产业集群的外文翻译及原文(族群与集群竞争力)

英文文献资料

（一）

Clusters and the New Economics of Competition

Michael E. Porter

（

Harvard university

）

Why Clusters Are Critical to Competition

Modern

competition

depends

on

productivity,

not

on

access

to

inputs

or

the

scale

of

individual

tivity

rests

on

how

companies

compete,not

on

the

particular

fields

they

compete

ies

can

be

highly

productive

in

any

industry

–

shoes,

agriculture,

or

semiconductors

–

if they employ sophisticated methods, use advanced technology,and offer unique

products

and

services.

All

industries

can

employ

advanced

technology;

all

industries

can

be

knowledge intensive.

The

sophistication

with

which

companies

compete

in

a

particular

location,

however,

is

strongly influenced by the quality of the local business environment.

1

Companies cannot employ

advanced logistical techniques, for example, without a high quality transportation infrastructure.

Nor can companies effectively compete on sophisticated service without well-educated employees.

Businesses cannot operate efficiently under onerous regulatory red tape or under a court system

that fails to resolve disputes quickly and fairly. Some aspects of the business environment, such as

the legal system, for example, or corporate tax rates, affect all industries. In advanced economies,

however, the more decisive aspects of the business environment are often cluster specific; these

constitute some of the most important microeconomic foundations for competition.

Clusters

affect

competition

in

three

broad

ways:first,

by

increasing

the

productivity

of

companies

based

in

the

area;

second,

by

driving

the

direction

and

pace

of

innovation,

which

underpins future productivity growth; and third, by stimulating the formation of new businesses,

which expands and strengthens the cluster itself. A cluster allows each member to benefit

as if

it

had greater scale or

as if

it had joined with others formally

–

without requiring it to sacrifice its

flexibility.

Clusters and Productivity.

Being part of a cluster allows companies to operate more productively

in

sourcing

inputs;

accessing

information,

technology,and

needed

institutions;

coordinating

with

related companies; and measuring and motivating improvement.

Better

Access

to

Employees

and

Suppliers.

Companies

in

vibrant

clusters

can

tap

into

an

existing

pool

of

specialized

and

experienced

employees,

thereby

lowering

their

search

and

transaction

costs

in

recruiting.

Because

a

cluster

signals

opportunity

and

reduces

the

risk

of

relocation

for

employees,

it

can

also

be

easier

to

attract

talented

people

from

other

locations,

a

decisive advantage in some industries.

A

well-developed

cluster

also

provides

an

efficient

means

of

obtaining

other

important

a cluster offers a deep and specialized supplier base. Sourcing locally instead of from

distant

suppliers

lowers

transaction

costs.

It

minimizes

the

need

for

inventory,

eliminates

importing

costs

and

delays,

and

–

because

local

reputation

is

important

–

lowers

the

risk

that

suppliers

will

overprice

or

renege

on

commitments.

Proximity

improves

communications

and

makes

it

easier

for

suppliers

to

provide

ancillary

or

support

services

such

as

installation

and

debugging.

Other

things

being

equal,

then,

local

outsourcing

is

a

better

solution

than

distant

outsourcing,

especially

for

advanced

and

specialized

inputs

involving

embedded

technology,

information, and service content.

Formal

alliances

with

distant

suppliers

can

mitigate

some

of

the

disadvantages

of

distant

outsourcing.

But

all

formal

alliances

involve

their

own

complex

bargaining

and

governance

problems and can inhibit

a company’s flexibility. The close, informal

relationships possible among

companies in a cluster are often a superior Arrangement.

In

many

cases,

clusters

are

also

a

better

alternative

to

vertical

ed

with

in-house

units,

outside

specialists

are

often

more

cost

effective

and

responsive,

not

only

in

component production but also in services such as training. Although extensive vertical integration

may

have

once

been

the

norm,

a

fast-changing

environment

can

render

vertical

integration

inefficient, ineffective, and inflexible.

Even when some inputs are best sourced from a distance, clusters offer advantages. Suppliers

trying to penetrate a large, concentrated market will price more aggressively, knowing that as they

do so they can realize efficiencies in marketing and in service.

Working

against

a

cluster’s

advantages

in

assembling

resources

is

the

possibility

that

competition will render them more expensive and scarce. But companies do have the alternative of

outsourcing many inputs from other locations, which tends to limit potential cost penalties. More

important, clusters increase not only the demand for specialized inputs but also their supply.

Access to Specialized Information.

Extensive market, technical, and competitive information

accumulates

within

a

cluster,

and

members

have

preferred

access

to

it.

In

addition,

personal

relationships

and

community

ties

foster

trust

and

facilitate

the

flow

of

information.

These

conditions make information more transferable.

Complementarities.

A host of linkages among cluster members results in a whole greater than

the sum of its parts. In a typical tourism cluster, for example,

the quality of a visitor’s experience

depends not only on the appeal of the primary attraction but also on the quality and efficiency of

complementary

businesses

such

as

hotels,

restaurants,

shopping

outlets,

and

transportation

facilities. Because members of the cluster are mutually dependent, good performance by one can

boost the success of the others.

Complementarities come in many forms. The most obvious is when products complement one

another

in

meeting

customers’

needs,

as

the

tourism

example

illustrates.

Another

form

is

the

coordination

of

activities

across

companies

to

optimize

their

collective

productivity.

In

wood

products,

for

instance,

the

efficiency

of

sawmills

depends

on

a

reliable

supply

of

high- quality

timber and the ability to put all the timber to use

–

in furniture (highest quality), pallets and boxes

(lower quality), or wood chips (lowest quality). In the early 1990s, Portuguese sawmills suffered

from poor timber quality because local landowners did not invest in timber management. Hence

most timber was processed for use in pallets and boxes, a lower- value use that limited the price

paid

to

landowners.

Substantial

improvement

in

productivity

was

possible,

but

only

if

several

parts of the cluster changed simultaneously.

Logging

operations,

for

example,

had

to

modify

cutting

and

sorting

procedures,

while

sawmills had to develop the capacity to process wood in more sophisticated ways. Coordination to

develop

standard

wood

classifications

and

measures

was

an

important

enabling

step.

Geographically dispersed companies are less likely to recognize and capture such linkages.

Other complementarities arise in marketing. A cluster frequently enhances the reputation of a

location in a particular field, making it more likely that buyers will turn to a vendor based there.

Italy’s

strong

reputation

for

fashion

and

design,

for

example,

benefits

companies

involved

in

leather goods, footwear, apparel, and accessories. Beyond reputation, cluster members often profit

from

a

variety

of

joint

marketing

mechanisms,

such

as

company

referrals,

trade

fairs,

trade

magazines, and marketing delegations.

Finally,

complementarities

can

make

buying

from

a

cluster

more

attractive

for

customers.

Visiting buyers can see many vendors in a single trip. They also may perceive their buying risk to

be lower because one location provides alternative suppliers. That allows them to multisource or

to switch vendors if the need arises. Hong Kong thrives as a source of fashion apparel in part for

this reason.

Access to Institutions and Public Goods.

Investments made by government or other public

institutions

–

such as public spending for specialized infrastructure or educational programs

–

can

enhance a

company’s productivity. The ability to recruit employees

trained at local programs, for

example,

lowers

the

cost

of

internal

training.

Other

quasi-public

goods,

such

as

the

cluster’s

information and technology pools and its reputation, arise as natural by-products of competition.

It is not just governments that create public goods that enhance productivity in the private

sector.

Investments

by

companies

–

in

training

programs,

infrastructure,

quality

centers,

testing

laboratories, and so on

–

also contribute to increased productivity. Such private investments are

often made collectively because cluster participants recognize the potential for collective benefits.

Better

Motivation

and

Measurement.

Local

rivalry

is

highly

motivating.

Peer

pressure

amplifies competitive pressure within a cluster,even among noncompeting or indirectly competing

companies. Pride and the desire to look good in the local community spur executives to attempt to

outdo one another.

Clusters also often make it easier to measure and compare performances because local rivals

share general circumstances

–

for example, labor costs and local market access

–

and they perform

similar activities. Companies within clusters typically

have intimate knowledge of their suppliers’

costs.

Managers

are

able

to

compare

costs

and

employees’

performance

with

other

local

companies.

Additionally,

financial

institutions

can

accumulate

knowledge

about

the

cluster

that

can be used to monitor performance.

Clusters

and

Innovation.

In

addition

to

enhancing

productivity,

clusters

play

a

vital

role

in

a

company’s

ongoing

ability

to

innovate.

Some

of

the

same

characteristics

that

enhance

current

productivity have an even more dramatic effect on innovation and productivity growth.

Because

sophisticated

buyers

are

often

part

of

a

cluster,

companies

inside

clusters

usually

have a better window on the market than isolated competitors do. Computer companies based in

Silicon Valley and Austin, Texas, for example, plug into customer needs and trends with a speed

difficult to match by companies located elsewhere. The ongoing relationships with other entities

within the cluster also help companies to learn early about evolving technology, component and

machinery availability, service and marketing concepts, and so on. Such learning is facilitated by

the ease of making site visits and frequent face-to-face contact.

Clusters do more than make opportunities for innovation more visible. They also provide the

capacity

and

the

flexibility

to

act

rapidly.

A

company

within

a

cluster

often

can

source

what

it

needs to implement innovations more quickly. Local suppliers and partners can and do get closely

involved in the innovation process, thus ensuring a better

match with customers’ requirements.

Companies within a cluster can experiment at lower cost and can delay large commitments

until they are more assured that a given innovation will pan out. In contrast, a company relying on