中国ICT行业深圳地区研究报告

IntroductionIn the last two decades study of economic geography has been characterized by a heightened attention paid to the `reemergence of agglomeration',`localization of the world economy',or a `global mosaic of regional economies'(Malmberg,1996;Martin and Sunley ,2003).A large number of scholars have argued that the process of global-ization is reinforcing rather than weakening regional economic distinctiveness (Scott,1998;Storper,1997;1999).Much attention has been paid to the innovativeness and competitiveness of firms in some region-based industrial clusters as the performance of industrial firms is believed to be less dependent on cost reduction through access to cheap land and labor and determined more by their innovative capabilities in a new knowledge-based global economy (Breschi and Malerba,2001).Scholars are divided,however,in their understanding and interpretation of the relationship between indus-trial clustering and technological innovation.The prevailing view is that industrial clustering can intensify localized production linkages,generate innovative milieux and facilitate knowledge spillovers,thereby leading to a highly innovative performance (Camagni,1991;Saxenian,1994;To dtling et al,2006).This view has been contested by others who have argued that focusing on local processes is insufficient to explain the innovative performance of firms and regions.The accessibility to national and international knowledge and the capability to build up global linkages are believed to be more pivotal to technological innovation (Bathelt et al,2004;Simmie,2004).Industrial clustering and technological innovation in China:new evidence from the ICT industry in ShenzhenCassandra C Wang,George C S Lin Department of Geography,University of Hong Kong,Pokfulam Road,Hong Kong;e-mail:h0691009@hkusua.hku.hk,gcslin@hkucc.hku.hkGuicai LiSchool of Urban Planning and Design,Shenzhen Graduate School,Peking University,Shenzhen,China 518055;e-mail:ligc@Received 3February 2010;in revised form 22March 2010Environment and Planning A 2010,volume 42,pages 1987^2010Abstract.The relationship between industrial clustering and technological innovation has been a subject of intense enquiry and heated debate.We examine the actual pattern of industrial clustering and technological innovation in China,focusing on the information and communication technology (ICT)industry.With our systematic analysis of the data gathered at the national level we found no significant relationship between spatial agglomeration and economic performance.Our questionnaire survey and personal interviews conducted in Shenzhen öChina's leading special economic zone örevealed a peculiar pattern consistent with that at the national level.Although there existed frequent and intensive production linkages among firms in the Shenzhen ICT industrial cluster,the innovative performance of these firms has been rather poor.Most of the ICT manufacturing firms obtained their core technology through internal research and development (R &D)activities rather than through technology transfer or knowledge spillover.There is a lack of interest among firms to seek coopera-tion and communication based on knowledge,technology,or R &D activities with other firms in the same cluster.The peculiar pattern of clustering and innovation in China suggests that technological innovation may have a divergent regional trajectory more sophisticated than that which has been described in the existing theory of industrial clusters.The study closes with a plea to go beyond a relational turn in economic geography and to take more seriously the roles played by actors and agents within different bounded and grounded institutional and regional contexts.doi:10.1068/a43561988C C Wang,G C S Lin,G LiMoreover,whether or not spatial proximity could lead to close and effective local cooperation and collective learning has remained an issue for competing interpretations and debates(Malmberg and Power,2005;Oinas,2000).We examine the growth,spatial distribution,and technological performance of China's information and communication technology(ICT)industry with an emphasis placed on the relationship between spatial clustering and technological performance. Our research is based on the systematic data gathered from China's first national economic census in2004and the detailed information obtained from our own survey and interviews conducted in the Shenzhen city-region in southern China.The remain-der of this paper is organized into three parts.We begin with a critical evaluation of the ongoing debate over the relationship between industrial clustering and technological innovation.This is followed by a clarification of our own research design and method-ology.Attention then turns to the actual pattern and processes of the growth,location, and technological performance of the ICT industry in China,including the general situation at the national level and the special case of the Shenzhen industrial region. Important findings of the research are highlighted and their theoretical implications discussed at the end.Understanding industrial clustering and technological innovation in a globalizing world In recent years the concept of an`industrial cluster'and its implications for techno-logical innovation as well as regional economic performance have attracted great scholarly attention(Malmberg,1996;Martin,1999).To Porter and many of his followers,an industrial cluster,defined as``[a]geographically proximate group of interconnected companies and associated institutions in a particular field,linked by commonalities and complementarities''is the main source of national competitive-ness and innovativeness because innovation is produced in the process of interfirm (with suppliers,customers,or counterparts)and extrafirm linkages(with universities, research institutions,local government,or other organizations)(Porter,2000,pages 253^254).In this perspective industrial clusters can lead to technological innovation because these localized clusters``allow rapid perception of new buyer needs;concentrate knowledge and informa-tion;allow the rapid assimilation of new technological possibilities;they provide richer insights into new management practices;facilitate on-going relationships with other institutions including university;the knowledge-based economy is most successful when knowledge resources are localized''(Simmie,2004page1102). The relationship described between industrial clustering and technological innovation has been widely addressed in the burgeoning literature on`new economic geography' and`new regionalism'.Conceptualization of this relationship has extended from the notion of`traded linkages'to the recognition of`untraded interdependence'in an industrial cluster.The focus of attention has shifted from the`structural^organizational characteristics of the production linkages involved to the social^institutional environ-ment and more recently to the cognitive nature of the relationship(Lagendijk,2006).Drawing on the theoretical insights of flexible specialization,particularly the con-cepts of agglomeration economies and transaction costs,the notion of traded linkages stresses the importance of the production linkages based on the division of labor and vertical disintegration in an industrial cluster.Traded linkages are believed to have the effect of increasing external economies of scale and scope,producing collective effi-ciency,and reducing transaction costs(Grabher,1993a;Schmitz,1995).Geographical proximity is considered to be important because it allows firms in the same region to share collective resources,facilitates the interaction between suppliers and customers,Industrial clustering and technological innovation in China1989cultivates a relationship of mutual trust,and stimulates competition(Bro cker et al, 2003;Fan and Scott,2003;Gertler,1995;Gordon and McCann,2000;Saxenian,1994).In the last two decades study of economic geography has experienced a shift of emphasis from an economic and reductionist explanation to a more contextual and discursive approach that is sensitive to social,cultural,and institutional environments in the understanding of industrial location and regional development(Amin,1999; Barnes,2001;Martin,2000;Yeung,2005;Yeung and Lin,2003).Increasingly,tech-nological change is seen as``an inherently socio-cultural activity dependent on the institutional setting within which it takes place''rather than``some exogenous disem-bodied process''as perceived by mainstream economists(Martin,2000,page82).In this perspective regional unevenness in technological innovation has to be understood in relation to the variation of social,cultural,and institutional conditions.The key to technological innovation,it is argued,lies in some``innovative milieu''or``[c]ertain form of local institutional regime of`milieu'[such as the presence of a well-developed enterprise culture,supportive regulatory and promotional agencies,research-oriented universities,and locally committed financial structures]''that functions``to facilitate the emergence and development of clusters of technolgically based activity''(page82). In contrast to the notion of traded linkages,which places much emphasis on economic relationships,the concept of untraded interdependencies refers to the externalities that ``take the form of conventions,informal rules,and habits that coordinate economic actors under conditions of uncertainty''(Storper,1997,page5)and focuses on social networks, personal relationships,collective learning,and the institutional set-up(Florida,1995; Moulaert and Sekia,2003;Nelson and Winter,1982).The recognition of the importance of collective learning,coupled with the advent of knowledge-based economies,has since the1990s given rise to the theory of localized knowledge spillovers in the process of industrial clustering(Asheim,1994; Cooke,2001;Do ring and Schnellenbach,2006;Howells,2002).Drawing upon the theoretical strengths from endogenous growth theory,the model of knowledge spillover considers technological knowledge to be a kind of nonrival and partially excludable goods.Knowledge is seen as localised assets which firms outside the region find difficult to reach(Simmie,2004,page1098).As Acs and Varga(2002,page140) have pointed out,``new technological knowledge[the most valuable type of knowledge in innovation]is usually in such a tacit form that its accessibility is bounded by geographic proximity and/or by the nature and extent of the interactions among actors of an innovation system.''Because of the localized nature of technological knowledge, geographical proximity is believed to be instrumental in speeding up knowledge spill-over and stimulating various forms of learning by doing,learning by using,and learning by interacting.The process of knowledge spillover,based on geographic proximity,can in turn attract more firms to locate nearby(Malmberg,1996;Maskell and Malmberg, 1999).More recently,however,a number of studies have cast doubt on the positive relationship between clustering and innovation.The popular notions of traded linkages and untraded interdependencies as well as knowledge spillover,all developed along with the discourse of endogenism,have been criticized for their overemphasis on local processes and dynamics at the expense of global or external linkages.A number of studies have suggested that it is global linkages rather than local processes that stimulate and facilitate the process of technological innovation.For instance,the work of Grabher(1993a;1993b)highlighted the importance of nonlocal ties in the process of local innovation and suggested that turning to global(or external) linkages has become increasingly important to firms and regions in order to avoid1990C C Wang,G C S Lin,G Li`lock in'or path dependency'.Simmie(2004)challenged Porter's main arguments concerning the relationship between local cluster and innovation.To Simmie,``national and international linkages are as significant for innovation as are more local networks.This provides at least a prima facie case suggesting that innovation must be understood in terms of trading nodes in an international system that encompasses both local and international knowledge spillovers and multilayered economic linkages extending over several different spatial scales''(2004,page1103). In a similar manner,Maskell et al(2006)maintained that interfirms linkages outside a cluster are important sources of firm development and local innovation.Such linkages are not necessarily localized or long lasting.In some cases a`temporary cluster'öa temporary but intense geographical concentration of international experts,entrepre-neurs,and engineers who exchange state-of-the-art knowledge and experiences by means of trade fairs,conferences,exhibitions,and so onöcan greatly facilitate global communication and diffusion of international knowledge.Another study of six opto-electronics clusters in the UK and Germany goes even further in suggesting that national and international relations are more frequent and important than localized ones because of the diverse markets and the complex technologies in this field(Hendry et al,2000).As for the less-developed economies,nonlocal linkages are considered to be even more important for local innovation and development because local agents tend to depend more on foreign companies and markets(Bair and Gereffi,2001, page1887).In an attempt to reconcile the tensions existing between endogenism and exogenism,Bathelt et al(2004)introduced a framework of`local buzz'and`global pipeline'as a conceptual compromise.Coe et al(2004)put forward the concept of `strategic coupling'as an alternative to the existing interpretations.Despite many ongoing theoretical attempts to hammer out a common ground acceptable to all,empirical studies have shown that the relationship described between industrial clustering and technological innovation does not hold in many regions (Martin and Sunley,2003).It has been reported that local competitiveness and innovation are determined more by the type and life cycle of the industry,composi-tion of economic activities,and regional conditions than by the oversimplistic notions of geographical proximity and spatial clustering(Feldman,1999;Glasmeier,2000). There is also the question of the relevance and applicability of models generated from advanced economies to cases in the less-developed world.In the case of China, one of the largest and most rapidly developing economies in the world,the phenom-enal expansion of industrial capacity(including high-tech industry)in recent years has been the subject of growing scholarly interest and various interpretations(Fan and Scott,2003;He,2002;He et al,2007;Sun,2000;2002;Wei,2007;Y eung,2007;Zhou, 2008a;Zhou and Tong,2003).On the one hand,China's high-tech industry has been understood as a latecomer with limited indigenous innovative capability and with high dependence upon imported technology(Naughton,1997;Ning,2009a).On the other hand,there are studies making the case that China has stood on its own feet in certain technologies and has managed to develop some of its core technology through indige-nous and domestic R&D activities(Lu,2000;Sun,2002;Zhou,2008b;Zhou and Tong,2003).The existence of the competing interpretations and unsettled debates identified above has called for special efforts to be devoted on further enquiry into the actual dynamics of industrial clustering and technological innovation in different regional contexts.We argue that,to understand the dynamism of technological innovation,the importance of traded linkages and untraded interdependencies cannot be overempha-sized at the expense of the nature and attributes of the firms themselves as activeIndustrial clustering and technological innovation in China1991to many well-established industrial clusters which have grown out of a market economy in the West,the ICT industry which emerged recently in China has been involved in the labor-intensive manufacture of electronic appliances and other ICT goods primarily for two purposesönamely,as downstream supplier for multinational firms including those from Taiwan and Hong Kong or to meet the explosive demand for consumption in the domestic market.Internationally,China has been brought into the global economy primarily as a`world factory'or an outlet for global capital's `accumulation by dispossession'and not as a site for the production of knowledge and technology.Domestically,the enormous pent-up market demand for ICT con-sumer goods,most of which originated in the West,has generated so many lucrative opportunities that quick profits could be made by simple emulation without having to commit to the risky venture of R&D and technological innovation.Here,profitability or productivity have been improved not by capital-intensive and time-consuming R&D but by cost reduction in factor inputs,their entrepreneurial new combinations,or simply learning by doing.Geographically,Chinese ICT firms,either financed by domestic capital or out-sourced from foreign enterprises,have usually colocated in development zones or industrial parks created by local governments.They are brought into the same develop-ment zone not because of their spontaneous production linkages or because of knowl-edge exchange among firms but because of the tax concessions and preferential treatments offered by the local governments.Their relationships are better charac-terized as competitive than cooperative.In the words of the Chinese,these firms are`sleeping in the bed with totally different dreams'(tongchuang yimeng).Even when some production linkages have been developed among firms such as those in Dongguan of the Pearl River Delta(PRD)region or Kunshan of the lower Y angtze Delta,they are confined to the suppliers^clients'commercial relationship with little knowledge exchange or collaborative R&D.The result has been a spatial clustering of ICT firms without interactive learning and technological innovation.In the Chinese case the special nature of ICT firms,particularly their positionality and functioning in the national and global economy,has explained more about the dynamism of techno-logical innovation than about the extent of production linkages and knowledge exchange among the firms(Sheppard,2002;Sunley,2008).Research design,data,and methodologyAgainst the theoretical backdrop identified above,this research is conducted with three specific purposes:to examine the growth,structure,and spatial distribution of China's ICT industry;to evaluate whether or not spatial agglomeration of firms is conducive to better economic performance;and to obtain insights into the actual relationship between industrial clustering and technological innovation in the context of a rapidly industrializing and globalizing Chinese city-region.To accomplish these goals and to organize our research better,two working hypotheses are made.We hypothesize that there exists a significant and positive correlation between the spatial agglomeration of firms and the economic performance of those firms.On the assumption that spatial proximity is conducive to production linkages and knowledge production,we further hypothesize that there exists a significant and positive relationship between industrial clustering and technological innovation.In this research we make a distinction between industrial clusters and spatial agglomeration.We follow the approach adopted by Porter(2000)and define a cluster as a geographical concentration of a group of interconnected companies with similar or complementary function in a particular field.By contrast,spatial agglomerationmay not exist(Malmberg,1996).Identification of industrial clusters involves intensive and careful research to obtain insights into the linkages existing among firms,whereas spatial agglomeration can be measured statistically using a number of indicators such as the Herfindahl index(Fan and Scott,2003),location quotient(LQ),growth-share matrix(Wolfe and Gertler,2004),and Ellison and Glaeser index(Ellison and Glaeser, 1997).For comparability and data consistency we adopt the employment location quotient as a measure of spatial agglomeration:LQ E ijE jE inE n,where E ij is employment in industry i in region j,E j is total employment in region j, E in is national employment in industry i,and E n is total national employment.Identi-fication of industrial clusters will be based both on our analysis of employment LQ and on a separate questionnaire survey of the actual linkages among the firms that are located in the same city-region.In this study economic performance of the ICT firms in a region will be evaluated using two important indicators:labor productivity and capital bor productivity is defined as the output value generated per worker and capital profitability is calculated as the total profit generated per dollar of capital investment.Technological innovation is usually measured by number of patents granted or number of new products introduced.For consistency and compar-ability we will use the number of patents granted as a proxy measure for technological innovation.We analyze three sets of data.The first is derived from China's first national economic census conducted in2004.This set is arguably one of the most comprehen-sive,comparable,and consistent economic datasets that has ever been generated in the history of the People's Republic of China.It includes detailed information about each and every industrial sector.It also includes the information aggregated at the national level and disaggregated data for provinces and special municipalities.There are also data in digital form and at the county-city level for the coastal region,where popula-tion density and level of economic development are high.We will use this dataset to analyze the nature and characteristics of China's ICT industry,its structural compo-sition,spatial distribution,and the relationship between spatial agglomeration and economic performance.The second set of data is derived from our own questionnaire survey of the ICT firms(inclusive of manufacturing and software)located in Shenzhen Municipality which includes the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone(SEZ)and its suburban districts in the fall of2006.The purpose of our questionnaire survey was to understand the actual extent of production linkages and knowledge exchanges among firms and how these linkages have affected firms'technological innovation.Our sample was drawn from the database developed by China's State Statistical Bureau on the basis of the 2004first national economic census.The sample size was predetermined with a target of a5%sampling rate.A total of221firms(comprising151hardware manufacturers and 70software designers)were sampled randomly for the survey.The third set of data was obtained from our in-depth face-to-face interviews conducted in Shenzhen in2007^08. We successfully interviewed thirty-three chief executive officers,engineers,leaders of industrial associations,and local officials involved in the growth of the ICT industry.It is important to note that a study of Shenzhen cannot be taken as representative of the general situation of the whole country.Nevertheless,the practice of setting up a special development zone to attract foreign investment and to promote industrial growth has not been limited to Shenzhen.Since the1990s the Shenzhen model has 1992C C Wang,G C S Lin,G LiIndustrial clustering and technological innovation in China1993to numerous development zones or a`zone fever'that spread throughout the country (Cartier,2001;Lin,2009a).A detailed study of the pattern and dynamics of industrial clustering and technological innovation in Shenzhen can generate significant insights that are not totally irrelevant to other SEZs or developed zones in the country that are modeled after Shenzhen.Growth,distribution,and performance of China's ICT manufacturing industry Over the last decade China's ICT industry has been one of the most rapidly expanding industrial sectors in the country and in the world.When the first industrial basic unit survey was conducted in1996,it was reported that China had an ICT manufacturing sector of about25000firms and2.6million workers(CSSB,1997).When the national economic census was conducted in2004,China's ICT manufacturing had expanded dramatically to over100000firms with a labor force of7million workers,a net growth of311%in the number of firms and168%in employment in eight years(CSSB,2005). The output generated by the ICT industry has shown an accelerated growth so that it held an increasing share of the rapidly expanding national economy.During the years 2003^07the share of the ICT industry in China's total industrial output increased steadily from43%to46%and its share in the total GDP of the country rose from18% to20%(CSSB,2008;MII,2008).ICT manufacturing has become one of the most important sources of China's exports.Chinese statistical authorities reported that exports of ICT goods increased from US$142billion to$460billion during the period 2003^07and the ICT manufacturing sector has now contributed more than one third of China's total exports(MII,2008).China has become the world's third largest ICT producer since2003and the largest exporter of ICT goods since2004(Ning,2009b; OECD,2005).What are the nature and structural characteristics of China's rapidly growing ICT industry?Table1lists the structural composition of the ICT industry in terms of output value and profits for2007.Three subsectors appear to have led the way in the production of ICT goods:electronic computers,electronic components,and telecom equipment.These three sectors provided nearly70%of total output value and65%of the total profits generated by the ICT industry.By contrast,manufacturing of house-hold audio and video equipment,which used to dominate China's electronic industry, accounted for less than8%of the total output value and5%of the total profits of the industry.A similar pattern can be identified from the export of ICT goods.Among all the ICT goods produced for export in2007,the leading sector has been the produc-tion of electronic computers which accounted for41%of the total value of exports. Table1.Output value and total profits of China's eight information and communication technology (ICT)subsectors,2007(source:calculated from MII,2008).ICT subsectors Output value Total profitsbillion yuan%billion yuan% Telecom equipment884.2217.8825.7415.52 Radar and related equipment15.060.300.930.54 Broadcasting and television equipment31.510.64 1.570.91 Electronic computers1628.5832.9445.2326.24 Household audio and video equipment386.827.829.28 5.38 Electronic devices586.7111.8721.3712.40 Electronic components909.218.3941.5624.12 Other electronic equipment502.3510.1625.6614.89 Total4944.45100172.341001994C C Wang,G C S Lin,G LiThe second and third sectors were telecom equipment(17%)and audio and video equipment(16%),respectively(MII,2008).This pattern suggests that China has started to produce and export more sophisticated ICT goods than the simple consumer electronics that had dominated its ICT manufacturing during the1980s(Naughton, 1997;Ning,2009a).Although China's ICT industrial capacity has experienced a dramatic expansion,it has functioned primarily as a latecomer to technological advancement with a low level of innovation and a position at the lower end of the global value chain.When ICT manufacturing firms are classified according to different sources of capitalödomestic, Hong Kong^Taiwan^Macao,and foreign countriesöan interesting pattern of differ-ent economic and technological performance emerges with the leading position held by foreign-funded enterprises which have generated60%of total ICT manufacturing out-put,72%of exports of ICT goods,55%of total profits,and50%of output value of new products.This pattern suggests that China's ICT manufacturing has been heavily reliant upon foreign capital.This high degree of financial and technological depen-dence upon foreign sources has also been evident from the composition of ICT exports. Of the total output of ICT exports in2007,the lion's share(70%)was held by processing with imported materials(MII,2008).The ICT manufacturing firms estab-lished by Hong Kong,Taiwan,and Macao contributed only15%of the total output value generated by new products,which is even lower than that of Chinese domestic firms(35%).Foreign-funded ICT firms provided50%of the total output value of new products,but this share was lower than their contributions on all other indicators. It appears that the reason for Hong Kong,Taiwan,Macao,and foreign countries setting up ICT firms in China is not so much to introduce new products or techno-logical innovation but instead for to apply Western technology and manufacturing at a lower cost.Thus,technological advancement of China's ICT industry will have to be achieved through the mobilization of indigenous resources rather than by relying on external support.Geographically,the growth of China's ICT industry has been characterized by an extreme regional variation and unevenness.The first national economic census conducted in2004has made available some of the most interesting and valuable information on the location of ICT manufacturing activities not only at the provincial and municipal levels but also at the finer scale of county and urban district.Table2and figure1identify the new geography of China's ICT production on the basis of the data obtained from the2004economic census.At the provincial level ICT manufacturing activities have been highly concentrated in Guangdong Province,which has functioned as the first and most important ICT manufacturing base for the integrated`Greater China'or `China Circle'(Naughton,1997).Guangdong Province alone harbored over45%of Table2.Uneven regional distribution of China's information and communication technology manufacturing industry,2004(source:CSSB,2005;FJSB,2005;GDSB,2005;JSSB,2005;SSB, 2005;TJSB,2005).Region Employment%Employment Output value%location quotient(billion yuan)Guangdong208290045.49 3.44821.4736.36 Jiangsu70920017.26 1.60441.6419.55 Tianjin133600 2.92 1.60137.35 6.08 Shanghai271000 5.92 1.10285.8912.65 Fujian172400 3.77 1.04118.58 5.25 National total45789001002259.40100。