博碩士論文 etd-0908110-140912 詳細資訊


[回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]

姓名 李鳳梧(Feng-wu Lee) 電子郵件信箱 E-mail 資料不公開
畢業系所 公共事務管理研究所(Public Affairs Management)
畢業學位 博士(Ph.D.) 畢業時期 98學年第2學期
論文名稱(中) 政府資助中小企業創新政策績效架構研擬
論文名稱(英) The Policy Evaluation Structure for Government Subsidies on Small and Medium Enterprises Innovation Program
檔案
  • etd-0908110-140912.pdf
  • 本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
    請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
    論文使用權限

    紙本論文:不公開

    電子論文:校內校外均不公開

    論文語文/頁數 中文/129
    統計 本論文已被瀏覽 5564 次,被下載 0 次
    摘要(中) 創新研發是建構國家競爭優勢和知識經濟的主要驅動力,而中小企業對於技
    術發展和經濟環境所產生的應變與彈性對國家整體競爭力與技術創新扮演著關
    鍵角色。因此,如何提供適當的激勵與誘因措施,促進中小企業之創新行為、強
    化中小企業之創新能力,以帶動經濟更進一步成長,已成為各國科技暨創新政策
    中極為重視的一環。有鑑於此,我國經濟部於1999年開始執行「小型企業創新研
    發計畫」(Small Business Innovation Research,簡稱SBIR計畫)。截至2009年止,
    我國中小企業共提出5,877件研究計畫申請補助,經技術初審與指導委員會確認
    審後,已通過3,352件創新研究計畫,通過比例約為56.98%。政府補助金額累計
    達新台幣67.9億元,並帶動中小企業再投入研究經費達116.67億元,且透過這些
    創新研究,中小企業將有益於提高技術水準、產業競爭力及傳統產業的升級與轉
    型。
    本研究重點為:
    1. 將利害關係人的概念納入分析架構:本研究藉由對相關利害關係人(參與
    計畫廠商、未通過計畫廠商、未申請廠商、民間顧問業者、審查委員、政府
    官員)的訪談與觀察,以有效瞭解不同利害關係人對於計畫的投入與相關限
    制,使得政策效益可以正確被評量,不被低估。
    2. 擴大投入產出分析架構:結合過往科專計畫的評估模型(RICE, IROT,
    GIPTOE 等)將政策的目的和長期的計畫擴散效果加入投入產出的模型。透
    過對廠商的訪談與文獻資料建構一結合目的與不同利害關係人投入的長期
    投入產出模型。
    3. 整合模式建立:建構一結合廠商創新行為、政策資源配置和專案績效評估
    的整合模型。透過訪談與問卷因素分析建構出廠商參與計畫的影響因素。並
    經由動機因素的加入建構出廠商創新行為模型。並結合政府的政策影響所產
    生的資源配置,進一步結合專案績效分析,建構一包含動機目的、利害關係
    人投入、創新行為、計畫成果和長期計畫效益的整合評估模型。
    4. 調查與大規模深入訪談相關政策利害關係人以瞭解SBIR 計畫的執行與建
    議。也根據研究結果,提出政策建議,包括目前廠商執行的成效、創新能力、
    創新障礙、未來計畫方向、計畫審查制度的優缺點等,俾利作為政府目前執
    行及未來政策規劃之參考。
    摘要(英) Government support for applied Research and Development (R&D) persisted in
    the US despite evidence to the contrary. Many provide government R&D funding for
    enterprises of particular interest and a number of countries have substantially
    increased their expenditure on R&D. SBIR as a means of funding high-risk R&D
    with broad commercial and societal benefits that would not be undertaken by a single
    company, either because the risk was too high or because a large enough share of the
    benefits of success would not accrue to the company for it to make the investment.
    Therefore, the program’s goal is to the development and application of new, enabling
    technologies that individual firms would not or pursue on their own and thereby
    encourage the economic growth that comes from the commercialization and use of
    new technologies in the private sector. However, very few studies of R&D policy
    toward innovative subsidy program in developing country. Public programs to
    subsidize high-technology firms have represented a significant but little-studied area
    of public expenditures. This article assesses the long-run success of firms
    participating in the SBIR program in Taiwan. The plan of this research is as follows.
    The purpose of this search in Taiwan is to study the impact of
    government-industry R&D programs on private R&D. The research has 3 important
    aspects. First, using a questionnaire to understand the enterprises intention and
    behavior which have participated in the “Small Business Innovation Research
    (SBIR)” this paper first examines whether government R&D subsidies influence
    firm’s innovative activities. Second, this paper examines what the correlation is
    between government funding and private R&D expenditures. Finally, this research
    conducted 67 important interviews from enterprises. Not only the multi-methodology
    comparisons, the empirical results aimed at:
    1) Examine the role of public/private partnerships (PP/Ps) as an instrument to
    leverage public investment in strategy technology and innovation and to achieve
    other goals of technology and innovation policy;
    2) Identify the critical factors determining the success of R&D subsidy program for
    innovation, with an emphasis on programme design, financial arrangement, and
    evaluation
    3) Government R&D subsidies have a significant positive effect or not on firm’s R&D
    expenditure / employment / firm-financed R&D spending.
    關鍵字(中)
  • 研究發展
  • 小型企業創新研發計畫(SBIR)
  • 計畫評估
  • 創新
  • 科專計畫
  • 關鍵字(英)
  • Technology Development Program Government subsidy
  • Innovation Policy
  • R&D Management
  • Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program evaluation
  • 論文目次 目錄
    第一章 緒論................................................................................................................. 3
    第二章 文獻回顧......................................................................................................... 9
    第一節 政府協助企業研發之政策合理性與政策措施..................................... 9
    第二節 廠商參與科技專案之動機................................................................... 14
    第三節 研發補助政策的效益........................................................................... 17
    第四節 科技專案的衡量方法與指標............................................................... 22
    第三章 台灣的SBIR 計畫與其他各國科專計畫.................................................... 34
    第一節 台灣的小型企業創新研發計畫SBIR................................................. 34
    第二節 美國SBIR 計畫.................................................................................... 46
    第三節 其他類似SBIR 之計畫........................................................................ 50
    第四章 研究方法....................................................................................................... 52
    第一節 研究方法設計....................................................................................... 53
    第二節 研究對象與資料蒐集方式................................................................... 58
    第三節 研究歷程............................................................................................... 64
    第五章 資料分析....................................................................................................... 66
    第一節 廠商參與計畫的動機........................................................................... 66
    第二節 廠商與評審委員的互動與審議........................................................... 72
    第三節 SBIR 計畫的產出與成效..................................................................... 77
    第四節 廠商執行研發專案所遭遇之困境分析............................................... 91
    第四節 廠商計畫執行成功的案例分析........................................................... 93
    第五節 未存續廠商分析(調查時間:2008 年11 月) ................................ 97
    第六節 對計畫未來建議及發展....................................................................... 99
    第六章 討論............................................................................................................. 102
    第一節 研究架構發展..................................................................................... 102
    第二節 績效評估方法的限制......................................................................... 109
    第七章 結論與建議..................................................................................................111
    第一節 結論......................................................................................................111
    第二節 整體政策建議......................................................................................112
    第三節 後續研究..............................................................................................113
    參考文獻....................................................................................................................114
    圖目錄
    圖1-1 科專計畫分類內容......................................................................................... 4
    圖2-1 研發計畫中社會與私人報酬率的落差........................................................11
    圖2-2 專案管理的控制循環................................................................................... 23
    圖2-3 IRCE 模式.................................................................................................... 24
    圖2-4 IRON 模式.................................................................................................... 24
    圖2-5 IROT 模式................................................................................................... 25
    圖2-6 IPRCE 模式.................................................................................................. 27
    圖2-7 GIPOTE 模式.............................................................................................. 28
    圖2-8 政策評估:廠商創新行為與績效整合模型............................................... 30
    圖3-1 SBIR 計畫補助項目..................................................................................... 35
    圖3-2 申請審查作業流程....................................................................................... 37
    圖3-3 各年度各領域收件情況(累計至2009 年11 月15 日)......................... 44
    圖3-5 各年度、各領域申請件數之趨勢(累計至2009 年11 月15 日) .............. 45
    圖3-6 各年度、各領域平均核定補助款之趨勢 (累計至2009 年11 月15 日) 45
    圖4-1 研究歷程....................................................................................................... 65
    圖5-1 影響廠商計畫成功因素圖........................................................................... 96
    圖6-1 利害關係人架構圖..................................................................................... 102
    圖6-2 投入產出關連圖......................................................................................... 104
    圖6-3 臺北縣政府地方產業創新研發推動計畫(地方型SBIR)簽約說明會投影片
    105
    圖6-3 科專計畫評估架構圖................................................................................. 107
    圖6-4 參與科專計畫廠商創新行為與績效整合模型......................................... 108
    圖6-5 評估科技政策的偏誤來源......................................................................... 109
    圖6-6 SBIR 推動體系............................................................................................110
    表目錄
    表1-1 SBIR 計畫歷年補助狀況............................................................................... 6
    表2-1 政府介入產業科技發展之工具比較........................................................... 13
    表2-2 形成研發夥伴動機的理論立據................................................................... 15
    表2-3 投入、行為及產出附加性........................................................................... 19
    表2-4 SBIR 計畫之長期影響................................................................................. 21
    表2-5 IRCE 各階段及評估指標........................................................................... 23
    表2-6 IRON 各階段及評估指標............................................................................ 25
    表2-7 IROT 各階段及評估指標............................................................................ 26
    表2-8 IPRCE 各階段及評估指標.......................................................................... 26
    表2-8 GIPOTE 各階段及評估指標...................................................................... 27
    表2-9 經濟部科技研發專案績效評估模式........................................................... 28
    表2-9 經濟部科技研發專案績效評估模式........................................................... 29
    表2-10 研發專案績效評估方法............................................................................... 30
    表2-11 三種分析方法比較....................................................................................... 31
    表2-12 政府資助科技研發的經濟效果控制變數................................................... 33
    表3-1 SBIR 計畫期程及補助款編列原則............................................................. 36
    表3-2 SBIR 計畫審查重點..................................................................................... 38
    表3-3 SBIR 計畫1999~2002 年度核定件數暨經費一覽表................................ 40
    表3-4 SBIR 計畫2003~2004 年度核定件數暨經費一覽表................................ 41
    表3-5 SBIR 計畫2005~2009 年度核定件數暨經費一覽表................................ 42
    表3-6 SBIR 計畫1999~2009 年度核定件數暨經費一覽表................................ 43
    表3-7 美國SBIR 執行機構一覽表....................................................................... 47
    表3-8 美國SBIR 計畫執行概況............................................................................ 48
    表3-9 我國與美國實施SBIR 計畫之差異............................................................ 50
    表3-10 與SBIR 計畫功能相似之其他科技計畫.................................................... 51
    表4-1 質性與量化研究之評估指標....................................................................... 54
    表4-2 質性和量化研究的研究歷程比較............................................................... 54
    表4-3 主要的混合方法設計類型........................................................................... 56
    表4-4 研究設計議題與方法................................................................................... 57
    表4-5 參與訪談對象與訪談重點........................................................................... 61
    表4-6 歷年廠商訪談領域....................................................................................... 62
    表5-1 2005 年調查廠商之參與動機...................................................................... 67
    表5-2 2005 年調查廠商之參與動機因素分析...................................................... 67
    表5-3 2008 年調查廠商之參與動機...................................................................... 68
    表5-4 2008 年調查廠商之參與動機因素分析...................................................... 68
    表5-5 2005 年受訪廠商對審查委員所具備能力之重要性與滿意度.................. 72
    表5-6 2005 年廠商對於評審委員開放業界人士參與的可行性.......................... 73
    表5-7 2008 年廠商對SBIR 計畫審查機制滿意度............................................... 73
    表5-8 2008 年廠商對SBIR 計畫審查機制應改進事項....................................... 73
    表5-9 SBIR 計畫廠商實收資本額分布表............................................................. 81
    表5-10 SBIR 計畫廠商營業額分布表................................................................... 81
    表5-11 SBIR 計畫廠商研發經費分布表............................................................... 82
    表5-12 SBIR 計畫廠商研發經費統計檢定........................................................... 82
    表5-13 計畫廠商員工人數分布表......................................................................... 82
    表5-14 計畫廠商員工人數統計檢定..................................................................... 83
    表5-15 計畫廠商研發人數分布表......................................................................... 83
    表5-16 計畫廠商研發人數統計檢定..................................................................... 83
    表5-17 計畫廠商碩博士級研發人數分布表......................................................... 84
    表5-18 計畫廠商碩博士級研發人數統計檢定..................................................... 84
    表5-19 補助款對研發人數的效果......................................................................... 85
    表5-20 補助款對研發經費的效果......................................................................... 86
    表5-21 廠商回覆計畫類別分析表(樣本).............................................................. 87
    表5-22 計畫廠商各地區技術領域分布表............................................................. 88
    表5-23 計畫廠商各領域營業年數分布表............................................................. 89
    表5-24 計畫廠商2007 年度股權狀況分析表....................................................... 89
    表5-25 SBIR 計畫主要績效整理........................................................................... 90
    表5-26 成功案例廠商名單及其選取原因............................................................. 94
    表5-27 成功案例廠商基本資料............................................................................. 95
    表5-28 廠商之成功因素分析................................................................................. 95
    表5-29 未存續廠商結案計畫件數分析表............................................................. 97
    表5-30 未存續廠商佔調查母體廠商年度分析表................................................. 97
    表5-31 未存續廠商比例佔調查母體廠商年度分析表......................................... 98
    表5-32 失去聯絡廠商領域分佈比例分析表......................................................... 98
    表6-1 計畫審查意見........................................................................................... 106
    參考文獻 中文部分
    方世杰(1998),國內廠商參與科技專案研發動機之研究,經濟情勢暨評論季刊,
    第4 卷第3 期,159-184。
    方彥永(2003),知識經濟體系下政府協助產業創新之研究-以業界開發產業技術
    計畫為例,國立中山大學公共事務管理研究所碩士論文。
    王健全(2001),臺灣科技資源之規劃與運用。經濟前瞻,3 月號,72-76。
    朱斌妤(2005),鼓勵中小企業開發新技術推動計畫(SBIR)成效追蹤作業委外評估
    研究計畫報告,財團法人工業技術研究院。
    朱斌妤(2006),科技政策與專案評估:選擇偏誤、動機、作為、創新與績效整合
    評估模型。2006 年國科會計畫申請書。
    江雪嬌(2001),我國鼓勵中小企業技術創新策略之研究,經濟情勢暨評論季刊,
    第7 卷第2 期,169-184。
    呂淑媛(1998),經濟部所屬事業協助中小企業推動研究發展計畫,工業簡訊,第
    28 卷第7 期,57-65。
    宋大崙(2006)。臺灣國家型科技計畫評量制度探討。國立臺灣大學會計學研究
    所EMBA 碩士學位論文,未出版,台北。
    李仁芳(1996),產研合作創新與合作管理機制之探討,第五屆產業管理研討會。
    周妍劭(2004)。專家為主,指標為輔:科技專案績效考評作業運作模式。臺灣
    經濟研究月刊,第27 卷第1 期,27-33。
    周霞麗(2002)。我國現有研究機構之績效考評機制。臺灣經濟研究月刊,第25
    卷第11 期,52-61。
    林月珠(2002),資料包絡分析法應用於電子、資訊領域科專計畫的效率評估,國
    立交通大學工業工程與管理學程碩士論文。
    林治廷(2000),科技研究發展專案的連續多期效率評估,國立交通大學工業工程
    與管理所碩士論文。
    林欣吾(2002a),一般科專計畫績效評估指標。臺灣經濟研究月刊,第25 卷第
    11 期,62-71。
    林欣吾(2002b),業界科專之績效評估機制。臺灣經濟研究月刊,第25 卷第11
    期,72-77。
    承立平(1998),我國科技產業發展政策之做法與檢討”,經濟情勢與評論季刊,
    第三卷第三期,1-37。
    祁明輝(1999),專利於產品研發所扮演之角色,智慧財產權,第5 期,39-45 頁。
    姜貞吟(2002),創新前瞻技術規劃之策略與績效考評機制。臺灣經濟研究月刊,
    第25 卷11 期,78-87。
    柯惠友(2002),政府研發補助經費對公司研發活動之影響效果──以經濟部所屬
    115
    事業協助中小企業推動研究發展計畫為例,國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩
    士論文。
    柯惠友(2002),政府研發補助經費對公司研發活動之影響效果─以經濟部所屬事
    業協助中小企業推動研究發展計畫為例,國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士
    論文。
    夏文龍(1998),專利對產業界的價值,智慧財產權管理,第16 期,20-21 頁。
    莊弘旻(2002),公共部門與民間部門研究發展經費之關聯性分析,國立台灣科技
    大學企業管理系碩士論文。
    陳正昌、程炳林(1998),SPSS、SAS、BMDP 統計軟體在多變量統計上的應用(第
    二版)。臺北:五南圖書出版公司。
    陳正福(2001),研發活動之資源基礎分析-以主導性新產品開發計畫廠商為例,
    國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
    陳嘉萍(2002),政府研發獎助與中小企業研發創新關係之研究-以新竹科學園區
    廠商為例,國立中央大學產業經濟研究所碩士論文。
    曾政傑(2005),研發聯盟的動機和組織能力對新產品開發績效的影響,國立成功大學企業管
    理研究所碩士論文。
    黃仟文、李鳳梧、朱斌妤(2003),評估政府資助中小企業創新之效果-以「鼓勵
    中小企業開發新技術推動計畫」為例,2003 科技政策與國家競爭力研討會,
    台北:台灣大學。(卓越計畫 甲-91H-FA08-1-4)
    黃志男(1997),資料包絡分析法在科技專案執行效率評估的應用-以能源科技研
    發專案為例,國立交通大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
    經濟部技術處(2002),業界開發產業技術計畫成果摘要彙編,經濟部:台北市。
    經濟部技術處(2005),2005 科技專案執行年報
    http://doit.moea.gov.tw/news/forlog_openfile.asp?id=4&award=pub&s=2&tourl
    =../news_manager/pubpost/4f3.pdf
    經濟部技術處全球資訊網。http://doit.moea.gov.tw/03know/product.asp
    經濟部技術處科專計畫統計總覽。http://tierwebs.tier.org.tw/itis/itis12.asp
    經濟部技術處業界開發產業技術計畫網站
    http://innovation1.tdp.org.tw/group/application/tdp_itdp/index.php
    董鍾明(2001),研發效率評估之資料包絡分析法實證研究-以主導性新產品開發
    計畫為例,國立台灣科技大學企業管理系碩士論文。
    劉代洋、許百華(1998),我國中小企業研究發展需求與政府角色之研究-以科技
    專案計畫為例,第三屆中小企業發展學術研討會。
    謝龍發(1993),我國廠商參與政府主導共同研究發展聯盟的動機、類型和管理機
    制的相關研究,政治大學企管所博士論文。
    簡禛富、王國明、王文志、陳建宏、曾繁斌、賴威齊、席時昶、洪綾君(2001),
    科技發展計畫績效評估指標與評估機制之研究。行政院國家科學委員會委託
    之專題研究成果報告,未出版。
    116
    蘇雲一(1998),資料包絡分析法與比例分析法運用於科技專案效率評估之研究,
    國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
    英文部分
    Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J. & Herron, M.(1996). Assessing the
    work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 54-84.
    Antonelli, C. (1989). A failure-inducement model of research and development
    expenditure. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 12, 159-180.
    Arrow, K. (1962). Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In
    Nelson, R. R. (Ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, 609-625.
    Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    Audretsch, D. B., Link, A. N., & Scott, J. T. (2002). Public/private technology
    partherships: Evaluating SBIR-supported research. Research Policy, 31(1),
    145-158.
    Bell, M., &. Pavitt, K. (1995). The Development of Technological Capabilities.
    InHaque, I. U. (Ed.), Trade, Technology and International Competitiveness (pp.
    69-101). Washington: The World Bank,
    Bingham, T. H. (2001). Estimating Economic Benefits from ATP Funding of New
    Medical Technologies. In Wessner, C. W. (Ed.), The Advanced Technology
    Program: Assessing Outcomes. Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
    Borys, B., & Jemison, D.B., (1989). Hybrid arrangements as strategic alliances:
    theoretical issues in organizational combinations. The Academy of Management
    Review, 14(2), 234-249.
    Branstetter, L., & Sakakibara, M., (1998). Japanese research consortia: a
    microeconometric analysis of industrial policy. Journal of Industrial Economics,
    46(2), 207-233.
    Brod, A., & Shivakumar, R. (1997). R&D cooperation and the joint exploitation of
    R&D. Canadian Journal of Economics, 30, 673-684.
    Brown, M. (1994). Introduction to Innovation - Managing ideas into action. Henley
    Management Centre/Price Waterhouse.
    Browning, D. C., Beyer, J. M. & Shetletr, J. C. (1995). Building cooperation in
    competitive industry: SEMATECH and the semiconductor industry. Academy of
    Management Journal, 38(1), 131-151.
    Busom, I. (1999). An Empirical Evaluation of the Effects of R&D Subsidies. Working
    Paper No. B99-05, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona.
    Capaldo, G., Iandoli, L., Raffa M., et al. (2003). The evaluation of innovation
    capabilities in small software firms: A methodological approach. Small Business
    Economics, 21(4) 343-354.
    Carmichael, J. (1981). The effects of mission-oriented public R&D spending on
    117
    private industry. Journal of Finance, 36, 617-627.
    Carpon, H., & van Pottelsberghe dela Potterie, B. (1997). Public support to R&D
    Programmes: an integrated assessment scheme. In Policy Evaluation in
    Innovation and Technology: Towards Best Practices (pp. 35-47). Paris:
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
    Caves, E., Crookel, H., & Killing, P. J. (1983). The Imperfect Market for Technology
    Licenses. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 45, 249-67.
    Chacke, G. K. (1988). Technology Management-Application to Corporate Markets
    and Military Missions. NY: Praeger.
    Chung, K. H., & Pruitt, S. W. (1994). A simple approximation of Tobin's Q. Finance
    Management, 23(3), 70–4.
    Clark, J., & Guy, K. (1998). Innovation and Competitiveness: A Review. Technology
    Analysis & Strategic Management, 10(4), 363-395.
    Combs, K., (1993). The role of information sharing in cooperative research and
    development. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 11, 535-551.
    Committee on Capitalizing on Science, Technology, and Innovation. (2004). An
    Assessment of the Small Business Innovation Research Program: Project
    Methodology. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
    Czinkota, M. R., Ronkainen, I. A., & Moffett, M. H. (2002). International Business
    (6th ed). South-Western,
    David, P. A., Toole A. A., & Hall, B. H. (2000). Is public R&D a complement or
    substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence. Research
    Policy, 29(4/5), 497-529.
    Day, G. S. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of
    Marketing, 58(4), 37-52.
    De Bondt, R., Slaets, P., Cassiman, B., (1992). The degree of spillovers and the
    number of rivals for maximum effective R&D. International Journal of
    Industrial Organization, 10, 35-54.
    Dowling, G. R. (1994). Corporate Reputations: Strategies for Developing the
    Corporate Brand. Kogan Page.
    Dutta, S. & Weiss, A.M. (1997).The relationship between a firm's level of
    technological innovativeness and its pattern of partnership agreements.
    Management Science, 43(3), 343-356.
    Eshima, Y. (2003). Impact of policy on innovation SMEs in Japan. Journal of Small
    Business Management, 41(1), 85-93.
    Folster, S. (1995). Do subsidies to cooperative R&D actually stimulate R&D
    investment and cooperation, Research Policy, 24, 403-417.
    Fombrun, C. & Rindova, V. (2000). The road to transparency: Reputation
    118
    management at Royal Dutch/Shell. In M. Schultz & M. J. Hatch, (Eds.), The
    Expressive Organization. Oxford University Press.
    Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (1997). The Economics of Industrial Innovation, (3rd ed.).
    Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Fryxell, G. & Wang, J. (1994). The fortune corporate "reputation" index: Reputation
    for what? Journal of Management, 20(1), 1-14.
    Geisler, E., & Rubenstein, A. (1989). University- Industry Relations: A Review of
    Major Issues. In A. Link & G. Tassey (Eds), Cooperative Research &
    Development. Kluwa Academic Publishers.
    Georghiou, L. (1999). Meta-Evaluation: Evaluation of evaluations. In European
    Commission & Austrian Advisory Board for Universities (Eds), Science and the
    Academic System in Transition: An International Expert Meeting on Evaluation
    (pp. 195-202). Budapest: Akade'miai Kiado'.
    Glaister, K. W., & Buckley, P. J. (1996). Strategic motives for international alliance
    formation. Journal of Management Studies, 33(3), 301-332.
    Griliches, Z., & Regev, H. (1998). An econometric evaluation of high-tech policy in
    Israel. Paper presented at ATP-conference in Washington, DC, June 1998.
    Guellec D. & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2003). The Impact of Public R&D
    Expenditure on Business R&D. Economics of Innovation and New Technologies,
    12(3), 225-243.
    Hagedoorn, J., & Narula, R., (1996). Choosing organizational modes of strategic
    technology partnering: International sectoral differences. Journal of
    International Business Studies, 27, pp.265-284.
    Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. L., & Vonortas N. (2000). Research partnerships. Research
    Policy, 29, 567-586.
    Hamberg, D. (1966). Essays on the Economics of Research and Development. New
    York: Random House.
    Higgins, R. S., & Link, A. N. (1981) Federal support of technological growth in
    industry: some evidence of crowding out. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
    Management, EM-28, 86-88.
    Holemans, B., & Sleuwaegen, L. (1988). Innovation expenditures and the role of
    government in Belgium. Research Policy, 17, 375-379.
    Howe, J. D., & McFetridge, D. G. (1976). The determinants of R&D expenditures.
    Canadian Journal of Economics, 9, 57-71.
    Hsu, Y. G., Tzeng, G. H., & Shyu, J.Z. (2003). Fuzzy multiple criteria selection of
    government-sponsored frontier technology. R&D projects. R&D Management,
    33(5), 539-550
    Irwin, D., & Klenow, P. (1996). High-tech R&D subsidies - estimating the effects of
    119
    SEMATECH. Journal of International Economics, 40, 323-344.
    Itami, H. R. (1987). Mobilizing Invisible Assets. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
    University Press.
    Jaffe, A. B. (2002). Building Programme Evaluation into the Design of Public
    Research-Support Programmes. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18(1), 22-34
    Johne, A. (1998). Using mark vision to steer innovation. Technovation, 19, 203-207.
    Kamien, M. I., Muller, E., & Zang, I. (1992). Research joint ventures and R&D cartels.
    American Economic Review, 82, 1293-1306.
    Katsoulacos, Y., & Ulph, D. (1997). Technology policy: a selective review with
    emphasis on European policy and the role of RJVs. In: J. A. Poyago-Theotoky
    (Eds.), Competition, Cooperation, Research and Development: The Economics of
    Research Joint Ventures (pp. 13–38). Macmillan, London.
    Katz, M. L. (1986). An analysis of cooperative research and development. Rand
    Journal of Economics, 17, 527-543.
    Kauko, K., (1996). Effectiveness of R&D Subsidies: A Sceptical Note on the
    Empirical Evidence. Research Policy, 25, 321-323.
    Kealy, T. (1996). The Economic Law of Scientific Research. New York: St Martin’s
    Press.
    Kleet, T. J., & Moen, J. (1998). R&D Investment responses to R&D subsidies: a
    theoretical analysis and econometric evidence. (presentation to the NBER
    Summer Institute, July)
    Kleinknecht, A., van Montfort, K., & Brouwer, E. (2002). The non-trivial choice
    between innovation indicators. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 11,
    109-121.
    Klette, T. & Moen, J. (1998) R&D Investment Responses to R&D Subsidies: A
    Theoretical Analysis and a Microeconometric Study. paper presented at the
    NBER Summer Institute.
    Lahdalma, R. & Salminen, P. (2001). SMAA-2: Stochasitc multicriteria acceptability
    analysis for group decision making. Operations Research, 49(3), 444-455.
    Lerner, J. & Kegler, C. (2000). Evaluating the Small Business Innovation Research
    Program: A Literature Review. In C. W. Wessner (Eds.), The Small Business
    Innovation Research Program: An Assessment of the Department of Defense Fast
    Track Initiative (pp. 307-324), Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
    Lerner, J. (1999). The government as venture capitalist: The long-run impact of the
    SBIR program. Journal of Business, 72(3), 285-318.
    Levy, D. M., & Terleckyj, N. E. (1983). Effects of government R&D on private R&D
    investment and productivity: a macroeconomic analysis. Bell Journal of
    Economics, 14, 551-561.
    120
    Leyden, D. P., & Link, A. N. (1991). Why are government and private R&D
    complements? Applied Economics, 23, 1673-1681.
    Leyden, D. P., Link, A. N., & Bozeman, B. (1989). The effects of governmental
    financing on firms’ R&D activities, a theoretical and empirical investigation.
    Technovation, 9, 561-575.
    Lichtenberg, F. R. (1984). The relationship between federal contract R&D and
    company R&D. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 74, 73-78.
    Lichtenberg, F. R. (1987). The effect of government funding on private industrial
    research and development: a re-assessment. The Journal of Industrial Economics,
    36, 97-104.
    Lichtenberg, F. R. (1988). The private R&D investment response to federal design and
    technical competitions. American Economic Review, 78, 550-559.
    Lichtenberg, F. R., (1987). The effect of government funding on private industrial
    research and development: a re-assessment. The Journal of Industrial Economics,
    36, 97-104.
    Lichtenberg, F. R., (1988). The private R&D investment response to federal design
    and technical competitions. American Economic Review, 78, 550-559.
    Lin, B-W. & Chen, J.-S. (2005). Corporate technology portfolios and R&D
    performance measures: A study of technology intensive firms. R&D
    Management, 35(2), 157-170.
    Lindenberg, E. B., & Ross, S. A. (1981), Tobin’s q ratio and industrial organization.
    Journal of Business, 54(1): 1-32.
    Lindenberg, E. B., & Ross, S. A. (1981). Tobin’s Q ratio and industrial organization.
    Journal of Business, 54, 1-32.
    Marquish, D. G. (1982). The Anatomy of Successful Innovation. Winthrop Publishers,
    Cambridge.
    Martin, S. 1994. Private and social incentives to form R&D joint ventures. Review of
    Industrial Organization, 9, 157–171.
    Meade, L. M. & Presley, A. (2002). R&D Project Selection Using the Analytic
    Network Process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(1), 59-66.
    Mogee, M. E., & Schacht W. H. (1980). Industrial innovation: major issues system.
    Issue Brief No.1 B80005.
    Mole, V., & Elliot, D. (1987). Enterprising innovation: An alternative approach.
    Frances Pinter, London.
    Mowery, D. S., Oxley, J. E. & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and
    interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 77-91.
    Nauwelaers, C. & Wintjes, R. (2002) Innovating SMEs and Regions: The Need for
    Policy Intelligence and Interactive Policies. Technology Analysis & Strategic
    121
    Management, 14(2), 201-215.
    Odagiri, H., Nakamura, Y., & Shibuya, M. (1997). Research consortia as a vehicle for
    basic research: The case of a fifth generation computer project in Japan.
    Research Policy, 24, 403-417.
    OECD (1999a). University Research in Transition. Paris.
    OECD (1999b). University Research in Transition: Countries notes. Paris.
    Parkhe, A. (1991) International portfolio analysis: A new model. Management
    International Review, 31(4), 365-380.
    Pereira, Z. L. & Aspinwall, E. (1997). Total quality management versus business
    process re-engineering. Journal of Total Quality Management, 8(1), 33-42.
    Peters, T., & R. Waterman (1982). In search of excellence. Harper and Row, New
    York, N.Y.
    Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive Strategy. NY: Free Press.
    Porter, M. E., & Fuller, R. (1986). Competition on Global Industries. MA: Harvard
    Business Press
    Reinganum, J. F. (1989). The timing of innovation: research, development, and
    diffusion. In R. L. Schmalensee & Willig, R.D. (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial
    Organization (pp. 849-908). North-Holland, New York.
    Robert, P.W. & Greenwood, R. (1997). Integrating transaction cost and institutional
    theories: Toward a constrained-efficiency framework for understanding
    organizational design adoption. Academy of Management Review, 22(2),
    346-373.
    Robertson, T. S. & Gatignon, H. (1998). Technology development mode: A
    transaction cost conceptualization. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 515-531.
    Rossi, P. H. (Eds.). (1982). Standards for evaluation practice. San Francisco:
    Jossey-Bass.
    Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic
    approach (7th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Rothwell, R., & Zegveld, W. (1981). Industrial Innovation and Public Policy:
    Preparing for the 1980s and 1990s. London: Frances Pinter.
    Ruegg, R. (1999). Assessment of the ATP. In C. W. Wessner (Eds.), Advanced
    Technology Program: Challenges and Opportunities (pp. 71-80). Washington,
    D.C.: National Academy Press.
    Sakakibara, M. (1997). Evaluation government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan:
    Who benefits and how. Research Policy, 26(4/5), 447-473.
    Sakakibara, M., (1997). Heterogeneity of firm capabilities and cooperative research
    and development: An empirical examination of motives, Strategic Management
    Journal, 18, 143-164.
    122
    Salmenkaita, J. P., & Salo, A. (2002). Rationales for Government Intervention in the
    Commercialization of New Technologies. Technology Analysis & Strategic
    Management, 14(2), 183-200.
    Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA:
    Harvard University Press.
    Schumpeter, J. A. (1961) The Theory of Economic Development, London: Oxford
    University Press.
    Schumpeter, J. A. (1975) Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, N.Y: Harper & Row,
    Publishers.
    Scott, J. T. (1984). Firm versus industry variability in R&D intensity. In Griliches, Z.
    (Ed.), R&D, Patents and Productivity. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
    Shrieves, R. E. (1978). Market structure and innovation: a new perspective. The
    Journal of Industrial Economics, 26, 329-347.
    Simpson, R. D., & Vonortas, N. S. (1994). Cournot equilibrium with imperfectly
    appropriable R&D. Journal of Industrial Economics, 42(1), 79-92.
    Song, M., Droge, C., Hanvanich, S., et al. (2005). Marketing and technology resource
    complementarity: An analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental
    contexts. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 259-276.
    Sorensen, A., Kongsted, H. C., & Marcusson, M. (2003). R&D, Public Innovation
    Policy, and Productivity: The Case of Danish Manufacturing. Economics of
    Innovation and New Technology, 12(2), 163-178.
    Spence, M. (1984). Cost reduction, competition, and industry performance.
    Econometrica, 52, 101-121.
    Subramanian, A., & Nilakanta, S. (1996). Organizational Innovativeness: Exploring
    the Relationship Between Organizational Determinant of Innovation, Types of
    Innovations, and Measures of Organizational Performance. Omega, International
    Journal of Management Science, 24(6), 631-647.
    Suzumura, K. (1992). Cooperative and non-cooperative R&D in an oligopoly with
    spillovers. American Economic Review, 82, 1307-1320.
    Tassey, G. (1999). R&D Policy Models and Data Needs. Retrieved June 24, 2003,
    from http://www.nist.gov/director/planning/dataneeds.pdf
    Thompson, V. A. (1965). Bureaucracy and Innovation. Administrative Science
    Quarterly, 5, 1-20.
    Tidd, J. & Trewhella, M. J. (1997). Organizational and technological antecedents of
    knowledge acquisition and learning. R&D Management, 27(4), 359-375.
    Toivanen, O., & P. Niininen (1998). Investment, R&D, subsidies and credit
    constraints. Working Paper, Dep. of Economics, MIT and Helsinki School of
    Economics.
    123
    Tripsas, M., Schrader, S., & Sobrero, M., (1995). Discouraging opportunistic behavior
    in collaborative R&D: A new role for government. Research Policy, 24, 367-389.
    Tushman, M. & Nadler, D. (1986). Organising for innovation. California
    Management Review, 28(3), 74-92.
    Van der Panne, G., van Beers, C. P. & Kleinknecht, A. (2003) Success and failure of
    innovation: A literature review. International Journal of Innovation Management,
    7(3), 309-338.
    Vonortas, N. S. (1994). Inter-firm cooperation with imperfectly appropriable research.
    International Journal of Industrial Organization, 12, 413-435.
    Wallsten, S. J. (1999). Do government-industry R&D programs increase private
    R&D?: The Case of the Small Business Innovation Research Program.
    Department of Economics. Working Paper, Stanford University.
    Wallsten, S. J. (2000). The effects of government-industry R&D programs on private
    R&D: the case of the Small Business Innovation Research program. RAND
    Journal of Economics, 31(1), 82-100.
    Wessner, C. W., (2001). The Advanced Technology Program: Assessing outcomes.
    Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
    Wooldridge, J. (2003). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data.
    Cambridge: MIT Press.
    Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., & and Holbek, J. (1973). Innovations and organizations.
    New York: John Wiley and Sons.
    口試委員
  • 黃營芳 - 召集委員
  • 蕭乃沂 - 委員
  • 蕭元哲 - 委員
  • 朱斌妤 - 指導教授
  • 李雅靖 - 指導教授
  • 口試日期 2010-07-28 繳交日期 2010-09-08

    [回到前頁查詢結果 | 重新搜尋]


    如有任何問題請與論文審查小組聯繫