外文翻译——全球价值链下产业升级.pdf

1 附录 原文 原文 Upgrading in Global Value Chains The aim of this paper is to explore how small and medium sized Latin American enterprises SMEs may participate in global markets in a way that provides for sustainable growth This may be defined as the highroad to competitiveness contrasting with the low road typical of firms from developing countries which often compete by squeezing wages and profit margins rather than by improving productivity wages and profits The key difference between the high and the low road to competitiveness is often explained by the different capabilities of firms to upgrade In this paper upgrading refers to the capacity of a firm to innovate to increase the value added of its products and processes Humphrey Kaplinsky Porter 1990 Capitalizing on one of the most productive areas of the recent literature on SMEs we restrict our field of research to small enterprises located in clusters There is now a wealth ofempirical evidence Humphrey 1995 Nadvi Rabellotti 1997 showing that small firms in clusters both in developed and developing countries are able to over come some of the major constraints they usually face lack of specialized skills difficult access to technology inputs market information credit and external services Nevertheless the literature on clusters mainly focused on the local sources of competitiveness coming from intracluster vertical and horizontal relationships generating collective efficiency Schmitz 1995 hasoften neglected the increasing importance of external link ages Due to recent changes in production systems distribution channels and financial markets and to the spread of information technologies enterprises and clusters are increasingly integrated in value chains that often operate across many different countries The literature on global value chains GVCs Gereffi 1999 Gereffi Wood 2001 the focus moves from manufacturing only to the other activities involved in the supply of goods and services including distribution and marketing All these activities contribute to add value Moreover the ability to identify the activities providing higher returns along the value chain is key to understanding the global appropriation of the returns to production Value chain research focuses on the nature of the relationships among the various actors involved in the chain and on their implications for development Humphrey b quasi hierarchy involving relationships between legally independent firms in which one is subordinated to the other with a leader in the chain defining the rules to which the rest of the actors have to comply and c hierarchy when a firm is owned by an external firm Also stressed is the role played by GVC leaders particularly by the buyers in transferring knowledge along the chains For small firms in less developed countries LDCs participation in value chains is a way to obtain information on the need and mode to gain access to global markets Yet although this information has high value for local SMEs the role played by the leaders of GVCs in fostering and supporting the SMEs upgrading process is less clear Gereffi 1999 mainly focusing on East Asia assumes a rather optimistic view emphasizing the role of the leaders that almost automatically promote process product and functional upgrading among small local producers Pietrobelli and Rabellotti 2004 present a more differentiated picture for Latin America In line with the present approach Humphrey and Schmitz 2000 discuss the prospects of upgrading with respect to the pattern of value chain governance They conclude that insertion in a quasi hierarchical chain offers very favorable conditions for process and product upgrading but hinders functional upgrading Networks offer ideal upgrading conditions but they are the least likely to occur for developing country producers In addition a more dynamic approach suggests that chain governance is not given forever and may change because Humphrey b establishing and maintaining quasi hierarchical governance is costly for the lead firm and leads to inflexibility because of transaction specific investments and c firms and cluster soften do not operate only in one chain but simultaneously in several types of chains and they may apply competencies learned in one chain to supply other chains In sum both modes of organizing production that is the cluster and the value chain offer interesting opportunities for the upgrading and modernization of local 6 firms and are not mutually exclusive alternatives However in order to assess their potential contribution to local SMEs innovation and upgrading we need to understand their organization of inter firm linkages and their internal governance Furthermore as we explain in the following section the nature of their dominant specialization also plays a role and affects SMEs upgrading prospects 3 THE SECTORAL DIMENSION OFSMEs UPGRADING a The concept of upgrading The concept of upgrading making better products making them more efficiently or moving in to more skilled activities has often been used in studies on competitiveness Kaplinsky 2001 Porter 1990 and is relevant here Following this approach upgrading is decisively related to innovation Here we define upgrading as innovating to increase value added 7 Enterprises achieve this in various ways such as for example by entering higher unit value market niches or new sectors or by undertaking new productive or service functions The concept of upgrading may be effectively described for enterprises working within a value chain where four types of upgrading are singled out Humphrey Schmitz 1999b Product upgrading is moving into more sophisticated product lines in terms of increased unit values e g the apparel commodity chain in Asia upgrading from discount chains to department stores Gereffi 1999 Functional upgrading is acquiring new superior functions in the chain such as design or marketing or abandoning existing low value added functions to focus on higher value added activities e g Torreon s blue jeans industry upgrading from maquila to full package manufacturing Bair Humphrey Pietrobelli 1997 In sum the logic goes from innovation to upgrading to the acquisition of firm level competitiveness i e competitive advantage 8 In this paper we argue that the concept of competitive advantage increasingly matters In the theory of comparative advantage what matters is relative productivity determining different patterns of inter industry specialization Within such a theoretical approach with perfectly competitive markets firms need to target only production efficiency In fact this is not enough and competitive advantage is the relevant concept to analyze SMEs performance because of i the existence of forms of imperfect competition in domestic and international markets and ii the presence of different degrees of dynamic externalities in different subsect or sand stages of the value chain More specifically in non perfectly competitive market rents and niches of extra normal profits often emerge and this explains the efforts to enter selectively specific segments rather than simply focusing on efficiency improvements regardless of the prevailing productive specialization as advocated by the theory of CA Moreover different stages in the value chain offer different scope for dynamic externalities Thus for example in traditional manufacturing the stages of design product innovation marketing and distribution may all foster competitiveness increases in related activities and sectors The advantage of functional upgrading is in reducing the fragility and vulnerability of an enterprise s productive specialization Competition from new entrants i e firms from developing countries with lower production costs crowding out incumbents is stronger in the manufacturing phases of the value chain than in other more knowledge and organization intensive phases e g product design 8 and innovation chain management distribution and retail etc Therefore functional upgrading may bring about more enduring and solid competitiveness For all these reasons the concept of production efficiency is encompassed within the broader concept of competitiveness and the efforts to upgrade functionally and inter sectorally and the policies to support these processes are justified to reap larger rents and externalities emerging in specific stages of the value chain market niches or sectors An additional element that crucially affects the upgrading prospects of firms and clusters is the sectoral dimension Insofar as we have defined upgrading as innovating to increase value added then all the factors influencing innovation acquire a new relevance This dimension is often overlooked in studies on clusters perhaps due to the fact that most of these studies are not comparative but rather detailed intra industry case studies In order to take into account such a sectoral dimension and the effect this may have on the firms pattern of innovation and learning we need to introduce the concept of tacit knowledge This notion was first introduced by Polanyi 1967 and then discussed in the context of evolutionary economics by Nelson and Winter 1982 It refers to the evidence that some aspects of technological knowledge are well articulated written down in manuals and papers and taught Others are largely tacit mainly learned through practice and practical examples In essence this is knowledge which can be freely used by its owners but that can not be easily expressed and communicated to anyone else The tacit component of technological knowledge makes its transfer and application costly and difficult As a result the mastery of a technology may require an organization to be active in the earlier stages of its development and a close and continuous interaction between the user and the producer or transfer of such knowledge Inter firm relationships are especially needed in this context Tacit knowledge is an essential dimension to define a useful grouping of economic activities b Sectoral specificities in upgrading and innovation a classification for Latin 9 American countries The impact of collective efficiency and patterns of governance on the capacity of SMEs to upgrade may differ across sectors This claim is based upon the consideration that sectoral groups differ in terms of technological complexity and in the modes and sources of innovation and upgrading 9 As shown by innovation studies in some sectors vertical relations with suppliers of inputs may be particularly important sources of product and process upgrading as in the case of textiles and the mosttraditionalmanufacturing whileinothersectors technologyusers organizations such as universities or the firms themselves as for example with software or agro industrial products may provide major stimuli for technical change Pavitt 1984 Von Hippel 1987 Consistently with this approach the properties of firm knowledge bases across different sectors Malerba 2 Natural resource based sectors NRbased implying the direct exploitation of natural resources for example copper marble fruit etc 3 Complex products industries COPs including among others automobiles autocomponents and aircraft industries ICT and consumer electronics 4 Specialized suppliers in our LA cases essentially software Each of these categories tends to have a predominant learning and innovating behavior in terms of main sources of technical change dependence on basic or applied research modes of in house innovation e g routinized versus large R 17 2 upgrading the clusters selected have experienced some degree of upgrading of whatever nature i e product process functional inter sectoral and 3 policy lessons all cases offer relevant policy lessons for future experiences either in terms of successesor failures A total of 40 case studies were selected forth is analysis 18 The list of cases albeit incomplete is to our knowledge the largest available on which comparative exercises have been carried out and provides a good approximation to the reality of clusters and value chains in LA Thus although it cannot claim to correspond to the universe of clusters in the region it represents a database that allows reasonable 13 generalizations The analysis consists of a systematic attempt to quantify on Likert scales for each of the clusters investigated the dimensions to be analyzed the degree of collective efficiency and levels of upgrading Cluster studies have also been categorized according to the governance pattern of the value chain to which they are connected To quantify the degree of collective efficiency a careful evaluation of CE main components external economies and joint action has been carried out Hence a value ranging from absent 0 to high 3 was attributed to the following components specialized labor market local availability of inputs easy access to information and market access for external economies backward and forward vertical linkages horizontal bilateral and multilateral linkages for joint action 19 The same was done with referenceto product process functional and inter sectoral upgrading a value ranging from absent 0 to high 3 was attributed to each of these types of upgrading The values were determined during either the original field studies or in the cases reviewed from the context and from the specific wording of papers Finally we identified the number and mode of governance market network quasi hierarchy and hierarchy of the value chains into which the clusters feed Whenever the evidence was derived from other published sources we carefully analyzed the wording of each paper with the collaboration of the team of experts and tried to minimize the occurrence of bias and misinterpretations complementing and cross referencing information in all possible ways and testing it with interviews with key informants and local experts Nevertheless as with any study of this kind there may be potential problems on the accuracy of the results which will therefore call for cautious interpretations The empirical analysis is inevitably affected by some limitations due to the lack of reliable data even when updated firm level statistics are available which seldom happens in developing countries they are usually available at the national or local level but they are never gathered at the cluster level nor do they take into account the relationships within the same value chain Therefore the empirical analysis has to rely on theavailablequantitativeevidencecomplementedbycarefulqualitative 14 assessments Given its qualitative content the aim of this study is not to identify causal relationships but rather to explore the hypotheses presented above with rich newly gathered empirical evidence on Latin American clustered SMEs The next section presents a synthesis of the main results Fuller details and analyses of additional complementary issues are addressed in a longer study where summarized descriptions of the case studies undertaken in the project are included Pietrobelli Rabellotti 2004 译文 译文 15 全球价值链下产业升级 企业的生产经营活动 本质上是价值创造的动态过程 每个企业都是在设计 生产 销售 发送和辅助其产品的过程中进行种种活动的一个集合体 而所有这 些活动可以用一个价值链 value chain 来表明 随着国际外包业务日益增多 全球价值链 global value chain GVC 的概 念应运而生 全球价值链是指全球性跨企业网络组织在原料采集和运输 产品的 生产和分销 直至最终消费和回收处理的过程中进行的价值创造活动 杰瑞菲 Gary Gereffi 通过研究不同环节之间相互联系的分布在世界各国的生产体系 后发现 全球价值链往往由一个或几个领导者支配 协调 领导者通常占据价值 链的战略环节 他决定着价值链的基本特征 根据领导者的角色 全球价值链可以分为生产者驱动型价值链 producer driven value chain 和购买者驱动型价值链 buyer driven value chain 生 产者驱动型价值链是指在生产进入壁垒高的行业 价值链由处在生产环节上的大 制造商控制 全球价值链的领导公司通常是国际巨头 他们后向控制原材料和配 件供应商 前向与分销零售商密切联系 这种价值链在汽车 飞机 计算机 半 导体及重型机械等资本 技术密集行业中很典型 购买者驱动型价值链是指在生 产进入壁垒较低的行业 价值链由销售渠道拥有者和品牌拥有者控制 他们在建 立销售网络的基础上 建立散布于各个国家 一般是第三世界国家 的生产网络 并控制着这2个网络 成为价值链的领导者 而在第三世界的制造商 根据零售 商和经销商提供的产品规格和品牌进行生产和销售 这种以贸易带动的价值链 在劳动密集型的日用消费品中很常见 如服装 鞋 玩具 手工艺品及家用电器 等 1 购买者驱动的服装价值链 服装价值链包括原料处理 产品设计 纺织品生产 成衣制造和销售等过程 据测算 服装价值链上的利润分配 设计占40 营销占50 生产占10 很明显 在全球服装价值链中 设计和营销处于价值链的高端 而生产加工处于 价值链的低端 服装价值链是购买者驱动型的 即大型的服装零售商 品牌营销 商 品牌制造商是服装价值链的领导厂商 他们构建营销网络的同时 在全球配 置服装生产网络 并通过订单的全球化推动生产的全球化 他们控制服装价值链 16 中增值率高 利润份额多的设计 品牌 营销环节 而把增值率低 利润份额少 的加工环节配置在劳动力密集 工资低廉的国家和地区 例如 亚洲早先的新兴 工业化国家 地区 以及后来的中国内地 越南等地 近些年来 全球服装价值链 已延伸到非洲 中美洲的一些国家 但重心仍在亚洲 发达国家在服装加工失去比较优势后 无一例外地都转向服装价值链高端 实现服装产业的升级 例如 意大利已经形成了纺织品 服装服饰以及高档时装 的设计 加工 销售一条龙的运作体系 构成了完整的产业链 并成为时尚潮流 的源头 不乏全球顶级品牌 日本服装企业自行开发 设计 将订单下到劳动力 便宜的发展中国家 成品打上自己的品牌 在国内销售 美国 大批世界知名 品牌集团如LizC1aiborne Lord Taylor等控制了本国甚至世界市场 他们中很 多是设计和销售公司 有自己的专卖店 或在零售集团中有专卖柜台 他们拥有 品牌 产品设计好后委托发展中国家贴牌加工 然后再由他们经销 2 中国服装业在全球价值链中的地位 中国服装在世界市场占有率达17 但以贴牌生产 OEM 加工贸易为主 在国际市场上自有品牌凤毛麟角 服装产品的出口价格只相当于法国和意大利的 1 4 赚取的利润极其有限 处于全球价值链低端 中国服装产品的尴尬在于 在品牌端你没有话语权 在技术端你又说不上话 最后发现 你只能在这产业链 的前后两端之间苦苦挣扎 挣一些血汗钱 国内有一些品牌生产商 OBM 如美特斯 邦威 森马等 开始在国内市场 控制服装价值链 但这些品牌基本上还没有进入国际市场 脱离全球价值链 雅 戈尔 杉杉等也均以国内中高档男装市场为主 基本上与全球价值链无关 如果 他们从事出口 目前大部分也以贴牌为主 自有品牌还难以在国际市场立足 在全球价值链中 领导者居于价值链高端并控制着价值链 而居于价值链低 端的生产企业处于被动地位 对价值链几乎没有控制力 价值链领导者总在寻找 新的更便宜的供应来源 我国的劳动力成本相对于美国 日本 欧盟来说有绝对 优势 与墨西哥相比优势已经不十分明显 与印度 缅甸和孟加拉等发展中国家 相比已没有优势 随着我国经济的快速发展 劳动力成本优势会逐渐减弱 国外 订单有可能流向其他国家和地区 服装生产大国的地位因此受到威胁 服装生产 中心转移最基本的原因是 领导厂商总是力图将服装价值链中劳动密集程度最高 17 的环节 即加工环节 配置在劳动工资水平最低的国家或地区来完成 3 全球价值链下的产业升级 全球价值链下产业升级的途径是逐步移向价值链高端 具体途径有 1 过程升级 即内部过程的优化 比自己的竞争对手做得更好 如降低库 存成本或损耗 或者改进价值链内部的关联 如多次而小量的及时送货 2 产品升级 即产品性能价格比的改进和更灵敏地应对市场 如比竞争对 手更快推出新产品 3 功能改进 通过改变内部活动结构来提升增加值 如在购买者驱动型价 值链中加工者逐步涉足设计 创建品牌 构建营销网络等 4 链条升级 从原有价值链移向新的 价值量高的相关价值链 比如台湾 从生产半导体收音机依次转向生产计算器 电视机 电脑监视器 笔记本电 脑 杰瑞菲认为 在购买者驱动型价值链中 加工企业通过在价值链中与领导者 的互动 可以接受领先公司的技术 资金 知识和信息的扩散 同时 领先公司 为保证产品差异 实现供货的及时 确保产品和服务满足国际市场的要求 会监 督和协助加工企业投资于先进设备 技术 人力资源等 这样 加工企业可以在 价值链中实现阶梯式升级 具体来说 从接单产品组装OEA original equipment assembling 到接单加工生产OEM original equipment manufacturer 然后 到设计加工生产ODM originaldesign manufacturer 最后转向自有品牌加工生 产OBM own brand manufacturer 这一过程 也是发展中国家产业升级的过程 现实中 发展中国家的产业升级大都没有如此顺利 一方面 全球价值链中的高 附加值部分日益集中在研究 开发 设计 品牌 市场营销等非生产性环节 领 先公司正是在这些环节构建自身的核心竞争力 并通过自身的优势抑制加工企业 涉足 以减少威胁 保持领导地位 另一方面 加工企业往往缺乏进入国际市场 的信息和渠道 领先公司的订单成为他们争夺的资源 对领先公司的依赖使他们 失去向价值链高端发展的主动权 因此 文献 6 认为 在领先公司的治理下 发展中国家的产业虽然能够实现 产品升级 过程升级 但 功能升级 链 的升级 却很难发生 全球服装