資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
http://nhuir.nhu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/22318
|
| 題名: | 後進國家演化的創新體系與技術學習：比較南韓和台灣的積體電路產業發展 |
| 其他題名: | Evolutionary Innovation System and Technological Learning of Latecomer Countries: the Development of Integrated Circuit Industry in Korea and Taiwan |
| 作者: | 宋品潔
Sung, Pin-chieh |
| 貢獻者: | 亞太研究所
宋鎮照
Jen-jaw Song |
| 關鍵詞: | 技術學習;創新體系;產業組織;積體電路產業;後進國家
Integrated circuit industry;latecomer countries;innovation system;technological learning;industrial organization |
| 日期: | 2006 |
| 上傳時間: | 2015-08-04 10:31:36 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要: | 本研究以南韓與台灣的積體電路產業發展為例，探討後進國家在既有的制度結構下，克服技術上的劣勢/落後並「追趕」先進者，並且特別關注如記憶與非記憶晶片的次產業表現。聚焦於兩者的經驗，本文採用歷史(演化)制度途徑，從資訊交換、互惠和可信度三個面向分析為了支持產業轉型與技術升級，國家機關與企業之間所做的互動。這架構也詳細察考這兩個核心行為者的互動如何引發其他主要制度行為者的參與，包括金融機構、大學和官方研發機構等，形成一個獨特的動態創新體系，可以有效吸收、改良並內化從先進者所轉移的技術。藉此分析後，南韓與台灣的相似點和差異顯示，國家機關和企業之間合作和協作的總效是積體電路部門迅速成長的推動力。但是，已鑲嵌在制度中的產業組織影響政企的互動並因此決定了個別國家中創新體系的演化。在南韓，由大型企業組成的產業組織(財閥)，形成IC產業部門為少數幾家整合元件製造商所主導，而國家機關則傾向扮演合作者的角色，以補貼措施支持私部門的研發與擴張；相對的，台灣以中小企業為主的產業組織，使得國家機關在IC產業發展的脈絡上扮演相對主導的角色。國家機關透過公部門實驗室對民間進行技術轉移和擴散和成立科學園區等制度安排，刺激專業化中小企業投入IC部門並相互群聚。同時，這些創新體系特有的動態也演化出獨特的技術學習模式。鑑於南韓的少數幾家垂直整合元件製造商經由內部研發獲取核心技術，彼此間相互競爭，台灣則是許多廠商組成垂直分工的開放網絡，進行相互的合作學習。前者選擇與集中量產標準化的ICs，後者則更能製造多樣化與客製化的ICs。因此，南韓的創新體系因為風險偏好和低彈性的特質，對國際經濟環境變動的適應力有限，而台灣則傾向風險趨避並具備彈性，可以快速回應市場需求的變化。不過，隨著制度變遷或重大事件的發生，像是1997年亞洲金融危機，其創新體系的路徑依賴和外部經濟也呈現緩慢的改變。
This study explores how latecomer countries overcome technological backwardness and ＂catch-up＂ with the frontier under given institutional structure in South Korea and Taiwan, with particular reference to the performance of sub-industry such as memory and non-memory chips in the integrated circuit (IC) industry development. Focusing on the experiences of both countries, historical (evolutionary) institution approach is used to analyze the interaction between the state and business for promoting industrial transformation and technological upgrading in three aspects: information exchange, reciprocity, and creditability. This framework also scrutinizes how the interaction between both core actors induce other main institutional actors including financial institution, universities, public research and development (R&D) agencies and so on, to shape a dynamic innovation system (IS) that can efficiently absorb, adapt, and internalize technology transferring from the frontier. From this analysis, similarities and contrasts identified between South Korea and Taiwan demonstrate the synergy of the cooperation, and that the cooperation between state and business is the impulse of the rapid growth of IC sector. However, this interaction is affected by the industrial organization embedded originally in the institution and thereby determines the evolution of IS in each country. In South Korea, industrial organization predominantly composed of large conglomerates, known as chaebols, forms few large integrated device manufacturers (IDMs) dominated in IC sector, and the state tends to play a cooperative role who supports private sector’s R&D and expansion with subsidy measures. By contrast, industrial organization in Taiwan composed of small and medium-size enterprises makes the state play a relatively dominant role in leading the development of IC industry. Through transferring and diffusing technology from state laboratories to private firms and establishing science-based parks, the state stimulates specialized small and medium-size firms to invest in the IC sector and cluster together with institutional arrangement. In the meanwhile, the specific dynamics in each innovation system (so called, “IS”) also evolve its unique technological learning pattern. While few IDMs in South Korea acquire core technology from internal R&D and competed with each other, many firms constitute a vertically disintegrated network open to technological and cooperative learning among themselves in Taiwan. The former selects and concentrates on producing standard ICs massively, while the latter manufactures more diversified or customized ICs. Therefore, since South Korean’s IS is more risk-taking and has less flexibility, its adaptability to the change of international economy is limited. Taiwan’s IS, on the other hand, is more risk-averse and has more flexibility, which could rapidly respond to the change of market demand. As the institutional change or a significant event such as 1997 Asian Financial Crisis occurred, nevertheless, the path-dependency and external economies of both IS also present change slowly. |
| 顯示於類別: | [國際事務與企業學系(亞太研究碩士班,公共政策研究碩士班,歐洲研究碩士班)] 博碩士論文-亞太研究碩士班
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
描述 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| 094NHU05664008-001.pdf | | 2505Kb | Adobe PDF | 38 | 檢視/開啟 | | index.html | | 0Kb | HTML | 209 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在NHUIR中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
