地理科学进展

地理科学进展 ›› 2019, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (7): 998-1008.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2019.07.005

• 专栏：“一带一路” • 上一篇    下一篇

“一带一路”技术贸易格局演化研究

段德忠1,2,3(), 谌颖2, 杜德斌1,2,3,*()   

  1. 1. 华东师范大学全球创新与发展研究院,上海 200062
    2. 华东师范大学城市与区域科学学院,上海 200241
    3. 华东师范大学一带一路与全球发展研究院,上海 200062
  • 收稿日期:2019-02-15 修回日期:2019-06-20 出版日期:2019-07-28 发布日期:2019-07-28
  • 通讯作者: 杜德斌
  • 作者简介:

    段德忠(1989— ),男,江苏溧阳人,博士后,研究方向为世界经济地理与科技创新政策。E-mail: dzduan@geo.ecnu.edu.cn

  • 基金资助:
    中国博士后科学基金项目(2018M641962);华东师范大学一带一路与全球发展研究院专项课题(ECNU-BRGD-201807)

Technology trade pattern and change in the Belt and Road region

Dezhong DUAN1,2,3(), Ying CHEN2, Debin DU1,2,3,*()   

  1. 1. Institute for Global Innovation and Development, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
    2. School of Urban & Regional Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China;
    3. ECNU Institute of Belt and Road & Global Development, Shanghai 200062, China;
  • Received:2019-02-15 Revised:2019-06-20 Online:2019-07-28 Published:2019-07-28
  • Contact: Debin DU
  • Supported by:
    China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, No. 2018M641962;Special Topic of ECNU Institute of Belt and Road & Global Development, No. ECNU-BRGD-201807.

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

赞

摘要：

论文利用2001—2015年国家(地区)间的知识产权贸易额,通过构建全球和“一带一路”技术贸易网络,从技术供给和技术销售层面刻画了“一带一路”技术贸易格局及其动态变化过程,研究发现：① 在“一带一路”内部技术贸易网络中,内部技术进口格局由独联体、中东欧地区主导向东亚地区主导转变,内部技术出口格局由西亚地区“一极主导”向东盟-西亚-东亚“三极主导”格局转变,“一带一路”在内部国家(地区)技术供给链中的地位非常低下,大量的技术需要从外部进口,但“一带一路”作为技术销售市场在内部国家(地区)技术销售链中的地位显著提升;② 在“一带一路”外部技术贸易网络中,外部技术进口格局由东盟向东亚更替,而外部技术出口格局始终由以新加坡为核心的东盟地区主导,“一带一路”在国际技术销售市场中的地位显著提升,但其在国际技术供给链中的地位十分低下;③ 从技术贸易类型上看,内流型国家(地区)占主导,大部分“一带一路”国家(地区)依赖内部技术贸易来实现技术互补,而高技术贸易额国家(地区)大多都为“两头在外”型,“一带一路”区域技术贸易网络尚未形成。

关键词: 一带一路, 技术贸易网络, 技术进口, 技术出口, 技术贸易类型

Abstract:

Based on the imports and exports of intellectual property rights between countries (regions) from 2001 to 2015 and by mapping the global (external) and local (internal) technology trade networks, this study examined the technology trade pattern and change of the Belt and Road region from the global and local perspectives. We found that: 1) In the local (internal) technology trade network, internal technology imports pattern has changed from CIS (Commonwealth of the Independent States) and CEU (Central and Eastern Europe countries) dominated to East Asia countries dominated, and internal technology exports pattern has shifted from "one leading pole" of West Asia countries to the "three poles" of countries in ASEAN, West Asia, and East Asia. The Belt and Road region has a very low status in the internal technology supply chain. A large number of technologies need to be imported from the outside, but as a technology sales market, the Belt and Road region has significantly improved its position in the internal technology sales chain. 2) In the global (external) technology trade network, external technology imports pattern has changed from ASEAN dominated to East Asia dominated, and external technology exports pattern was always dominated by the ASEAN region with Singapore at the core. The Belt and Road region has significantly improved its position in the international technology sales market, but its position in the international technology supply chain was always very low. 3) With regard to the types of technology trade, most of the countries along the Belt and Road relied on internal technology trade to achieve technological complementarity, while the technology supply and sales of the countries with high technology trades were mainly relying on the outside. The regional technology trade network of the Belt and Road region has not yet been formed. At the end of the article, we recommend that China should increase its exports of technology to countries along the Belt and Road and build a regional technology cooperation network along the Belt and Road as soon as possible.

Key words: the Belt and Road Initiative, technology trade network, technology import, technology export, technology trade type