本文基于2019年苹果手机供应商数据,从全球价值链视角构建全球化城市网络,将具有全球化职能的专业城市与世界城市纳入同一分析框架,运用社会网络与社区发现方法,研究了研发型、生产型、代工服务型城市网络的节点中心性、整体拓扑结构、社群结构及影响机制。结果发现：① 苹果手机零部件的全球化城市网络均具有多中心与多样化、节点等级化、联系外部化特征,网络中“明星”节点高权力—高声望并存且权力总体高于声望;② 研发型城市网络联系最紧密,趋于首位城市分布,小团体结构与集群发育明显。生产型网络关联性最高,网络趋于均匀结构与位序—规模分布。代工服务型网络中心性最高,权力集中在少数城市节点,众多节点易受核心节点控制与支配。③ 研发型城市社区集群最明显,企业通过知识关联效应形成专业化集群,获取本地化经济益处,并通过链式与轮轴式布局建立基于关系接近的跨国网络社区。生产型城市社区集群次之,企业通过经济关联效应形成一般化集群,获取城市化经济益处,通过网络式布局建立基于地理接近的本国内跨行政区网络社区。代工服务型城市社区未发育出明显集群网络,企业通过低成本关联实现规模经济,世界工厂模式形成散点式网络社区。

Based on the data of 197 suppliers of iPhone components and parts in 2019, this paper builds multidimensional world city networks from the perspective of global value chains, integrating specialized cities with global functions and the high-class world cities into the same analytical framework, which enriches the research perspective of world city networks in the era of globalization to a certain extent. The purpose of this paper is to expand the research and investigation scope of the existing field of world city networks. By means of social network analysis (i.e. the analysis of centrality, connectedness and network cohesion), rank-size rule and community detection, we study the power and prestige, the overall topological structure, the community structure and influence mechanism of the city networks of R&D-oriented, production-oriented and OEM service-oriented types. The results show that: (1) All the world city networks are characterized by polycentricity and diversification, differentiation of nodes' status and dependence on external connections. The "star" nodes in the network coexist with high power and high prestige, and the power is generally higher than the prestige. (2) The network cohesion and rank of R&D-oriented cities are the highest, and the network tends to show a primate city distribution, and the growth of small group structure and the phenomenon of R&D clusters are obvious. The production-oriented network has the highest connectedness, and it tends to present a rank-size distribution and an equilibrium structure. Its network scale is large, but the ties of many nodes are sparse and decentralized; OEM service-oriented network has the highest relative centrality, and power and information are concentrated in a few city nodes. (3) The cluster characteristics of R&D-oriented city communities are most noticeable. Moreover, the network has significant long-distance knowledge spillover and cooperation behavior. Enterprises form specialized clusters in R&D-type cities through non-tradable interdependence, and obtain the benefits of localization economies and spatial integrated effects. The cluster tendency of production-oriented city communities are relatively obvious. Geographical proximity and spatial dependence are the main factors incubating community structure. Enterprises form generalized clusters through tradable interdependence to obtain the benefits of urbanization economies and distance attenuation effect. No obvious cluster network has been incubated in OEM serviced-oriented city communities. Polarization phenomenon of the inter-community is extremely significant, that is to say, the core city community in Taiwan, China, radiates to other low-level equilibrium communities, forming a radial community structure. Contract manufacturers seek the cities with low labor costs around the world to carry out standardized production, and realize full competition through scale economies, therefore, a scatter-type city network layout structure is formed.

产品内分工已成为支配当代企业分工与产品生产的重要模式。研究智能手机生产网络价值分配格局,对辨析中国大陆企业在移动通讯产业价值链中所处地位与演进具有重要意义。论文利用2012—2017年苹果公司供应商数据,以其零部件价值含量与技术要求为测度标准,分析了苹果手机零部件全球价值链的分配特征以及中国大陆企业在其中的地位变化。发现：高价值环节的供应商主要以美国、日本、韩国为主,而中低价值环节则以中国台湾、日本和中国大陆供应商为主,且中国大陆与中国台湾在中间环节占据重要地位。处于价值链高端的供应商分支数量在中国大陆和美国缩减明显,日本、韩国较为稳定,中国台湾增加明显。在价值链的中低端环节,供应商分支趋向中国大陆集中。印度、巴西以及越南等地成为新的中低端价值环节转移承接地。近年来,中国大陆在苹果手机价值链的高端环节得到了提升,长三角、珠三角、京津冀、成渝、中原地区等地逐渐形成了苹果供应商分支的集聚区域,呈现出零部件生产的区域分工特征。长三角(上海-苏州为核心)与珠三角(深圳-东莞为核心),承接了价值链多个生产环节,是中国大陆嵌入苹果手机生产网络的主要阵地。成渝地区既承接了芯片类企业布局,也承接了价值链低端的组装代工和包装服务环节,呈现出在价值链两端双向承接的特征。环渤海、福建及湖南等地主要承接苹果手机价值链的中间环节,而中原地区主要以苹果手机组装与包装服务为主,承接价值链的低端环节。最后,论文从创新驱动、政府作用与外资等方面探讨了影响中国大陆地位提升的因素。

Based on the data of Apple suppliers from 2012 to 2017, this study conducted an empirical analysis of the global value chains of iPhone parts, and the changing role of Chinese enterprises according to the cost value of different parts of mobile phone. The conclusions are as follows: Firstly, suppliers of the key parts were mainly located in the United States, Japan, and South Korea, and they were in the core of value chain governance; while the important and general components were mainly from Japan and Chinese mainland and Taiwan, China. Secondly, the production of most parts was completed in Chinese mainland and Southeast Asia. In recent years, Chinese mainland's status of the "world factory" for general parts of iPhone has been further consolidated, but at the same time, breakthroughs have been made in some important links of the value chains, and Chinese mainland has gradually moved to the high end of the value chain. Thirdly, the Yangtze River Delta, the Pearl River Delta, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the Chengdu-Chongqing region, and the Central Plains have become the core production base of iPhone's components. iPhone parts industrial clusters have been formed in the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta, and they have become the main base for Chinese mainland's enterprises to embed in iPhone's global value chain. The Chengdu-Chongqing region is not only the base for chip companies, but also the location for assemblying and packaging services at the low end of the value chain, which indicates the two-way acceptance at both ends of the value chain. The regions around the Bohai Bay, Fujian Province, Hunan Province, and some other places mainly carry on the production of the medium part of the value chain, while the Central Plains mainly carry on the production of the mobile phone assembly and packaging services. Finally, we analyzed the driving factors that upgraded Chinese mainland's status in the global value chains.

全球生产网络理论（GPN）是关系经济地理学派的核心理论成果,但当前国内外研究对其发展脉络和理论内涵的认识存在模糊之处,在应用方面也存在一些误区。因此,本文从GPN与全球价值链（GVC）理论互动的视角出发,回顾GVC和GPN的重要发展阶段及对彼此的影响,针对常见的对GPN理解和应用的误区展开解释与辨析,主要得到3个结论。第一,GPN理论的研究目的已从解释“价值生产”凝练为解释“区域发展的不均衡”,更贴近经济地理学的基本研究范式。第二,GPN与GVC正在从分歧走向融合,共同致力于捕捉与解释全球化动态。第三,并非所有跨国公司研究或生产网络研究都属于GPN研究,GPN专指研究跨国公司与主要相关者基于生产所形成的网络动态,不适用于以国家为单位的研究,也不着力于揭示企业内部经营管理动态。本文继而指出中国经验既需要GPN理论加以探析、也有助于丰富GPN理论,精准理解GPN尤其对中国当前推行双循环战略有重要应用价值。本文强调,GPN作为中观理论框架,有效解释了全球经济中区域发展的多尺度动态,在全球化出现逆流的新形势下,对中国全球化实践,特别是国际国内双循环发展有着鲜明的研究意义。

Global Production Network (GPN), as the core theory in the school of relational economic geography, has been widely discussed and examined in mainstream economic geography and by researchers in China in recent two decades. However, the understanding towards its theoretical context, development and connotation is ambiguous to a certain extent. Some application misinterprets this theory mainly because of the lack of attention to the crucial influence of Global Value Chain (GVC) on the development of GPN. Therefore, this paper starts from critically reviewing how the GPN literature develops with continuous interactions with GVC, then explores how these two strands of research evolve from divergence to integration by reviewing the latest research on GPN, and clarifies some common misunderstandings in GPN research. This paper comes to three general conclusions regarding the recent development of GPN research. First, the theoretical goal of GPN research has moved from explaining value creation to uneven development, which makes it closer to the tradition of geographical studies. Second, the divergence between GPN and GVC has become narrower than before in terms of capturing global economic dynamics. Third, GPN research refers to a study that unpacks network dynamics to explain uneven regional development particularly. GPN is not an appropriate theory for studies that use a country as an analytical unit or reveal internal business issues of a firm. This paper also argues that exploring China stories requires proper GPN theoretical application, and offers an opportunity for GPN’s further theoretical development especially towards the dual-circulation strategy proposed recently by the Chinese government.

基于2015年世界财富500强中的102家中国企业数据,根据企业组织特征构建了反映企业—城市间关联的折衷网络模型,借助网络分析等多种方法分析了中国地级城市间和典型城市群之间的网络联系。研究发现：① 城市网络总体连通性较差、向心集中性强,发育不够完备;城市网络连接具有明显的行政中心指向、沿海指向和资源指向;网络节点城市对外经济依赖度高,网络结构扁平特征明显。城市群网络存在权力分散、地位分化和外部联系依赖特征。② 城市网络中省域、城市群和俱乐部边界效应明显,区域内外的中心城市规模和数量对省域行政区经济、城市群经济和俱乐部经济的发展产生影响。③ 城市在多尺度网络中的功能分化明显,大城市和区域型中心城市比中小城市拥有更加完备和均衡的功能体系。沿海三大城市群的辐射带动作用明显,其他城市群的优势功能有待突出。④ 城市（群）跨尺度区域功能互动效应显著,城市（群）的自我经济集聚能力与城市（群）的对外辐射带动功能之间存在密切的正向关系。研究为城市网络模型拓展及理解中国城市网络空间联系特征提供了支撑。

Based on the data of Chinese enterprises that entered the Fortune 500 list in 2015, this paper uses the eclectic model to construct the inter-city association network. Using the network analysis method, the spatial connection characteristics of 311 inter-city networks at prefecture level and above and 20 urban agglomerations networks in China are examined respectively. The research found that: (1) The overall connectivity of urban network is poor, the centripetal concentration is strong, and the network is not complete. The urban network connection shows a strong tendency of political center cities directivity, coastal cities directivity as well as resource-based cities directivity. The external economic dependence of each node city in the urban network is high, and the urban network structure has obvious flattening characteristics. The network of urban agglomerations is characterized by decentralization of power, differentiation of status and dependence on external connections. (2) The boundary effect of provinces, urban agglomerations and urban agglomerations clubs in the urban network is significant. The network evolution process is influenced by the provincial administrative district economy, the urban agglomerations economy and the urban agglomerations club economy. The size and number of central cities in the region and its surrounding areas have an impact on the provincial administrative district economy, the city agglomerations economy and the urban agglomerations club economy. (3) The function of cities is obviously divided in a multi-scale network. The large cities and regional central cities have a complete and more balanced function system than the small and medium-sized cities do. The radiation effect of three major urban agglomerations in coastal China is significant, while the dominant function of other urban agglomerations needs to be strengthened. (4) The cross-scale regional functional interaction effect of cities (clusters) is significant. The radiation-driven function of cities (clusters) is positively related to their self-agglomeration capabilities. This study provides support for the understanding of urban network model expansion and the spatial relation of urban network in China.

目前,全球生产网络（GPN）理论可分为2个发展阶段：2001―2011年的GPN1.0,强调跨国主义、团队协助、超越小范围地理空间的联系。这一时期,在全球生产网络背景下,理解区域发展的一些关键问题主要包括：1）区域升级（Regional upgrading）——嵌入全球价值链是如何影响产业升级与区域发展？2）全球―地方互动（Global-local interaction）——快速变化的全球经济背景下,区域与地方的经济发展动态如何被很好地解释？2012年至今的GPN2.0阶段,关注到战略耦合（Strategic coupling）、经济和社会的升级、路径依赖和区域锁定、脆弱性等议题。这一时期,战略耦合已经成为链接区域发展动态与全球生产网络过程的一种互动机制,在全球生产网络背景下的区域发展过程是价值捕捉过程,同时呈现出动态的耦合（Coupling）、去耦合（Decoupling）和再耦合（Recoupling）的过程。全球生产网络的本质是国际生产的空间分工。其产生的原因之一在于,当前不要求企业把所有的生产环节都包办,一些利润率较低的环节可以逐步外包,企业只保留利润或价值较高的那个环节。

多部门创新企业的跨城布局能够增进城市间的知识流动与创新联系,大量创新企业部门关联构成的城市网络是理解国家创新格局的重要认知基础。本文运用1778家国家级创新企业部门关联数据和“总部—分支机构”方法建立中国城市间有向关系矩阵,借助社会网络分析、GIS技术及空间交互模型方法,对创新企业建构的中国城市网络联系特征进行分析。结果发现：① 基于创新企业的中国城市网络联系覆盖广但极不均质,菱形联系格局在次级网络中逐步显现,京津冀、长三角和珠三角城市群是网络联系的核心枢纽。② 城市间创新企业流具有明显的行政中心指向特征与省级边界效应,直辖市及省会城市对创新企业流具有较强吸引力,北京是网络联系最强核心,上海和深圳次之。③ 城市网络区域异质性突出,东部区域“内联外控”与中、西部区域“内弱外强”的联系格局呈现鲜明对比,东部区域内沿海三大城市群网络的联系结构也存在较大差异。④ 城市的行政等级、经济水平和创新环境等属性指标,以及城市间地理、技术、制度的邻近性关系指标,都对城市吸收和输出创新企业流产生了不同程度的影响,外资并不利于促进中国城际创新企业流和网络的形成。

Improving the connectivity of multi-sector enterprises at a cross-regional level can enhance knowledge and technology transfer and stimulate innovation and synergies among cities. Therefore, the study of city networks, which comprise a large number of multi-sector enterprises, can provide an important knowledge base for innovation and development at the regional and national levels. Based on an evaluation of innovative enterprises in China by authoritative institutions, data were collected on 1778 multi-sector enterprises, which included details on the headquarters, the branches (a total of 30,625) and the locations. A city-based network for the country was established, using the data for the multi-sector linkages and a model for the headquarters-branches, to explore the network connectivity characteristics via social network analysis, the GIS method and the spatial interactive model. The results showed that (1) although the network covered 353 cities across China, the spatial distribution of the network was extremely uneven. For instance, a diamond-shaped connectivity pattern emerged gradually as the network hierarchy decreased. The Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl River Delta were found to be the three key hubs of the network. (2) The intercity linkages between innovative enterprise sectors (innovative enterprise flows), had a clear administrative center and a provincial boundary effect. Moreover, the innovative enterprises were strongly attracted to the municipalities and provincial capitals. Beijing was at the heart of the network, followed by Shanghai and Shenzhen. (3) Differences existed in regional connectivity. There was a striking difference between the eastern region and the central-western region. The former had a high connectivity with respect to both the internal and the external networks, while the latter had lower connectivity for the internal network but a higher connectivity at the external level. At the same time, although the network structures for all the three eastern megalopolises showed strong cohesion, their connectivity characteristics were quite different. (4) The input and output of innovative enterprise flows were to varying degrees influenced by the indicator attributes for each city, and these in turn were related to the administrative hierarchy, the economic strength and the innovative environment of the region, as well as proximity indicators, which were related to geographical, technological and institutional factors. Foreign capital was not conducive to innovative enterprise flows and to the formation of innovative intercity company-based networks in China.