本文關(guān)鍵詞：中日對(duì)外直接投資比較研究　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 對(duì)外直接投資 區(qū)位選擇 產(chǎn)業(yè)選擇 投資主體選擇 政策變化

【摘要】：中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)在改革開(kāi)放的三十年中得到了快速的發(fā)展。中國(guó)政府于2000年提出中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)“走出去”的戰(zhàn)略，對(duì)外直接投資被提升至國(guó)家發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略的高度。對(duì)外直接投資是中國(guó)企業(yè)獲取資源和開(kāi)拓市場(chǎng)的途徑，同時(shí)也是中國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)升級(jí)的一個(gè)重要手段。本文希望通過(guò)對(duì)中國(guó)現(xiàn)階段與日本50年代到80年代間兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資的區(qū)位選擇、產(chǎn)業(yè)選擇、投資主體選擇和政策變化等幾方面的比較研究，找出兩國(guó)的異同，進(jìn)而得到一些對(duì)中國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資的啟示。 本文首先介紹了關(guān)于對(duì)外直接投資區(qū)位、產(chǎn)業(yè)、投資主體選擇相關(guān)的理論。包括英國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家鄧寧提出的國(guó)際生產(chǎn)折衷論、日本經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家小島清提出的邊際產(chǎn)業(yè)擴(kuò)張理論以及由英國(guó)學(xué)者坎特韋爾和托蘭惕諾共同提出的技術(shù)創(chuàng)新產(chǎn)業(yè)升級(jí)理論等。這些理論對(duì)于中日兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資有一定的指導(dǎo)意義。利用這些理論對(duì)中日兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資的區(qū)位選擇、產(chǎn)業(yè)選擇和投資主體選擇進(jìn)行了比較，發(fā)現(xiàn)以下不同：兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資區(qū)位選擇的多元化程度不同。日本對(duì)外直接投資區(qū)位選擇多元化程度較高；中國(guó)的對(duì)外直接投資區(qū)域過(guò)于集中。主要集中在亞洲和拉美等地區(qū)，對(duì)歐美等發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的投資所占比重較低。兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資對(duì)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)調(diào)整的作用不同。日本通過(guò)對(duì)外直接投資有效促進(jìn)了國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)升級(jí)；中國(guó)沒(méi)能有效利用對(duì)外直接投資將國(guó)內(nèi)過(guò)剩的生產(chǎn)能力和具有比較劣勢(shì)的產(chǎn)業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移出去，對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)升級(jí)沒(méi)能起到促進(jìn)作用。兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資主體多元化程度不同。日本對(duì)外直接投資主體是以大型跨國(guó)公司為主，同時(shí)中小企業(yè)占有一定比重；中國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資主體以國(guó)有大型企業(yè)為主，中小企業(yè)在對(duì)外直接投資中所占比重較低。 然后比較了中日兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資政策的轉(zhuǎn)變�？傮w上看，中國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資政策正在朝著適合中國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資發(fā)展的方向調(diào)整。說(shuō)明中國(guó)政府已經(jīng)開(kāi)始有意識(shí)的利用政策引導(dǎo)中國(guó)企業(yè)進(jìn)行對(duì)外投資。但中國(guó)的戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)不夠明確，中國(guó)目前對(duì)“走出去”的戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)的表述不夠明確。政府審批程序復(fù)雜、效率低下，同時(shí)對(duì)中小企業(yè)進(jìn)行海外投資的支持力度不夠。 最后基于對(duì)中日兩國(guó)對(duì)外直接投資的比較分析提出了相應(yīng)的政策建議。中國(guó)應(yīng)當(dāng)有針對(duì)性的加大對(duì)歐美等發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)的地區(qū)的對(duì)外直接投資；利用對(duì)外直接投資促進(jìn)國(guó)內(nèi)產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的升級(jí)；增強(qiáng)投資主體多元化程度，加強(qiáng)對(duì)中小企業(yè)進(jìn)行對(duì)外直接投資的支持力度；明確戰(zhàn)略目標(biāo)，減少繁瑣的審批程序，，加強(qiáng)政策扶持。
[Abstract]:China's economy has developed rapidly in the past 30 years of reform and opening up. In 2000, the Chinese government put forward the strategy of "going out" of the Chinese economy. Foreign direct investment (OFDI) has been promoted to the height of national development strategy. OFDI is the way for Chinese enterprises to obtain resources and open up markets. At the same time, it is also an important means of upgrading China's domestic industrial structure. This paper hopes to choose the location and industry of FDI between China and Japan from 50s to 80s. Through the comparative study of the choice of investment subject and the change of policy, the similarities and differences between the two countries are found, and the enlightenment to China's foreign direct investment is obtained. This paper first introduces the theory of FDI location, industry and investment subject selection, including the international production compromise theory put forward by Dunning, a British economist. The theory of marginal industrial expansion put forward by Japanese economist Kiyoshi Kojima and the theory of industrial upgrading of technological innovation put forward by British scholars Cantwell and Torrentino. These theories have a great impact on foreign direct investment (FDI) between China and Japan. Use these theories to choose the location of FDI between China and Japan. Comparing the choice of industry with the choice of investment subject, the author finds the following differences: the degree of diversification of location choice of FDI is different between the two countries, and the degree of diversification of FDI location choice of Japan is higher; China's OFDI region is too concentrated, mainly in Asia and Latin America and other regions. The proportion of investment in developed countries such as Europe and America is relatively low. The role of FDI in industrial structure adjustment is different between the two countries. Japan has effectively promoted the upgrading of domestic industrial structure through FDI. China has not been able to make effective use of foreign direct investment (FDI) to transfer its excess domestic production capacity and industries with comparative disadvantages. The two countries have different degrees of diversification of the main body of foreign direct investment. The main body of Japanese foreign direct investment is mainly large multinational corporations, while small and medium-sized enterprises occupy a certain proportion; The main body of China's foreign direct investment is state-owned large enterprises, small and medium-sized enterprises account for a low proportion of foreign direct investment. Then it compares the changes of FDI policies between China and Japan. China's foreign direct investment policy is being adjusted in a direction suitable for the development of china's foreign direct investment. This indicates that the Chinese government has begun to consciously use the policy to guide Chinese enterprises to invest abroad. But china's strategic objectives. Not clear enough. China's current strategic goal of "going out" is not clear enough. The government's approval process is complex and inefficient, and its support for small and medium-sized enterprises to invest abroad is inadequate. Finally, based on the comparative analysis of foreign direct investment between China and Japan, the corresponding policy suggestions are put forward. To promote the upgrading of domestic industrial structure by using outward direct investment (OFDI); Strengthening the diversification of investment subjects and strengthening the support for SMEs in outward direct investment; Clear strategic objectives, reduce cumbersome approval procedures, and strengthen policy support.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：F832.6;F833.13

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 高薇;國(guó)際直接投資理論的演變及其對(duì)中國(guó)的啟示[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

2 蔣群英;中國(guó)企業(yè)對(duì)外直接投資現(xiàn)狀與對(duì)策研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2003年

本文編號(hào)：1401209