中美知识产权密集型产业国际竞争力及升级路径比较研究

发布时间：2018-04-09 09:00

本文选题：知识产权密集型产业　切入点：国际竞争力　出处：《武汉大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：在全球一体化的经济竞争环境中,知识产权的保护与利用对稳固与提升各国国际贸易竞争力具有越来越重要的意义,由知识资本驱动的经济动力也已替代了过去寻求的蓝海市场的机会驱动力和低成本的资源驱动力,而大多的知识基础资本需要通过一定形式的知识产权外化并应用于生产、流通、贸易实务,来实现价值的创造。因此知识产权密集型产业也正凸显其在全球贸易价值链中至关重要的地位。本文研究主要包括三大部分内容,第一部分是对知识产权密集型产业世界范围内的概况分析:从整个制造业发展战略环境入手,分析中国知识产权密集型产业面临工业4.0的挑战与机遇,运用社会网络分析原理构建产业贸易流向图,着重从知识产权密集型产业贸易的产品层面与国家（地区）层面分析产业现状;第二部分是中美知识产权密集型产业竞争性与互补性研究:将中国与美国在知识产权密集型产业上的截面数据量化为竞争力指标与互补性指标进行对比分析,探索中美两国之间知识产权密集型产业的国际竞争力差距;第三部分是中美知识产权密集型产业的升级路径实证研究:比较中国与美国的知识产权密集型产业环境,借助产品空间理论与竞争力指标进行实证分析,深入研究中国知识产权密集型产业升级路径的选择,并旨在形成相关有效的产业发展建议。本文通过对世界贸易数据的整理与实证分析,得出以下几点结论:第一,世界范围内知识产权密集型产业的竞争主要集中于少数几个国家当中,且处于战略地位的国家在该产业中的竞争愈演愈烈,中美成为领头国;第二,随着中美双方对知识产权密集型产业的重视,该产业内的竞争性将持续增强,而互补性虽然仍存在,但是中国对美国的出口更具数量优势;第三,实证研究表明,中国的知识产权密集型产业出口篮子已经占据数量优势,但缺乏质量优势,现有的要素资源更多分配在保持产品显性比较优势中,产业升级路径选择不明晰,拥有遵循比较优势渐进式发展与偏离比较优势跳跃式发展两股升级势力,而美国知识产权密集型产业的发展起步较早,拥有丰富的知识性资源,虽然出口份额受到威胁,但是已经累积的要素禀赋使得美国坚持走遵循比较优势的产业升级路径。
[Abstract]:In the economic competition environment of global integration, the protection and utilization of intellectual property rights play an increasingly important role in stabilizing and enhancing the competitiveness of international trade among countries.Economic dynamics driven by intellectual capital have also replaced the opportunity drivers and low-cost resource drivers of the Blue Sea market sought in the past, and most of the knowledge-based capital needs to be externalized and applied to production through some form of intellectual property rights.Circulation, trade practices, to achieve value creation.So intellectual property-intensive industries are also highlighting their vital position in global trade value chains.This paper mainly includes three parts. The first part is the general situation analysis of intellectual property intensive industries worldwide: starting with the strategic environment of the development of the whole manufacturing industry,This paper analyzes the challenges and opportunities of China's intellectual property intensive industries facing industry 4.0, and constructs an industrial trade flow chart using the principle of social network analysis.Focusing on the product level and national (regional) level of IPR intensive industry trade;The second part is a comparative study of the competitiveness and complementarity of intellectual property intensive industries between China and the United States: the cross-section data between China and the United States in intellectual property intensive industries are translated into competitiveness indicators and complementary indicators.The third part is an empirical study on the upgrading path of intellectual property intensive industries between China and the United States: comparing the environment of intellectual property intensive industries between China and the United States.With the help of the theory of product space and the index of competitiveness, the paper makes an in-depth study on the choice of upgrading paths for China's intellectual property intensive industries, and aims at forming relevant and effective suggestions for industrial development.Based on the analysis of world trade data, this paper draws the following conclusions: first, the competition of intellectual property intensive industries in the world is mainly concentrated in a few countries.Moreover, the competition among the countries in a strategic position has intensified in this industry, and China and the United States have become the leading countries. Second, as China and the United States attach importance to the IPR intensive industries, the competitiveness in the industry will continue to increase.Although complementarities still exist, China's exports to the United States have more quantitative advantages. Thirdly, empirical research shows that China's intellectual property rights intensive industrial export basket has already occupied a quantitative advantage, but lacks a quality advantage.The existing factor resources are more allocated in keeping the product dominant comparative advantage, the choice of industrial upgrade path is not clear, and there are two upgrading forces, I. e., the gradual development following comparative advantage and the leaping development away from comparative advantage.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：F204

【参考文献】