占份额极小。 3.对外直接投资主体与投资方式 近年来,随着中国加入世界贸易组织,国家逐渐放宽了对外投资政策,对外直接投资主体逐渐由国有企业主导向投资主体多元化方向发展。国有企业占整个投资主体的比重由2003年的43%降至2006年的26% ,而有限责任公司由2003年的22%上升至2006年的33% ,超过国有企业跃居对外投资主体首位,私营企业则位居对外投资主体的第三位。这表明有限责任公司和民营企业已逐渐发展成为我国对外投资的新生力量,投资主体结构进一步优化。另外, 跨国并购已成为我国对外投资的重要方式。 二、我国对外直接投资发展中遇到的主要问题 1.缺乏清晰的境外发展战略,投资存在一定的盲目性 发达国家的大型跨国公司往往都有一个显著的特点,就是具有完整的全球战略,以世界市场作为角逐的目标,对再生产周期的各个环节实行国际化安排。而我国企业对外直接投资尚处于初级阶段,还未制定对外直接投资总体发展战略。首先,我国有些企业从事对外投资不是生产经营发展到一定程度的结果,而是带有某种试探性、偶然性。其次,我国更多的企业进行对外直接投资的主要目的仍是扩大出口市场,增加出口创汇,而不是依据企业全球化发展战略的实施计划而进行投资的。这样企业海外发展的持续性和全体布局性就较差,也将导致企业在全球市场的长期竞争中缺乏后劲。 2.企业缺乏核心技术 核心技术与核心产品是企业在市场中取胜的主要因素。目前, 我国还处在技术引进阶段, 在关键技术上, 还难以与国外具有高新尖技术和成熟产品的企业抗衡。从总体上看,与发达国家相比,我国企业的技术优势不足。对许多引进的先进技术缺乏消化吸收, 创新能力不强, 特别是一些高端产品的核心技术仍然依靠进口, 甚至某些行业的产业结构、产品结构、技术结构不适应市场经济的要求, 根本没有竞争优势可言, 因而无力参与国际竞争, 甚至连国内的
外文翻译 原文 Firms in International Trade Material Source: https://www.doczj.com/doc/dd14255842.html, Author: Andrew B. Bernard For most of its lengthy history the field of international trade largely ignored the role of the firm in mediating the flow of goods and services. Traditional trade theory explained the flow of goods between countries in terms of comparative advantage, that is, variation in the opportunity costs of production across countries and industries. Even the research focusing on differentiated varieties and increasing returns to scale that followed Helpman and Krugman continued to retain the characterization of the representative firm.?However, the assumption of a representative firm, while greatly enhancing the tractability of general equilibrium analysis, is emphatically rejected in the data. My research over the past decade has been an attempt to explore international trade from below: to understand the decisions of heterogeneous firms in shaping international trade and their effects on productivity growth and welfare. Firm Heterogeneity and Trade My early work with J. Bradford Jensen was motivated by a simple question: what do we know about firms that trade? The answer at the time was "very little" and our initial efforts focused on locating firm-level data and describing the world of exporting firms. Our first study compared exporters and non-exporters for the entire U.S. manufacturing sector and established a set of facts about exporting plants and firms.?Two major results stand out. First, only a small fraction of firms are exporters at any given time. Even in sectors where the United States is thought to have comparative advantage, such as Instruments, a majority of firms produce only for the domestic market. Similarly, some firms are exporting even in net import sectors such as Textiles and Apparel. Second, exporters are substantially and significantly different than non-exporters, even in the same industry and region. Exporters are dramatically larger, more productive, pay higher wages, use more skilled workers, and are more technology- and capital-intensive than their non-exporting counterparts. In related
我国上市公司融资行为文献综述 前言 资本结构对任何企业来说都非常重要，而融资行为是资本结构理论所研究的主要问题，通过融资活动为企业生产经营筹集必要的资金是一切投资发展活动的开始。上市公司融资方式包含两个部分，分别为源融资和外源融资，外源融资又分为股权融资和债权融资。学者们通过研究发现我国上市公司的融资偏好与西方有所不同，这里将国学者对融资行为的研究进行整理并作了综述，以便了解我国上市公司融资行为的大致情况。 一、融资理论与优序融资理论 融资理论是企业制定融资政策的理论基础。自20世纪50年代以来,在解释企业融资决策行为的动机及其所秉承的理论基础时,主要存在着两论,一是权衡融资理论;二是优序融资理论。 权衡融资理论认为,企业在构造长期资本来源的组合时,存在着一个最佳的资本结构,企业将按照事先测算的最佳资本结构来选择资金来源及配置各种不同性质的资金。 优序融资理论，以信息不对称理论为基础,提出企业融资存在一种“啄食顺序原则”。认为由于所有权和经营权的分离而产生委托代理关系,因为利益不同,部经营者和股东之间的信息不对称原因,企业的融资顺序上就形成了一个优序策略。即首先为部融资,也就是企业的留存收益,其次是短期借款和长期债券;再次是发行优先股融资;最后是发行普通股融资。 在国,有些学者通过实证研究发现我国企业偏好于股权融资。这与优序融资理论的主正好相反。 二、我国上市企业融资模式概况 根据有关部门对上市公司进行统计分析显示,我国企业的融资模式以外源融资为主。在外文融资中，主要偏向于股权融资。所以,我国上市公司的融资顺序,首先是股权融资，然后是债券融资，最后才是源融资。英明（2005），利辉，立新，桂（2010）研究发现，我国上市企业外源融资比例达80% 左右，而源融资比例不到20% 。对于未分配利润为负的上市公司，源融资比例平均为- 3.385% ，这意味着那些未分配利润为负的上市公司几乎完全
外商对华直接投资的效应风险述评 内容提要：外商对华直接投资对促进中国经济发展，提高国内企业业绩具有诸多正面效应和积极作用。但随着外资进程的加快，利用外商对华投资的风险问题也随即出现，亟待需要解决和深入研究。本文在问题提出的背景下，就近期相关中外资风险的问题进行文献综述和评价，进而提出规避风险的政策建议，以期我国经济建设的健康持续发展。 关键词：FDI风险政策建议 一、问题背景 我国改革开放，利用外资所取得的成绩令世人瞩目，但伴随引资战略进程的加快，我国在引进和利用外资中存在一些潜在风险，产生了一定的负面效应，许多问题亟待解决。首先，国内被外资垄断的一些行业，排挤了我国民族企业，威胁到我国的产业安全，加大了国内市场风险。其次，外贸依存度虚高，外企出口占总出口的50％以上，反映了出口对GDP增长的拉动作用很大程度上依赖外企实现，我国对外资的依赖性过高，影响到我国的国际收支安全，加大了国际市场风险。第三，外资的技术外溢效果从总体上看不太明显，我国出口中劳动密集型产品占绝对层次的现状并没改变，贸易环境持续恶化的趋势也没扭转，表明利用外资优化出口产品结构的目标未能达到预期效果。第四，外企的技术垄断和限制竞争行为增强了我国对外国技术的依赖性，影响了我国自主技术创新的能力和积极性，技术的相对落后使我国产业和企业的市场竞争力偏低，加大了国际和国内市场风险。第五，外资对总体就业的贡献率很低，与其在我国获取的利益不成比例，同时，外资的区域选择偏好也加剧了我国地区经济差异和个人收入差异。 尽管目前有许多国内外学者对此方面问题进行了有效的理论探讨，但绝大多数国内专家在从总体上论述了外资的正面效应后，只是略带论述了外资的负面效应，还不够深入；或从单个方面探讨外资的负面影响，如国内学者在技术外溢和技术安全方面，运用了大量的计量与实证的分析方法，但分析结果大相径庭，对统计计量标准与方法也存在较大的分歧。作为国外学者则是针对发展中国家整体进行分析，或以中国为例进行局部分析，直接对我国具体情况进行深入客观分析的较少，并且国外专家分析也难免会从自身的角度和立足点出发来看待中国问题，不一定完全符合我国国情。虽然外资对我国经济的负面影响及对策有专门阐述，但缺乏理论系统分析，因此本文研究具有重要的理论意义。我国全面履行人世义务的过渡期即将过去。这意味着中国融入经济全球化进程将加快，外资会以更快的速度进入我国，国际投资的自由化趋势难以逆转。在积极参与了与其他国家（尤其是周边国家）的区域经济一体化和多边投资自由化活动中，全球化和区域经济一体化并存的现象使我国的政策出现了两难
Positioning in Practice Strategic Role of Marketing For large firms that have two or more strategic business units (SBUs), there are generally three levels of strategy: corporate-level strategy, strategic-business-unit-level (or business-level) strategy, and marketing strategy. A corporate strategy provides direction on the company's mission, the kinds of businesses it should be in, and its growth policies. A business-level strategy addresses the way a strategic business unit will compete within its industry. Finally, a marketing strategy provides a plan for pursuing the company's objectives within a specific market segment. Note that the higher level of strategy provides both the objectives and guidelines for the lower level of strategy. At corporate level, management must coordinate the activities of multiple strategic business units. Thus the decisions about the organization's scope and appropriate resource deployments/allocation across its various divisions or businesses are the primary focus of corporate strategy.Attempts to develop and maintain distinctive competencies tend to focus on generating superior financial, capital, and human resources; designing effective organizational structures and processes; and seeking synergy among the firm's various businesses. At business-level strategy, managers focus on how the SBU will compete within its industry. A major issue addressed in business strategy is how to achieve and sustain a competitive advantage. Synergy for the unit is sought across product-markets and across functional department within the unit. The primary purpose of a marketing strategy is to effectively allocate and coordinate marketing resources and activities to accomplish the firm's objectives within a specific product-market. The decisions about the scope of a marketing strategy involve specifying the target market segment(s) to pursue and the breadth of the product line to offered. At this level of strategy, firms seek competitive advantage and synergy through a well-integrated program of marketing mix elements tailored to the needs and wants of customers in the target segment(s). Strategic Role of Positioning Based on the above discussion, it is clear that marketing strategy consists of two parts: target market strategy and marketing mix strategy. Target market strategy consists of three processes: market segmentation, targeting (or target market selection), and positioning. Marketing mix strategy refers to the process of creating a unique
附录 F.1英文参考资料及中文翻译 F. 1 .1international trade documents role General international trade documents (international trade documents) is the international trade of use all the documents, documents and certificates collectively. Usually with international trade documents to deal with in and out of delivery of the goods El, transportation, insurance, inspection and quarantine, customs declaration, the settlement of exchange, etc. Special international trade documents usually refers to the settlement documents, especially the l/c under the way of settlement of documents. International trade documents and the use of import and export trade program closely related, the documents in the import and export enterprise work throughout the export, purchase, transportation, the whole process of the proceeds, the effort is big, timeliness strong, is broad, in addition to import and export enterprise internal between various departments the cooperation with the outside, still must and bank, customs, transportation department, insurance companies, the inspection and quarantine agencies and the relevant administrative authorities happen various contact, linked together, mutual influence, also are conditions. International trade documents for the performance of a contract is necessary means International trade is the transnational goods business, due to the particularity of the multinational business, which is the purchase and sale of the different departments are located in different countries, are remote, in most cases, the goods and payment can't perform simple direct exchange, but only as the medium of exchange with documents means. The international trade of the documents that sales of goods through the documents realization sale, the seller should not only will the actual delivery of goods export shipment, and should submit to the buyer include the title to the goods vouchers, complete documents to show real assignment. The seller/p means that the delivery of the goods, and the buyer payment is get to buy goods on behalf of property rights certificate, the deal is no longer with the goods as the core, but with documents as the core. Documents and payment of the convection principle has become the international trade of general principles of the commodity business. As international trade experts "; m Cardiff in the export trade in his book mentioned: "from a business perspective, can say CIF the purpose of the contract is not the buying and selling of goods itself, but the documents relating to the goods business." What say here "documents" is the international trade of documents. International trade documents many kinds, every kind of documents has its
中国上市公司融资方式选择文献综述 赵婉婷、朱德康 【内容摘要】 企业融资问题，尤其是股权融资偏好问题，已经成为我国进入21世纪以来资本市场争论的焦点之一。随着不对称信息的引入改变了MM定理“结构不相关”的结论，西方发达国家认为，基于原有股东的利益，企业在进行融资决策时会严格遵循“内部融资-债务融资-股权融资”的啄食顺序理论，而我国的融资现实表现出强烈的股权融资偏好，并且股权融资资金利用效率低下也是一个普遍存在的问题。基于上述背景，本文系统梳理并研究了我国企业融资理论的发展及一些相关研究成果，这些理论对本文将要研究的思路和方法有很重要的指导意义。 【关键词】股权融资；债券融资；收购并购； 一、引言 企业的融资方式主要包括内源融资和外源融资两类，其中内源融资是企业生产过程中自有资金的积累，包括留存收益和折旧；外源融资即企业的外部资金来源部分，包括股权融资和债权融资。股权融资是指公司首次上市募集资金、配股、增发新股融资等；债权融资包括公司在证券市场上发行债券及向银行或非银行金融机构借款等。 不同融资方式的选择将导致不同的资金成本、利益冲突及财务风险，进而影响到公司的市场价值。因此企业如何通过融资方式的选择来实现其市场价值最大化，不但是股东和债权人的共同目标，也是长久以来金融理论研究的焦点。外国学者在这个领域的探索和研究中，己初步形成了较完整的理论体系，即企业资本结构理论。近年来，随着我国资本市场的不断发展完善，我国学者在这方面的研究也逐渐增多。本文将对我国学者在研究我国资本市场中取得的主要成果进行概述。 二、股权融资 1、我国上司公司偏好股权融资成因分析 张嘉颖【1】认为上司公司偏好股权融资有一下几大原因： （1）股权融资偏好的直接原因——股利分配的随意性和较低的股权融资成本； （2）证券市场制度设计原因，这些源于制度设计和制度变迁过程的偏颇，造成了我国证券市场发展不完善，助长了股票市场非正常繁荣； （3）投资者通过企业融资方式这个信号判断企业价值是比较困难的，因此，上司公司也不必担忧股权融资可能带来的负面效应； （4）内部融资来源不充分，股权融资的约束力低于债券融资； （5）业绩评价指标驱使上市公司偏好股权融资。在经济增加值评价指标下，上市公司可能更乐意采用债务融资。 2、对配股和增发方式的选择
改革开放以来外商在华直接投资 经济效用研究 The Economic Utility of FDI since the Reform and Opening-up in China April 2012
摘要 随着经济全球化速度的不断加快，国际直接投资日益频繁，投资流量、规模迅速扩大，对整个世界经济格局的变革产生了深刻影响。1978年改革开放至今，吸引外商在华直接投资数量逐年增加，引资额已连续多年位居发展中国家的首位。经过三十多年的发展,中国无疑已然成为世界经济活动中不可或缺的重要一员.改革开放以来的中国在利用外商直接投资方面不断取得突破，外商在华直接投资从无到有，规模从小到大，已然形成多层次、宽领域、全方位的开放发展新格局，对中国经济发展产生了重大而深远的影响。本文将站在历史沿革角度，运用历史眼光正确看待外商直接投资的历史、现在及未来，对改革开放30年的外商在华直接投资发展历程的重点进行梳理。通过历史比较，对改革开放以来外商在华直接投资在我国经济高速发展期的作用得出综合评述，本文力求在每一章节做到条理分明，层次清晰。 本论文拟分五部分展开论述： 第一部分：前言。主要包括以下内容：介绍选题的背景和研究意义；国内外学界有关外商直接投资经济效用研究方面的成果和文献综述；课题结构安排和研究方法；研究创新点及不足之处。 第二部分：改革开放以来中国吸引外商直接投资发展历程及特征。包括基于历史角度，回顾外商在华直接投资的五个阶段发展历程；在华直接投资来源地、投资方式、产业布局、区域分布四个方面的特征分析。 第三部分：外商在华直接投资对经济发展促进作用分析。首先从宏观角度分析改革开放以来外商在华直接投资经济效用，然后选取外商在华直接投资与中国技术进步、产业发展、市场化改革等问题进行具体分析。 第四部分：中国利用外商直接投资过程中出现的问题。分析在改革开放三十多年的进程中利用外商直接投资产生的结构风险，如外资进入与国家经济安全、不均衡分布扩大经济水平差距、产业结构失衡影响工业结构效益；日趋受到普遍关注的环境污染与破坏问题。 第五部分：外商在华直接投资政策建议。分为三个具体部分进行评述。首先强调用国家发展战略眼光引导。其次政府立法规范在华外企的经营行为。最后提出寻求创新发展之路的方向。 关键词：改革开放；直接投资；历程；经济效用
评价外商直接投资对中国经济发展的作用 内容摘要:近年来,在世界范围上,中国被广泛地认为是引入外商直接投资促进经济发展最为成功的国家之一。主流文献应用新古典经济学分析框架得出结论,认为外商直接投资透过资本形成、出口扩张、技术转移和推动经济结构和制度转变促进了中国经济发展。本文则从涵盖结构主义、激进政治经济学、新古典经济学等学派有关外商直接投资和后进发展研究的一个多方位视角,来评价外商直接投资对中国经济发展的作用。通过比较分析得出,外商直接投资一方面确实促进了资源配置效率,有利于中国的经济发展,另一方面却妨碍了生产性效率的提升、对中国经济发展造成了消极影响,综合而言,总的效应却应该是偏向于负面的。 关键词:外商直接投资,相对生产率,比较优势,经济发展 一、现有文献概述与批评 现有的研究文献绝大多数遵循主流新古典经济学的分析框架——在不同程度上,它们接受这样的假定,认为外商直接投资的经济意义,是代表了接受体的资金和技术资源的一种“净增加”。这种分析主要有两种方法。第一种方法,将外商直接投资与经济总量的主要指标的比率简单标示出来,然后“读出”外商直接投资对中国经济发展的贡献。由此得出判断,按照国际标准,中国的外商直接投资与中国的国内生产总值之比、和外商直接投资与固定资本形成之比,在1980年代相对较小,进入1990年代以后就开始大幅度上升。这些研究同时发现,在日益扩张的中国外贸出口中,外资所占份额也在急剧上升。这两项指标,对于迅猛发展的沿海地区省市表现得尤为显着(Chen et al. 1995; Kaiser et al. 1996; Lardy 1995; Whalley and Xin 20XX; Zhang and Song 20XX)。 第二种方法,可以说是第一种方法的补充,主要专注于外商直接投资与经济发展各项指标之间关系的回归分析。这种分析意在检测外商直接投资对可观测的指标,如GDP增长等的间接影响,这种影响在在第一种分析中不能够显示出来。另外也试图想得出外商直接投资对那些不可观测的指标,如全要素生产率等的影响。这些分析发现对于各种不同的回归模型结果各异,但总体结论是,相关性都表现为正,而且在统计上显着。其中最乐观的发现是,在1990年代,外商直接投资促进中国经济的全要素生产率平均年增长达%,加上外商直接投资通过资本形成使GDP增长个百分点,那么外商直接投资对中国经济增长的总贡献在1990年代年平
跨境电商外文文献综述 (文档含英文原文和中文翻译) 译文: 本地化跨境电子商务的模型 摘要 通过对国际供应链的B2B电子商务交易量的快速增长和伊朗快速增加的跨境交易业务，跨境电商过程的有效管理对B2B电子商务系统十分重要。本文对局部模型的结构是基于B2B电子商务的基础设施三大层，消息层、业务流程层和内容层。由于伊朗的电子商务的要求，每一层的需要适当的标准和合适的方案的选择。当电子文件需要移动顺利向伊朗，建议文件的标准为文件内容支持纸质和电子文件阅读。验证提出的模型是通过案例研究方法呈现一到四阶段的情景。本文试图通过交换商业文件在贸易过程中这一局部模型，实现在全球电子贸易供应链更接近区域单一窗口建设的关键目标。 关键词：电子商务;跨境贸易;电子文档管理;国际供应链
1.简介 电子商务是关于在互联网或其他网络电子系统购买和销售产品或服务。术语B2B（企业对企业），描述了企业间的电子商务交易，如制造商和批发商，或批发商和零售商之间。本文的研究目标是上两个不同国家贸易商之间的通信。今天的世界贸易组织的主要目标之一是建立区域单一窗口，可以提高世界各地的贸易便利化。建立区域单一窗口需要跨境海关，可以有效地交换贸易文件。因此，首先，简化跨境贸易文件的关键在于朝着国家单一窗口移动。然后，区域单一窗口可以授权国家之间的通信。电子商务模型是基于三个主要逻辑层的研究。这三个层消息传输层，业务处理层和内容层。本文的局部模型是一种能够自动交换读取文件的过程。通过与东亚和中东国家的建立区域单一窗口可以在将来得到改善的更多的互操作性，从而建立伊朗国家单一窗口 在本文的第二部分讨论引进国际供应链中的跨境B2B模式所需的基本概念和标准。第三部分介绍在大的模型中引入的组件功能和范围。第四部分讨论了B2B交易层模型的定位，最后结束本文。 2.背景 在本节中，除了了解B2B电子商务在伊朗的情况，还有参考模型的背景等概念以及讨论B2B电子商务跨境模式的本土化。 2.1 B2B电子商务在伊朗 如今伊朗在贸易进程的变现是一个关键的贸易成功点。伊朗和许多其他国家接壤，它的进口和出口过程可以通过公路，铁路，海上和空中的方式来完成。因此，这个国家的中部和战略作用，使得它在亚洲和中东地区货物运输的主要贸易点。今天，在伊朗海关几乎所有的贸易过程通过纸质表格完成，由商务部提供的电子服务仅限于谁该国境内交易的商人。今天，伊朗海关几乎所有的贸易流程都是通过纸质表格来完成的，商务部给出的电子服务只限于该国的商人。介绍了模型试图简化在伊朗交易的跨境电子商务供应链交换电子文件的过程。这里提到的一些系统，由商务部在伊朗的电子服务被提及：进口订单管理系统。贸易统计制度。伊朗法典伊朗。这些电子系统的主要使用，以促进在伊朗贸易过程。这里提到的系统作为独立的贸易者可与建议本文模型在未来的作用。在亚洲的区域性单