财会毕业生英文翻译.doc

XX大学XX学院毕业设计（论文）外文翻译学生姓名： XXX 院（系）： XXXXX学院 专业班级： XXX班 指导教师： XXX 完成日期： X年X月X日 CatalogueFinance and small and medium-sized enterprise in developing countries1Review1Relevant theory and its development1SME Research on Developing Countries2Conclusions and Recommendations3目录发展中国家的财政和中小型企业41、综述42、相关理论及其发展43、对发展中国家中小企业的研究 54、结论和建议6II外文资料Finance and small and medium-sized enterprise in developing countriesCook, PaulReviewInterest in the role of small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) in the development process continues to be in the forefront of policy debates in developing countries. The advantages claimed for SMEs are various, including: the encouragement of entrepreneurship; the greater likelihood that SMEs will utilize labor intensive technologies and thus have an immediate impact on employment generation; the fact that they can usually be established rapidly and put into operation to produce quick returns; the ability of SME development to encourage the process of both inter- and intra-regional decentralization; and the notion that they may become a countervailing force against the economic power of larger enterprises. More generally, the development of SMEs is seen as accelerating the achievement of wider economic and socio-economic objectives, including poverty alleviation. Relevant theory and its developmentStaley and Morse (1965, p. 318) identify a developmental approach to SME promotion which has as its objective the creation of economically viable enterprises which can stand on their own feet without perpetual subsidy and can make a positive contribution to the growth of real income and therefore to better living levels. This approach emphasizes the importance of efficiency in new SMEs. Small producers must be encouraged to adopt new methods, to move into new lines of production and in the longer-run, wherever feasible, be encouraged to become medium- or even large-scale producers. Unfortunately, the empirical evidence on the relation between efficiency and firm size is rather inconclusive. Little, Mazumdar and Page (1987) reported technical efficiency does not vary systematically with firm size. A collection of studies found efficiency was lower in smaller firms Cortes, Berry & Ishaq, （1987）; Goldar, （1988). Opposite conclusions can be drawn from the twelve country studies by Liedholm and Mead (1987). More recent concerns associated with the growth and efficiency of smaller enterprises have also become prominent (1997). Using the case of Northern Italy, Piore and Sabel (1984) have argued that small enterprises are more efficient because they have adopted a flexible specialization approach. Correspondingly, there has been growing interest in whether this model has been or can be replicated in developing countries (Schmitz, 1989; Pederson, 1994; Schmitz & Musyck, 1994; Schmitz, 1995). The role of finance has been viewed as a critical element for the development of small and medium-sized enterprises. Previous studies have highlighted the limited access to financial resources available to smaller enterprises compared to larger organizations and the consequences for their growth and development (Levy, 1993). Typically, smaller enterprises face higher transaction costs than larger enterprises in obtaining credit (Saito & Villanueva, 1981). Insufficient funding has been made available to finance working capital (Peel & Wilson, 1996). Poor management and accounting practices have hampered the ability of smaller enterprises to raise finances. Information asymmetries associated with lending to small scale borrowers have restricted the flow of finance to smaller enterprises. In spite of these claims however, some studies show a large number of small enterprises fail because of non-financial reasons (Liedholm, MacPherson & Chuta, 1994). The purpose of this paper is to systematically examine research on the relation between finance and small and medium-sized enterprise development, and identify some of the gaps in our knowledge. While a considerable amount is known about the characteristics and behavior of small and medium-sized enterprises, this knowledge continues to be imperfect and a large number of questions remain unanswered in relation to finance and small enterprise development in developing countries. This paper discusses some of the issues raised by previous research and points to newer areas that can fruitfully be investigated. SME Research on Developing Countries There has been less work directly related to small and medium-sized enterprises in low income countries, although the geographical spread of this work has been wide, covering Africa, Asia and South America. It is also the case that the major proportion of this work has been empirically rather than theoretically focused, and it is reasonable to conclude that relatively little is known about the behavior of entrepreneurs in low income countries relative to those operating in higher income countries. The literature on developing countries follows the same division as studies on the industrialized countries, by attempting to distinguish between the external and internal factors that affect small and medium-sized enterprise development. In terms of external factors, much of the earlier literature in the 1970s was concerned with the biases established against smaller enterprises through trade and industrial policies pursued in low income countries, and with the design of appropriate support institutions that would compensate for these so-called policy-induced biases. Schmitz (1982) identified a number of external factors that affected small enterprise development. These included lack of credit at reasonable cost, lack of working capital, poor infrastructure, and competition from larger and foreign firms. Policies of economic liberalization were introduced later, partly with the aim of reducing the bias in favor of larger enterprises. The 1980s also witnessed greater concern for the need to establish policies at the macro, meso and micro level regarding the development of smaller enterprises in low income countries (Stewart, 1990). Earlier research on the internal workings of small and medium-sized enterprises was mainly concerned with the size of small firms and providing explanations for their growth. Staley and Morse (1965) examined the stages small firms pass through as an economy grows. They postulated several reasons why small firms in low income countries initially grow rapidly before their share of total industrial activity begins to decline. Rapid growth of small firms could be explained where (a) demand was rising as rural incomes were growing and where infrastructure costs still favored small firms locating near fragmented markets and (b) subcontracting and local assembly was common, as for example in varieties of machine-shop activities and where smaller firms produced a range of differentiated and innovative products serving small total markets. But as Anderson (1982) pointed out, these propositions had not been quantitatively tested by the early 1980s. These early researchers were also preoccupied with investigating the extent to which small businesses create the foundation for larger company growth. As Anderson (1982, p. 923) reported: firms practically always begin as very small entities, with low amounts of capital drawn from the savings of the owner or borrowings from friends and relatives; initial levels of employment are low, typically less than a dozen, though the figure varies with the nature of the business; the social and occupational backgrounds of the owners varies greatly; and the firms that expand into medium or large scale activities do so continually or in steps. Expansion can be very fast for some firms, though the growth rates appear as broadly distributed as their final sizes Anderson (1982, p. 926) concluded that the available empirical evidence suggested that a significant part of the growth of large-scale enterprises was rooted in the expansion of once small firms through the size distribution. In low income countries, work directed towards the internal workings of enterprises has been hampered by the lack of basic data on the management and characteristics of smaller firms. Considerable effort has been expended on attempting to gather consistent and measurable information about small firms. Industrial censuses in a large number of low income countries have not been undertaken annually; they have concentrated on larger enterprises; they have only infrequently surveyed small enterprises, and have often been published with long delays. As a consequence, useful time series data for smaller enterprises from official sources are largely absent. This has had implications for research efforts into small enterprises in low income countries in three important ways. First, a considerable amount of time has been spent on gathering baseline information on small firms. This has involved identifying universes and constructing samples, devising methods to deal with delinquent returns and editing the results in a consistent manner. Second, information collected tends to be more qualitative than quantitative because of the poor record keeping, as well as the lack of cross-referencing sources through formal channels that can be used to confirm data reliability. This tends to limit the use of the data in statistical analysis. Third, surveys are more often conducted on an ad hoc basis and at a point in time. Few compare different points in time and fewer still have attempted to use the same database for follow-up work. As a result, time series work on the small scale sector is relatively scarce. The preoccupation with gathering baseline data and the restricted nature of the data that have eventually been collected has resulted in a preponderance of studies that describe and report on the characteristics and features of the small scale sector rather than test theoretical propositions about relationships and the expected behavior of the small firm sector. This is not to suggest that theorizing and testing of theories is completely absent in relation to work on small enterprises in low income countries. But in comparison with work in industrialized countries, or in relation to research on the behavior of larger foreign-owned enterprises in low income countries, it is demonstrably less evident. Conclusions and Recommendations This review has pointed to the weaknesses and gaps in our knowledge concerning the relation between finance and SME development. At least four strands of research can be identified that will contribute to a better understanding of the financing needs of SMEs and the ways to deliver financial services to them. First, research is needed on the forms of finance used by small and mediumsized enterprises and made available by lending institutions and investors. In particular, a clear picture is required of the financing differences between firms of different sizes and the differences in financing in relation to types of ownership structures. Cross-country and regional differences may also exist in these respects. Second, research is required into the relation between different financial forms and firm-level performance. Existing research on small size and performance has not isolated the importance of different forms of finance. Methods should be devised to examine the relationship between different financial structures of firms and a range of performance measures (including output, productivity, employment, and survival rates). Third, research is required relating to the behavior of small and medium-sized firms with different forms of finance. We need to predict how different forms of finance will affect the allocation of profits between income (dividend flows), investment and consumption and their effect on other forms of expenditure relating to innovation, marketing and the development of human resources through training. In particular, the links need to be made between different forms of finance and the impact of small firm development on poverty alleviation. Fourth, research is required on the supply side of finance. This work should focus on formal and informal sector lending institutions and savers, and the macroeconomic environment, including economic policies, promotional policies, and the role played by private, international and non-governmental organizations. 中文翻译发展中国家的财政和中小型企业库克.保罗1、综述在发展中国家，中小型企业在发展过程中对利益作用的政策辩论，仍然位于最前沿。为中小企业提供的优势声称是多方面的,包括:鼓励创业;中小型企业更可能将利用劳动密集型行业技术,从而直接影响就业;这一事实,就是他们通常可以迅速建立并投入经营，尽快获得收益;中小企业的发展过程中,鼓励双方由于国际区域内分权化,认为他们可以成为对经济实力反补贴力量更大的企业。更普遍的是，中小企业的发展被视为能够加速实现更广泛的经济和社会经济目标，包括扶贫。2、相关理论及其发展斯特利和莫尔斯（1965年，第318页）识别的发展途径的中小企业提升其目的而创造的“经济可行的企业, 没有永恒的补贴也能够自行站稳脚跟,同时可以作出积极的贡献实现实际收入的增长,从而获得更好的生活水平。”这种方法强调效率的重要性，在新的中小企业，必须鼓励小生产者采用新的方法，转移到新的生产线，并进行较长的运行，在可行的情况下，鼓励他们成为中型甚至大型生产商。 不幸的是,实证研究证明效率和企业规模之间的关系是相当不确定。小玛祖达尔和佩格（1987）报告，在一个研究效率收集率较低的小规模企业，系统技术效率与企业规模无关。科尔特斯，贝里和伊沙克，（1987）; 哥达（1988），收集研究发现效率较低。利德霍尔姆和米德（1987）来自12个国家研究，可以得出相反的结论。 最近有关对小企业发展与效益的关注日益突出，依据意大利北部的情况,皮埃尔和萨贝尔(1984)认为,小型企业更有效率,因为它们采取了一些灵活专业化的方法。相应地，相关人士对这种模式能否应用在发展中国家越来越感兴趣(施密茨,1989; 佩德森,1994;施密茨和马苏科,1994; 施密茨,1995)。财政的作用，一直被视为一个为小型和中小型企业发展的关键因素。以往的研究都强调了有限的财政资源提供给规模较小的企业相比，规模较大的组织和为他们的成长和发展（列维，1993）的后果。通常情况下，规模较小的企业面临着较高的交易成本，比规模较大的企业在获得信贷（斋藤维拉纽瓦，1981）。资金不足已提供财政周转金（皮尔和威尔逊，1996）。管理不善和会计惯例，阻碍了规模较小的企业提高财政的能力。受企业规模限制，小企业的资金流动规模也较小，借款人所获得的与贷款相关的信息不对称。尽管能够提出这些索赔，然而一些研究表明，由于非金融性的原因，大量的小企业却失败了（利德霍尔姆，麦弗逊及楚塔 1994）。本文的目的是，系统地研究金融和中小型企业发展之间的关系，并找出一些我们知识上的差距。虽然是一个相当小型和中小型企业的特点和行为，但是这方面的知识仍然不完善，在关系到发展中国家的金融和小企业发展的大量问题仍然没有找到答案。本文讨论了由以往的研究成果，并指出提高到新的领域进而对一些问题进行调查的卓有成效的方法。3、对发展中国家中小企业的研究 有较少的工作，直接关系到中低收入国家的小型和中小型企业，虽然这项工作的地理分布广泛，包括非洲，亚洲和南美洲。这也是这项工作的主要比例一直凭经验而不是理论上集中的情况下，这是合理的结论，大约是在低收入国家的企业家，相对于那些在高收入国家的经营的行为相对较少。 对发展中国家的文献如下同一部门对工业化国家的研究，试图通过区分影响小型和中小型企业发展的外部和内部因素。在外部因素方面，在20世纪70年代早期文学的关注与对规模较小的企业，通过贸易和追求在低收入国家的产业政策和适当的支持机构，将弥补这些所谓的设计与建立的偏见政策引起的偏见。施密茨（1982）发现，小企业的发展受一些外部因素的影响。这些因素包括信用缺失，合理的成本较小，缺乏流动资金，基础设施差，和较大的外国公司的竞争。经济自由化政策的相继出台，目的是有利于减少部分大型企业对中小企业的偏见。20世纪80年代，关于中小型企业在低收入国家的发展问题获得了更大的关注，这需要在宏观，中观和微观层面建立政策，斯图尔特（1990）。 小型和中小型企业的内部运作的早期研究主要关注与小企业的规模，并为他们的成长提供解释。斯特利和莫尔斯（1965）研究阶段的小企业通过作为经济增长的传递。