商學院外文翻譯模板

1、文獻一：（宋體五號）英文題目(居中，Times New Roman字體，三號加黑)正文（英文不少于10000印刷符號，Times New Roman字體，五號）翻譯一：（宋體五號，另起一頁）中文題目(居中，黑體，三號加黑)正文（中文不少于2000字，宋體，五號）文獻二：（宋體五號，另起一頁）英文題目(居中，Times New Roman字體，三號加黑)正文（英文不少于10000印刷符號，Times New Roman字體，五號）翻譯二：（宋體五號，另起一頁）中文題目(居中，黑體，三號加黑)正文（中文不少于2000字，宋體，五號）請參照下面模板文獻一：Research on Spillover

2、Effect of Foreign Direct Investment1. Introduction In recent decades, economists have begun to identify technical progress, or more generally, knowledge creation, as the major determinant of economic growth. Until the 1970s, the analysis of economic growth was typically based on neoclassical models

3、that explain growth with the accumulation of labor, capital, and other production factors with diminishing returns to scale. In these models, the economy converges to steady state equilibrium where the level of per capita income is determined by savings and investment, depreciation, and population g

4、rowth, but where there is no permanent income growth. Any observed income growth per capita occurs because the economy is still converging towards its steady state, or because it is in transition from one steady state to another. The policies needed to achieve growth and development in the framework

5、 of these models is therefore straightforward: increases in savings and investments and reductions in the population growth rate, shift the economy to a higher steady state income level. From the view of developing countries, however, these policies are difficult to implement. Low income and develop

6、ment levels are not only consequences, but also causes of low savings and high population growth rates. The importance of technical progress was also recognized in the neoclassical growth models, but the determinants of the level of technology were not discussed in detail; instead, technology was se

7、en as an exogenous factor. Yet, it was clear that convergence in income percapita levels could not occur unless technologies converged as well. From the 1980s and onwards, growth research has therefore increasingly focused on understanding and ontogenetic technical progress. Modern growth theory is

8、largely built on models with constant or increasing returns to reproducible factors as a result of the accumulation of knowledge. Knowledge is, to some extent, a public good, and R&D, education, training, and other investments in knowledge creation may generate externalities that prevent diminis

9、hing returns to scale for labor and physical capital. Taking this into account, the economy may experience positive long-run growth instead of the neoclassical steady state where per capita incomes remain unchanged. Depending on the economic starting point, technical progress and growth can be based

10、 on creation of entirely new knowledge, or adaptation and transfer of existing foreign technology. Along with international trade, the most important vehicle for international technology transfer is foreign direct investment (FDI). It is well known that multinational corporations (MNCs) undertake a

11、major part of the worlds private R&D efforts and production, own and control most of the worlds advanced technology. When a MNC sets up a foreign affiliate, the affiliate receives some amount of the proprietary technology that constitutes the parents firm specific advantage and allows it to comp

12、ete successfully with local firms that have superior knowledge of local markets, consumer preferences, and business practices. This leads to a geographical diffusion of technology, but not necessarily to any formal transfer of technology beyond the boundaries of the MNCs; the establishment of a fore

13、ign affiliate is, almost per definition, a decision to internalize the use of core technology. However, MNC technology may still leak to the surrounding economy through external effects or spillovers that raise the level of human capital in the host country and create productivity increases in local

14、 firms. In many cases, the effects operate through forward and backward linkages, as MNCs provide training and technical assistance to their local suppliers, subcontractors, and customers. The labor market is another important channel for spillovers, as almost all MNCs train operatives and managers

15、who may subsequently take employment in local firms or establish entirely new companies. It is therefore not surprising that attitudes towards inward FDI have changed considerably over the last couple of decades, as most countries have liberalized their policies to attract all kinds of foreign inves

16、tment. Numerous governments have even introduced various forms of investment incentives to encourage foreign MNCs to invest in their jurisdiction. However, productivity and technology spillovers are not automatic consequences of FDI. Instead, FDI and human capital interact in a complex manner, where

17、 FDI inflows create a potential for spillovers of knowledge to the local labor force, at the same time as the host countrys level of human capital determines how much FDI it can attract and whether local firms are able to absorb the potential spillover benefits. 2. Foreign Direct Investment and Spil

18、lovers The earliest discussions of spillovers in the literature on foreign direct investment date back to the 1960s. The first author who systematically introduced spillovers (or external effects) among the possible consequences of FDI was MacDougall (1960), who analyzed the general welfare effects

19、of foreign investment. The common aim of the studies was to identify the various costs and benefits of FDI. Productivity externalities were discussed together with several other indirect effects that influence the welfare assessment, such as those arising from the impact of FDI on government revenue

20、, tax policies, terms of trade, and the balance of payments. The fact that spillovers included in the discussion was generally motivated by empirical evidence from case studies rather than by comprehensive theoretical arguments. Yet, the early analyses made clear that multinationals may improve loca

21、tives efficiency by entering into industries with high entry barriers and reducing monopolistic distortions, and induce higher technical efficiency if the increased competitive pressure or some demonstration effect spurs local firms to more efficient use of existing resources. They also proposed tha

22、t the presence may lead to increases in the rate of technology transfer and diffusion. More specifically, case studies showed that foreign MNCs may: (1) Contribute to efficiency by breaking supply bottlenecks (but that the effect may become less important as the technology of the host country advanc

23、es); (2) Introduce new know-how by demonstrating new technologies and training workers who later take employment in local firms; (3) Either break down monopolies and stimulate competition and efficiency or create a more monopolistic industry structure, depending on the strength and responses of the

24、local firms; (4) Transfer techniques for inventory and quality control and standardization to their local suppliers and distribution channels; Although this diverse list gives some clues about the broad range of various spillover effects, it says little about how common or how important they are in

25、general. Similar complaints can be made about the evidence on spillovers gauged from the numerous case studies discussing various aspects of FDI in different countries and industries. These studies often contain valuable circumstantial evidence of spillovers, but often fail to show how significant t

26、he spillover effects are and whether the results can be generalized. For instance, many analyses of the linkages between MNCs and their local suppliers and subcontractors have documented learning and technology transfers that may make up a basis for productivity spillovers or market access spillover

27、s. However, these studies seldom reveal whether the MNCs are able to extract all the benefits that the new technologies or information generate among their supplier firms. Hence, there is no clear proof of spillovers, but it is reasonable to assume that spillovers are positively related to the exten

28、t of linkages. Similarly, there are many works on the relation between MNCs entry and presence and market structure in host countries, and this is closely related to the possible effects of FDI on competition in the local markets. There are also case studies of demonstration effects, technology diff

29、usion, and labor training in foreign MNCs. However, although these studies provide much detailed information about the various channels for spillovers, they say little about the overall significance of such spillovers. The statistical studies of spillovers, by contrast, may reveal the overall impact

30、 of foreign presence on the productivity of local firms, but they are generally not able to say much about how the effects come about. These studies typically estimate production functions for locally owned firms, and include the foreign share of the industry as one of the explanatory variables. The

31、y then test whether foreign presence has a significant positive impact on local productivity once other firm and industry characteristics have been accounted.Research conclude that domestic firms exhibited higher productivity in sectors with a larger foreign share, but argue that it may be wrong to

32、conclude that spillovers have taken place if MNC affiliates systematically locate in the more productive sectors. In addition, they are also able to perform some more detailed tests of regional differences in spillovers. Examining the geographical dispersion of foreign investment, they suggest that

33、the positive impact of FDI accrue mainly to the domestic firms located close to the MNC affiliates. However, effects seem to vary between industries. The results on the presence of spillovers seem to be mixed; recent studies suggest that there should be a systematic pattern where various host indust

34、ry and host country characteristics influence the incidence of spillovers. For instance, the foreign affiliates levels of technology or technology imports seem to influence the amount of spillovers to local firms. The technology imports of MNC affiliates, in turn, have been shown to vary systematica

35、lly with host country characteristics. These imports seem larger in countries and industries where the educational level of the local labor force is higher, where local competition is tougher, and where the host country imposes fewer formal requirements on the affiliates operations. Some recent stud

36、ies have also addressed the apparent contradictions between the earlier statistical spillover studies, with the hypothesis that the host countrys level of technical development or human capital may matter as a starting point. In fact, in some cases, large foreign presence may even be a sign of a wea

37、k local industry, where local firms have not been able to absorb any productivity spillovers at all and have therefore been forced to yield market shares to the foreign MNCs. 3. FDI Spillover and Human Capital Development The transfer of technology from MNC parents to its affiliates and other host c

38、ountry firms is not only mbodied in machinery, equipment, patent rights, and expatriate managers and technicians, but is also realized rough the training of local employees. This training affects most levels of employees, from simple manufacturing operatives through supervisors to technically advanc

39、ed professionals and top-level managers. While most recipients of training are employed in the MNCs own affiliates, the beneficiaries also include employees among the MNCs suppliers, subcontractors, and customers. Types of training ranged from on-the-job training to seminars and more formal schoolin

40、g to overseas education, perhaps at the parent company, depending on the skills needed. The various skills gained through the elation with the foreign MNCs may spill over directly when the MNCs do not charge the full value of the training provided to local firms or over time, as the employees move t

41、o other firms or set up their own businesses. While the role of MNCs in primary and secondary education is marginal, there is increasingly clear evidence hat FDI may have a noticeable impact on tertiary education in their host countries. The most important effect is perhaps on the demand side. MNCs

42、provide attractive employment opportunities to highly skilled graduates in natural sciences, engineering, and business sciences, which may be an incentive for gifted students to complete tertiary training, and MNCs demand skilled labor, which may encourage governments to invest in higher education.

43、Many studies undertaken in developing countries have emphasized the spillovers of management skills. There is evidence of training and capacity development in technical areas, although the number of detailed studies appears smaller. While training activities in manufacturing often aim to facilitate

44、the introduction of new technologies that are embodied in machinery and equipments, the training in service sectors is more directly focused on strengthening skills and know-how embodied in employees. This means that training and human capital development are often more important in service industri

45、es. Furthermore, many services are not tradable across international borders, which mean that service MNCs to a great extent are forced to reproduce home country technologies in their foreign affiliates. As a consequence, service companies are often forced to invest more in training, and the gap bet

46、ween affiliate and parent company wages tends, therefore, to be smaller than that in manufacturing. 4. Conclusion This paper has noted that the interaction of FDI and spillovers is complex and highly non-linear, and that several different outcomes are possible. FDI inflows create a potential for spi

47、llovers of knowledge to the local labor force, at the same time as the host countrys level of human capital determines how much FDI it can attract and whether local firms are able to absorb the potential spillover benefits. Hence, it is possible that host economies with relatively high levels of hum

48、an capital may be able to attract large amounts of technology intensive foreign MNCs that contribute significantly to the further development of labor skills. At the same time, economies with weaker initial conditions are likely to experience smaller inflows of FDI, and those foreign firms that ente

49、r are likely to use simpler technologies that contribute only marginally to local learning and skill development.翻譯一：外商直接投資溢出效應研究1.引言在最近幾十年中，經(jīng)濟學家們已開始確定技術進步，或更普遍認為知識創(chuàng)造，作為經(jīng)濟增長原動力的一個重要決定因素，直到20世紀70年代，分析經(jīng)濟增長運用典型的新古典主義模型來解釋經(jīng)濟增長的積累，勞動力、資本等生產(chǎn)要素與收益遞減的規(guī)模。在這些模型中，經(jīng)濟收斂于穩(wěn)態(tài)平衡，而人均收入水平取決于儲蓄、投資、折舊以及人口的增長，但那里沒有永久的收入增

50、長。任何觀察到的收入增長率，因為經(jīng)濟仍然匯流實現(xiàn)其穩(wěn)定狀態(tài)，或因為它是在轉型，從一個穩(wěn)定狀態(tài)到另一個狀態(tài)。在這個框架內(nèi)，用以實現(xiàn)增長和發(fā)展所需的政策，直截了當認為是增加儲蓄和投資，并降低人口增長率，使經(jīng)濟轉向更高的穩(wěn)態(tài)收入水平。但是，從發(fā)展中國家的角度來說，這些政策難以落實。因為低收入和發(fā)展水平，不僅嚴重后果，同時也造成的低儲蓄和高人口增長率。重要的技術進步，也認識到在新古典增長模型，但決定因素，技術水平，并沒有詳細討論，而是技術，被視為一個外在因素。然而，很明顯的收斂，在人均收入水平是不可能發(fā)生的，除非技術的融合。從20世紀80年代起，生長發(fā)育研究，所以越來越多地注重了解和內(nèi)生技術進步。現(xiàn)代

51、增長理論主要是建立在模型不變或增加收益的基礎上，最重現(xiàn)性的因素是知識的累積。知識的外部效應，在一定程度上是指，一個社會公益事業(yè)，研發(fā)，教育，培訓，及其他投資在知識的創(chuàng)造，從而避免收益遞減，以規(guī)模為勞動和有形資本。考慮到這一點，經(jīng)濟可能經(jīng)歷積極長期增長而不是新古典主義的穩(wěn)定狀態(tài)的人均收入保持不變。視經(jīng)濟為出發(fā)點，技術進步和增長的基礎可以創(chuàng)造完全新的知識，或適應和轉讓現(xiàn)有的外國技術。國際貿(mào)易中，作為國際間的技術轉移最重要的工具，是外國直接投資（FDI）。這是人所共知的跨國公司承擔的一個主要部分，世界上的私人研發(fā)工作和生產(chǎn)，擁有和控制世界上大多數(shù)的先進技術。當一個跨國公司建立了一個外國子公司，分公司

52、領取一定金額的專有技術構成母公司的堅定特定優(yōu)勢，并允許它的競爭中脫穎而出，與當?shù)毓居袃?yōu)越的了解當?shù)厥袌?，消費者的喜好，以及經(jīng)營手法。這就引出一個地域擴散技術，但不一定任何正式的技術轉讓超越國界的跨國公司;建立一個外國子公司的是決定在內(nèi)部使用的核心技術。然而，跨國公司在技術，有可能仍在泄漏到周圍經(jīng)濟的外部效應或外溢認為提高人力資本水平，在所在國和當?shù)毓緞?chuàng)造生產(chǎn)力得到了提高。在許多情況下影響經(jīng)營，通過前向和后向聯(lián)系，為跨國公司提供培訓和技術援助，以自己的本地供應商、分包商、顧客等。勞動力市場是另一個重要渠道溢出，因為幾乎所有跨國公司列車操作人員和管理人員，他們接下來可能會采取雇傭當?shù)仄髽I(yè)或建立

53、完全的新公司。2.外商直接投資與技術外溢在過去數(shù)十年間，因為大多數(shù)國家都開放了它們的政策，以吸引各種外來投資。許多國家政府甚至推出了各種形式的投資獎勵措施，鼓勵外國跨國公司的投資在其管轄范圍內(nèi)。然而，勞動生產(chǎn)率和技術溢出的是不是自動后果的外國直接投資。相反，外國直接投資和人力資本的互動，在一個復雜的方式，而外國直接投資的流入創(chuàng)造潛力溢出的知識，以當?shù)貏趧恿?，在同一時間，身為主辦國的人力資本水平?jīng)Q定了多少外國直接投資，可以吸引和無論是本地企業(yè)能夠吸收潛在的溢出效益。最早討論的外溢效應，在文獻上對外國直接投資的日期可以追溯到1960年。第一作者，他們系統(tǒng)地介紹了溢出（或外部效應） ，其中可能產(chǎn)生的

54、后果，外國直接投資是高（1960） ，他分析了一般福利的影響外國投資。共同的目標是研究，是確定的各項成本和效益的外國直接投資。 生產(chǎn)力的外部因素進行了討論連同其他幾個間接的影響，影響到社會福利的評估，例如那些來自外國直接投資的影響對政府的財政收入，稅收政策，貿(mào)易條件惡化，以及國際收支平衡。事實外溢列入討論的是一般的動機實證研究案例研究，而不是通過全面的理論論據(jù)。然而，早期的分析表明，跨國公司可以提高資源配置效益，進入壁壘，減少壟斷性扭曲，并引發(fā)更高的技術效率，如果是增加了競爭壓力，或一些示范效應馬刺本地公司，以更有效地利用現(xiàn)有的資源。他們還建議在場，可能導致增加的速度，技術轉移和擴散。更具體地

55、說，案例研究表明，有幾種可能：（1）有助于提高效率，突破供給瓶頸（但效果可能變得不那么重要了，隨著技術的東道國預付款）; （2）引進新的技術訣竅所展示的新技術和培訓工人，后來采取雇傭當?shù)毓? （3）無論是打破壟斷，促進競爭和效率，或者創(chuàng)造一個更加壟斷的行業(yè)結構，這取決于實力和反應當?shù)毓? （4）轉讓技術的存貨和質量控制和標準化，以自己的本地供應商及分銷渠道。例如，許多分析之間的聯(lián)系，跨國公司及本地供應商和分包商有記載學習和技術轉移可能彌補基礎生產(chǎn)力外溢或市場準入的外溢效應。然而，這些研究很少透露是否跨國企業(yè)能夠提取的各種好處，新技術或信息產(chǎn)生，他們之間的供貨企業(yè)。因此，沒有明確的證據(jù)證明溢

56、出，但它是合理的假設溢出的正相關聯(lián)系的程度。 同樣，也有許多工程上的關系，跨國公司的進入和存在和市場結構的東道國，這是密切相關的可能影響外國直接投資的競爭，在當?shù)厥袌鲣N售。也有一些個案研究的示范效應，技術擴散，以及勞動培訓，在國外跨國公司。然而，盡管這些研究提供了更詳細的資料，對不同渠道向外溢，他們都很少提到全局性的重大意義等外溢效應。統(tǒng)計研究的外溢效應，與之相反，可以揭示整體的影響，外國存在對生產(chǎn)力的本地公司，但他們一般都不能說太多的效應如何出籠的。這些研究通常估計生產(chǎn)函數(shù)，為當?shù)氐膰衅髽I(yè)，包括外資份額的行業(yè)之一，說明變量。然后，他們測試是否有外國存在有一個顯著的積極影響本地生產(chǎn)力一旦其他

57、公司和行業(yè)特點，已計入。研究的結論是，國內(nèi)廠商表現(xiàn)出較高的生產(chǎn)力，在行業(yè)具有較大的外資份額，但認為它可能是錯誤的結論，認為溢出已經(jīng)發(fā)生了，如果跨國公司子公司定位系統(tǒng)，在更多的生產(chǎn)部門。此外，他們也可以執(zhí)行一些更詳細的測試，不同地區(qū)的外溢效應。研究地域分散的外國投資，他們認為積極的影響，外國直接投資累積到主要向國內(nèi)公司位于接近跨國公司的附屬公司。不過，效果似乎在各個產(chǎn)業(yè)之間。結果是對存在的外溢效應似乎被混淆;最近的研究表明，應該有一個系統(tǒng)的模式不同的地方所在行業(yè)和所在國特色的影響，發(fā)病的外溢效應。舉例來說，外國子公司的技術水平或技術引進，似乎影響金額溢出給本地公司。該技術引進跨國公司的子公司，反

58、過來，已顯示出不同的系統(tǒng)，與所在國的特色。這些進口的，似乎較大，在各國和各行業(yè)如教育水平，當?shù)貏趧恿^高，地方競爭是強硬，并在所在國施加較少的正式要求，對聯(lián)營公司業(yè)務。事實上，在某些情況下，外國大型的存在，甚至可能是一個跡象微弱地方工業(yè)，如果當?shù)毓旧形茨芪杖魏紊a(chǎn)率外溢所有，并已因此被迫屈服的市場份額給外國跨國公司。3.外商直接投資技術外溢與人力資本增長 技術轉讓由跨國公司家長及其分支機構和其他東道國公司不僅是在機械，設備，專利權益，及外籍管理人員和技術人員，但同時也意識到培訓當?shù)貑T工。這次培訓的影響最各級員工，從簡單的生產(chǎn)操作工通過監(jiān)督員，以技術先進的專業(yè)人士和高層管理人員。雖然大多數(shù)的

59、人的訓練都是受聘于跨國企業(yè)自己的子公司，受惠者還包括間跨國企業(yè)的供應商、分包商、顧客等。介于對在職培訓，以講座和更正規(guī)的學校教育，海外教育中，也許在該公司的母公司，這取決于所需要的技能。各種技能，通過喜悅與外國跨國公司有可能超出直接當跨國企業(yè)并沒有收取的全部價值培訓給本地公司或隨著時間的推移，作為雇員轉往其他機構，或成立自己的企業(yè)。而角色的跨國公司中，小學教育和中學教育是邊緣性，有越來越明顯的證據(jù)帽子的外國直接投資可能有顯著影響的高等教育在他們所在的國家。最重要的作用是在需求方面?？鐕髽I(yè)提供具吸引力的就業(yè)機會，高技能的畢業(yè)生，在天然科學，工程科學，商業(yè)和科學的，這可能是一個誘因，為資優(yōu)學生完成培訓，以及跨國企業(yè)的需求，熟練的勞動力，這可能會鼓勵各國政府投資在較高的教育中。也有更直接的聯(lián)系，外國直接投資和高等教育。除了提供獎學金和正規(guī)教育的