PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY ›› 2022, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (7): 1168-1182.doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2022.07.003

• Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

“Local and nonlocal” enterprise linkages of Beijing: Spatio-temporal patterns and influencing factors

LU Jiayi1,2(), SUN Dongqi1,2,*()   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    2. College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
  • Received:2021-12-04 Revised:2022-03-16 Online:2022-07-28 Published:2022-09-28
  • Contact: SUN Dongqi;
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China(41971162)


The relationship between regional centers and hinterland has always been a classic content in the research of regional and urban development. The process of globalization and informatization yielded "space of flows" and "central flow theory", and provided theoretical supports for the research on urban relationships. Inter-city relationships reflected by enterprise linkage flows have been widely explored by scholars, but most studies focused on urban networks of the "whole space". They rarely focused on specific issues and placed the central city in a larger regional scope. Based on firm data at the county level from 1990 to 2018, this study examined the spatial-temporal evolution and influencing factors of local and nonlocal enterprise linkages of Beijing with the hinterland and external regions to provide an explanation for the economic gap between Beijing and its hinterland—Hebei Province—from the perspective of enterprise linkages. The main conclusions are as follows: 1) From 1990 to 2018, local enterprise linkages of Beijing were weak. Counties with strong enterprise linkages were mainly concentrated in nonlocal areas such as the Yangtze River Delta. Nonlocal was the main form of enterprise connections of Beijing. In terms of investment, Beijing had the strongest local connections in manufacturing industry, and the strongest nonlocal connections (mainly with the Yangtze River Delta) in leasing and business services industry. In terms of branches, Beijing had both the strongest local and nonlocal connections in financial industry. 2) Beijing's local enterprise linkages were affected by local financial environment, government intervention, geographical proximity, and policy environment, while its nonlocal linkages were affected by political resources, technology input, economic openness, and consumption level. Among these factors, consumption level and market development had a negative impact on the connections of nonlocal enterprises, while the rest had a positive impact. There was some resistance for Beijing’s firms to establish local ties, which made them more inclined to establish nonlocal connections with regions with superior market potential and business environment.

Key words: center-hinterland, nonlocal, enterprise linkages, collaborative development of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region