Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
標題: 手工具產業OEM經營模式之研究-台灣與中國間之驗證
A Study On The OEM Business Model In Hand Tool Industry - Evidence Between Taiwan and China
作者: 張慈恩
Chang, Tzu-En
關鍵字: 雙向貿易
Two Way Trade
Hand Tool Industry
Quality Differentiation
出版社: 應用經濟學系所
引用: 中文部分 1. 王素彎、連文榮、蔡金宏,2009。中小企業在區域經濟發展應有的角色,中小企業白皮書編撰計畫。 2. 中華人民共和國國家稅務總局,(2002,2003,2007,2009),財稅[2002] 7號,財稅[2003]222號,財稅[2007] 90號,財稅[2009]43號。 3. 中華人民共和國海關總署,(2010),中華人民共和國海關企業分類管理辦法。 4. 安士敦、瞿宛文,2003 。超越後進發展-台灣的產業升級策略,聯經出版社。 5. 林祖嘉,2004。台灣經濟發展與兩岸經貿依存度之研究,大選後兩岸經貿事務研討會,台綜院。 6. 金屬手工具製造產業聯盟結案報告,2011。傳統產業加值創新科技關懷計畫。 7. 許育瑞、侯冠智、黃得晉、陳仲宜,2011。金屬製品業年鑑,金屬研究中心。 8. 莊昆明,2009。中國大陸投資財經知識須知,龍鳳凰出版社。 9. 郭明洲,2012。金屬手工具製造業基本資料,台灣經濟研究院產經資料庫。 10. 許承賢,2008。中國大陸出口退稅率制度,貿易救濟動態通訊月刊,第100期。經濟部貿委會。 11. 陳芙靜,2006。我國動力手工具產業發展概述,金屬中心ITIS計劃。 12. 陳芙靜,2007。金屬製品業年鑑,金屬研究中心。 13. 康信鴻、楊曼君,2004。影響台灣與中國大陸整體產業內貿易指數因素之研究,台灣銀行季刊,Vol. 55, No.1 , pp. 272-285. 14. 張國益、李宥蒼,2012。垂直式與水平式雙向貿易決定因素之實證分析:台灣主要製造業之驗證,台灣經濟預測與政策, Vol. 42 ,No.2. 15. 楊崇悟,2000。原產地規則-關稅法規重要之一環,財稅研究,Vol. 32 ,No.5. 16. 劉碧珍、陳添枝、翁永和,2010。國際貿易理論與政策,台北:雙葉書廊。 17. 蔡孟佳,2012。從經濟效果論優惠性原產地規則之適法性及其未來發展,歐美研究,Vol. 42 ,No.2, pp 281-P337,政治大學國際經營與貿易學系。 18. 蔡松棋,2003。大陸保稅區關係法規,實用稅務出版社。 19. 鍾詠聿,2009。貨品貿易下原產地規則之調和,國立中正大學法律學研究所,碩士論文。 20. 羅昌發,2004。國際貿易法,元照出版有限公司。 英文部分 1. Abd-el-Rahman, K., 1991, Firm s'' competitive and national comparative advantage as joint determinants of trade composition, Weltwirtschaftliches Achiv, Vol. 127, pp.83-97. 2. Akamatsu, K., 1935, Trade of woolen products in Japan, Studies of Commerce and Economy, Vol. 13, No.1, pp. 129-212. 3. Anderson, J. E. 1979, The Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation, America Economic Review, Vol. 69, No.1. 4. Anderson, J. E. and E. Van Wincoop, 2003,Gravity And Gravitas: A Solution To The Border Puzzle, American Economic Review, Vol. 13, No.1 , pp. 170-192. 5. Ando, M. , 2006, Fragmentation and Vertical Intra-industry Trade in East Asia, North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol. 17, No.3 , pp. 257-281. 6. Azhar, A. K. M., R. J. R. Elliot and J. Liu, 2008, On the measurement of product quality in intra-industry trade: An empirical test for China. China Economic Review, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 336-344. 7. Bergstrand, J.H. 1985, The Gravity Equatiion in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empircal Evidence, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 67, pp. 474-481. 8. Bergstrand, J.H. 1989, The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor-Proportions Theory in International Trade, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 71, No. 1, pp.143-153. 9. Brenton, P. and M. Manchin, 2003, Making EU trade agreements work: The role of rules of origin. The World Economy, Vol. 26, No.5, pp. 755-769. 10. Deardorff, V. 1998b, Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?, in: Jeffrey A. Frankel. ed., The Regionalization of the World Economy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 11. Dixit, A. K and J. E. Stiglitz, 1977, Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity, The American Economic Review, Vol. 67, No. 3 , pp. 297-308. 12. Estevadeordal, A., 2000, Negotiating preferential market access: The case of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Journal of World Trade, Vol. 34, pp. 141-200. 13. Falvey, R., 1981, Commercial policy and intra-industry trade. Journal of International Economics, Vol. 11, pp. 495-511. 14. Falvey R. and H.Kierzkowski ,1987, Product Quality, Intra-Industry Trade and (Im)perfect Competition, in H. Kierzkowski (Eds.), Protection and Competition in international Trade, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 15. Feenstra, R. C, 1988, Quality Change under Trade Restraints in Japanese Autos. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 103 , No. 1, pp. 131-146. 16. Fershtman, C., N. Gandal and S. Markovich, 1999, Estimating the Effect of TaxReform in Differentiated Product Oligopolistic Markets. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 74, pp. 151-170. 17. Fertő, I, 2005, Vertically Differentiated Trade and Differences in Factor Endowment - The Case of Agri-Food Products between Hungary and the EU. Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 56,No.1, pp. 117-134. 18. Flam, H. and E. Helpman, 1987, Vertical product differentiation and the North-South Trade. American Economic Review, Vol. 77,pp. 810-822. 19. Fontagne, L. and L. Michael, 2002, Long-term Trends in Intra-Industry Trade, in P. J. Lloyd and Hyun-Hoon Lee (Eds.), Frontiers of Research in Intra-Industry Trade, Palgrave , pp. 131-158. 20. Fontagne, L., M. Freudenberg, and N. Peridy, 1997, Trade Patterns inside the Single Market s, CEPII Working Paper No. 1997-07, April, Centre D’Etudes Prospectives et D’Informations Internationales 21. Fontagne, L., M. Freudenberg and N. Peridy, 1998, Intra-industry Trade and the Single Market : Quality Matters , CEPR Discussion Paper, No.1959. 22. Fukao, K., H. Ishido, and K. Ito, 2003, Vertical Intra-Industry Trade and Foreign Direct Investment in East Asia, RIETI Discussion Paper Series 03-E-001. 23. Goldberger, S., 1964, Economic Theory, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, USA. 24. Gourieroux ,C., A. Monfort, and A. Trognon, 1984, Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Methods: Theory. Econometrica, Vol. 52, No.3, pp. 681-700 25. Gourieroux ,C., A. Monfort, and A. Trognon, 1984, Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Methods: applications to poisson models. Econometrica, Vol. 52, No.3, pp. 701-720. 26. Greenaway, D., C. Milner, and R. Hine, 1994,Country-specific factors and the pattern of horizontal intra-industry trade in UK. Weltwirtschaftliches Achiv, Vol. 130, pp.77-100. 27. Greenaway, D., C. Milner, and R. Hine, 1995, Vertical and Horizontal Intra-Industry Trade: A Cross Country Analysis for the United Kingdom. Economic Journal, Vol. 105, pp.1505-1518. 28. Gretton, P. and J. Gali, 2005, Making EU trade agreements rules of origin in preferential trade agreement. Paper presented at the 34th Conference of Economists 2005, Melbourne, Australia. 29. Grubel, H., 1967,Intra-industry Specialization and the Pattern of Trade, Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, Vol.1, pp. 374-388. 30. Grubel, H. and P. Lloyd, 1975, Intra-industry trade: Theory and measurement of international trade in differentiated products, London: Macmillan. 31. Hellvin, L., 1996, Vertical Intra-Industry Trade Between China and the OECD Countries, OECD Development Centre Working Paper 114, pp. 31. 32. Helpman, E., 1984, A Simple Theory of International Trade with Multinational Corporations. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 92, No. 3, pp. 451-471. 33. Helpman, E. and P. Krugman, 1985, Market Structure and Foreign Trade, Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition and the International Economy, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 34. Helpman, E., M. Melitz, and Y. Rubinstein, 2008, Estimating trade flows: trading partners and trading volumes, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 123, No. 2, pp. 441-487. 35. Kimura, F. and M. Ando, 2003c, Intra-regional Trade among China, Japan, and Korea: Intra-industry Trade of Major Industries, In Yangsen Kim and Chang Jae Lee, (Eds.), Northeast Asian Integration: Prospects for a Northeast Asian FTA. Seoul: KIEP, pp.245-279. 36. Kimura F., S-H. Hsu, and K-I. Chang, 2004, Intra-industry Trade and the Potential Impacts of Free Trade Agreement between Japan and Taiwan, The 2004 IEAS Taipei International Conference on Growth and Development in Global Perspectives, Taipei, Taiwan on July 23-24. 37. Kingston, E. I., 1994, The economics of rules of origin. In Vermulst, E. A., P. Waer, and J. Bourgeois (Eds.), Rules of origin in international trade: a comparative study, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, pp.7-25. 38. Krueger, A. O., 1993, Free trade agreements as protectionist devises: Rules of origin , Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, Working paper No.4352. 39. Krueger, A. O. and K. Krishna, 1995, Implementing free trade areas: Rules of origin and hidden protection. , New Directions in Trade Theory, J. Levinsohn, A. Deardorff and R. Sterneds, Ann Arbor, MI:University of Michigan Press, pp. 149-187. 40. Krugman. P. R, 1979, Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition, and International Trade. Journal of international Economics, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 469-479. 41. Lancaster, K. J., 1980, Intra-industry trade under perfect monopolistic competition. Journal International Economics, Vol. 10, pp. 151-75. 42. Linnemann, H. 1966, An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows, Amsterdam: North-Holland. 43. Mabrouk, H., 2010, Rules of origin as international trade hindrances. Entrepreneurial Business Law Journal, Vol. 5, No.1, pp. 97-176. 44. Pelzman, J. and A.Shoham, 2010, Measuring the welfare effects of country of origin rules: A suggested methodology. Global Economy Journal, Vol. 10, No.1, pp. 1-23. 45. Poyhonen, P. 1963, A Tentative Model for the Flows of Trade between Countries, Welwirtschatftliches Archiv, No. 90, pp. 93-99. 46. Santos, S. and Tenreyro, 2006, The log of gravity. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 88, No.4, pp. 641-658. 47. Spence, A. M., 1976, Product selection, fixed costs and monopolistic competition, Revues Economic Studies, Vol. 43, pp. 217-235. 48. Tadashi I.and T. Okubo,(2012), New Aspects of Intra-industry Trade in EU Countries, The World Economy,Vol.35, pp. 1126-1138. 49. Tinbergen, J. 1962, Shaping the World Economy: Suggestions for an International Economic Policy, New York: The Twentieth Century Fund. 50. Vermulst, E. A., 1994, Rules of origin as commercial policy instruments—Revisited. In E. A. Vermulst, P. Waer, & J. Bourgeois (Eds.), Rules of origin in international trade: A comparative study , Ann Arbor, MI: the University of Michigan Press, pp. 433-484. 51. Westerlund, J. and Wilhelmsson F., 2006, Estimating the gravity model without Gravity using panel dat, Applied Economics, pp.1466-4283
摘要: 1998年起,台灣手工具出口在全球21個主要工業國中排名第一,但在2003年被中國超越,退居為第二。雖然受到中國挑戰,但台商到中國投資設廠,兩岸分工的經營模式下,中國也對於台灣手工具產業有著顯著影響。2011年兩岸實施經濟合作架構協議(Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, ECFA),但手工具早收清單中產品特定原產地規則規定嚴苛,加上手工具產業為出口導向產業,中國政府原本就已提供台商進口中間財加工出口免關稅(出口退稅)政策,今業界大多仍使用原有優惠措施,導致ECFA優惠關稅利用率效益不大。 本文以World Trade Atlas資料庫2000年至2012年兩岸進出口值,利用門檻拆解法分析兩岸分工模式下各項中間財貿易型態,而後分別將貿易型態做為虛擬變數代入PPML模型、Probit模型,分析對出口貿易以及ECFA早收清單的決策影響。 研究結果發現:(1)貿易型態以垂直雙向貿易台灣高品質為首,次為單向貿易台灣高品質(2)中國進口關稅負向顯著影響進口金額。(3)貿易型態為垂直雙向貿易台灣高品質及中國進口關稅越高的產品,獲選為早收清單機率越大;而台灣出口顯示性比較優勢指數則為顯著負相關,表示台灣與中國協議早收清單明細時,中國並未真正開放台灣具有競爭優勢產品,此保守態度也可與手工具產業設定嚴苛的產品特定原產地規則相呼應。
The exports of Taiwanese hand tool industry 1st among 21 main industrial countries since 1998, but surpassed by China in 2003, became 2nd place thereafter. Being challenged, Taiwanese companies started another model to invest in China named Original Equipment Manufacturing(OEM). Thus China had also played a crucial role in Taiwanese hand tool industry. In 2011, Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement(ECFA)between Taiwan and China were entered into force. However, the hand tool industry is remained strict Product Specific Rules(PSR)in the Early Harvest List of ECFA due to their export orientation. Moreover, Chinese government still allows an export drawback toward OEM hand tool products before ECFA, so that these measures may offset the zero tariff preferential in the Early Harvest List. This study utilized bilateral trade data from World Trade Atlas between Taiwan and China since 2000 to 2012. Threshold Decomposition Method is applied to analyze the trade patterns of intermediate parts and components. The result was then used as a dummy variable in a Poisson Pseudo Maximum Likelihood(PPML)and a Probit model, to measure the effect on export trade value and determinants of ECFA Early Harvest List , respectively. The empirical results suggest that: First, The primary trade pattern is “Taiwanese exporting of two-way vertical high-quality trade(VT-T).” The secondary pattern is “Taiwanese higher exporting of one-way trade.” Second, the import tariffs levied by Chinese customs on a product have significant negative effect on trade value. Third, in the determinants by Probit model of Early Harvest List, two-way high-quality trade(VT-T)and higher Chinese customs import tariffs products have higher probability to be selected in Early Harvest List. On the other hand, Revealed Comparative Advantage(RCA)of Taiwanese products shows significant negative effect. It implies that China does not fully open the market for Taiwanese products which possess competitiveness in the scheme of ECFA. The result could also explain the difficulties on PSR toward Taiwanese hand tool industry.
其他識別: U0005-2608201311283300
Appears in Collections:應用經濟學系



Show full item record
TAIR Related Article

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.