中小企业外文翻译

1、Appendix :In ternatio nal Bus in ess Review 13 (2004) 383 TOOSources of export success in small andmedium-sized en terprises: the impact of publicprogramsRoberto Alvarez EDepartme nt of Econo mics, Un iversity of Chile, San tiago, ChileAbstract This paper an alyzes differe nces in firm exporter perf

2、orma nee for small and medium-sized en terprises (SMEs). Traditi on ally, it is argued that these firms face several disadva ntages for competi ng in intern atio nal markets. Few studies, however, exploit the fact that successful exporters exist withi n this group. Using data for Chilea n firms, we

3、study various explanations for differences between sporadic and permanent exporters. Our results suggest that greater effort in intern ati onal bus in ess, process inno vati on, and the utilizati on of export promoti on programs con tribute positively to export performa nee in SMEs. In addition, we

4、find that some forms of intervention are better than others: trade shows and trade missions do not affect the probability of exporting permanently, but exporter committees show a positive and sig ni fica nt impact.Key words: Export performanee; Export promotion; Small- and medium-sized en terprises1

5、 IntroductionInternational evidenee suggests that firm size matters for exporter performanee. Several reasons have been provided to explain why larger firms perform better in International markets. Advantages associated with scale economies and speeialization, better access to financial resources in

6、 capital markets, and improved capabilities to take risks are among these reas ons. Also, evide nee in Roberts and Tybout (1997) and Bernard and Jensen (1999) regarding the existence of sunk costs to entering international markets implies that small- and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) face greater

7、limitations than larger firms to be successful exporters.There are, however, firms with in the group of SMEs that have bee n able to compete successfully in intern ati onal markets. Yet, few empirical studies exploit this fact. This paper con tributes to the discussi on of firm exporter performa nce

8、 in four ways. First, we compare exporter performa nce among firms of similar size. Second, focus ing on ly on exporters, we distinguish between sporadic and permanent exporters. Third, we employ a detailed survey of 295 sporadic and permanent exporters. This survey collects information about firm a

9、ctivities not traditi on ally in cluded in other empirical studies. Fourth, we study evide nce in Chile, a country that has experie need a huge in crease in export diversificati on over the last several decades. The Chilean experience is useful for other developing coun tries tryi ng to improve the

10、intern atio nal competitive ness of SMEs.There are two empirical facts that motivate this paper. First, the probability of exporting is lower for SMEs than it is for larger firms. This resembles evidence found in other national economies. In the Chilean manufacturing industry, for instance, only 14%

11、 of SMEs have exported goods over the period 1990996. However, more than 74% of largefirms have exported goods over the same period. Second, a reduced nu mber of firms are able to rema in as exporters. Among all exporter firms, only about 20% have exported every year of the period. The percentage of

12、 successful exporters for SMEs, however, is even lower: only about a 7% can be classified as permanent exporters. Contrast this with large-sized firms, where successful exporters represe nt more tha n 40% of the firms in this group (Table 1).The main questi on we ask here is why some SMEs are more s

13、uccessful exporters tha n others firms of a similar size. In the next section, we explore various explanations through the use of special survey directed at sporadic and perma nent exporter firms. In the third sect ion, a Probit model is estimat ed to ide ntify empirically the most importa nt determ

14、i nants of export performa nce. The fourth sect ion con eludes.Table 1Export statusSmallMediumLargeN%N%N%Non-exporter428486.078048.013225.6Sporadic exporter65013.165940.622042.6Perma nent exporter470.918511.416431.8Total4981100.01624100.0516100.0Sporadic/total exporters93.378.157.3Source: Own calcul

15、ati on based on Natio nwide Survey of Manu facturi ng Establishments (ENIA).2 Possible explanationsIn this sect ion, we explore possible expla natio ns for differe nces in firm exporter performanee. The approach aims to establish if there are significant differences in firm activities that would exp

16、lain why some SMEs are more successful than others. First, we present the data source. Second, we test for the existenee of statistical differences over four aspects: (i) tech no logical inno vati on, (ii) intern ati onal bus in ess man ageme nt, (iii) manager perceptions about obstacles to exporter

17、 performanee, and (iv) utilization of public in strume nts available to SMEs for enhancing productivity and tech no logical capabilities, in creas ing exports, and improv ing access to capital markets.2.2.1 Tech no logical inno vati onTech no logical inno vatio n may affect the export status of a fi

18、rm by in creas ing productivity (and reducing costs) and/or by developing new goods for international markets. This may be an alyzed in the con text of firms that compete in differe ntiated product markets. Firms may sell low-quality goods in domestic markets, but they must upgrade to tech no logies

19、 that produce high-quality goods if they wish to sell abroad the n.We test for differences in three types of innovative activities: product innovation, process inno vati on, and orga ni zati onal inno vati on. The results are show n in Table 2, and suggest that there are differe nces betwee n both g

20、roups of exporters. Though perma nent exporters en gage product inno vati on in greater inten sity tha n do sporadic exporters, this differenee is not significant. However, significant differences exist for process and orga ni zati onal inno vatio n. The results show that perma nent exporters inno v

21、ate more tha n sporadic exporters in outsourcing and the computer-based modernization of productiveprocesses. With respect to the introduction of organizational innovation, permanent exporters are more innovative in terms of introducing re-engineering into administrative processes and for total qual

22、ity developme nt.Table 2Tech no logical inno vati onType of inno vati onDifferenceaDiffere nee by sectorProduct inno vati onTech no logical improveme nts0.110.15New products0.51-0.16Chan ges in desig n0.100.10Chan ges in packag ing0.43-0.11Process inno vati onPurchases of specialized mach inery0.170

23、.09In troducti on of quality con trol0.380.05Outsourc ing0.93-0.22Introduction of informationtech nologies0.77-0.28Inno vati on in man ageme ntIn troducti on of strategic pla nning0.60-0.16In troducti on of re-e ngin eeri ng0.90-0.38Introduction of total quality0.69-0.27In troducti on of specializat

24、i on and role defi niti on0.54-0.092.2.2. Effort in intern atio nal bus in essDifferences in export performa nee may be expla ined by differe nt degrees of effort by internationalizing firms. These differences are attributable to firm heterogeneity in access to information and management capability,

25、 among other possibilities. Kumcu, Harcar, and Kumcu (1995) show that, for Turkish companies, manager motivation helps to explain awareness of export incentives. Moreover, Spence (2003) shows that the success of UK overseas trade missi ons is positively affected by man ager Ian guage proficie ncy.In

26、 the survey, man agers were asked about the actio n inten sity of several activities, such as strategic alliances with foreign and domestic firms, training of workers in export operations, and promotion of goods abroad. The results are shown in Table 3. The estimates suggest that permanent exporters

27、 are more active than sporadic exporters in only two activities: personnel training in exports operations and obtaining funds for work ing capital in activity-related exports.2.2.3. Man ager percepti on regard ing obstacles to export ingOne possible explanation for differences in exporter performane

28、e is that sporadic exporters face greater difficulties in their intern atio nal operati ons. Some firms may have good export projects, for in sta nee, but if they face credit access problems in the finan cial market, then it is more likely that they will leave international markets. In addition, som

29、e firms may exit due to protect ionist barriers established in foreig n markets. These kinds of obstacles have been divided into three types: internal to firms, internal to country, and exter nal. Results are show n in Table 4.Even the sign of the difference indicates that permanent exporters assign

30、 smaller importa nce to firm-i nternal obstacles; the differe nce betwee n both groups of firms is not statistically significant. Significant differences regarding the evolution of the real exchange rate and difficulties in access to financial resources exist, however, for the case of country-intern

31、al obstacles. This implies that a lower and/or unstable real exchange rate more greatly affects sporadic exporters tha n perma nent exporters. One in terest ing result is that the in teractive variable betwee n status and sectoris positive and sig ni fica nt. This reveals that in sectors of the econ

32、omy without a comparative advantage, real exchange fluctuati ons tend to be a more importa nt obstacle for sporadic exporters.With regard to credit access, the evide nce in dicates that liquidity con stra ints are more releva nt for sporadic exporters. This finding in and of itself, however, is not

33、con clusive with respect to a causality relati on ship. One in terpretati on is that credit con stra ints limit the possibility to remai n as an exporter. This is plausible for small firms that are traditi on ally more restricted tha n larger firms. An alter native in terpretati on is that capital m

34、arkets associate greater bus in ess risk with sporadic exporters, and lower access to credit may be due to poor export performa nce in the past.With respect to external obstacles, there are not important differences between permanent and sporadic exporters. Permanent exporters associate lower levels

35、 of incidenee with almost every obstacle, especially for tar肝 and no-tariff barriers, but differences with sporadic exporters are not statistically significant. This implies that expla nati ons about why some firms are not able to export perma nen tly are not associated with the existe nee of trade

36、barriers in foreig n markets.2.2.4. Utilizati on of public in strume ntsThere are several public instruments that Chilean firms can use to enhance their productivity and intern ati onal competitive ness. It can be argued that differe nces in export performa nee are associated with the fact that perm

37、a nent exporter firms have used these in strume nts with greater inten sity tha n have sporadic exporters.The Chilean public instruments are classified into three groups. First, there are in strume nts desig ned to enhance productivity and tech no logical capability in small firms. Second, there are

38、 export promotio n in strume nts whose objective is to in crease international competitiveness. Third, there are financial instruments established to improve credit access for small firms.In Fig. 1, we show the results for differences in the utilization of these instruments by firm group. The eviden

39、ee shows that permanent exporters have used every public instrument more intensively. The most used public instruments have been the export promotion instruments and those specifically administered by the National Export Promoti on Age ncy (ProChile). I n the case of export promoti on, about 35% of

40、perma nent exporters have used this kind of public support. This percentage is only about 19% for sporadic exporters. With regard to ProChile in strume nts, firm participati on has bee n 26.9% for perma nent exporters, and 14.5% for sporadic exporters .The evide nee in the previous sect ion suggests

41、 that there are sig ni fica nt differe nces in the firm behavior accord ing to exporter status. In this sect ion, we study whether these factors do in fact explain the differences in exporter status. To do so, we define a dependent variable that takes the value 1 if the firm has been a permanent exp

42、orter over the period 1996 -999 and 0 if the firm has bee n a sporadic exporter. For the econo metric estimati on, the follow ing Probit model is used:There are two pote ntial methodological problems associated with this approach. First,in our case, it may be argued that some of the expla natory var

43、iables are also affected by the firm s export status. In fact, firms that export permanently mage not only more likely to carry out tech no logical inno vati on, but also to put greater effort into intern ati onal bus in ess. Our dataset is not detailed eno ugh to explore this bi-causality phe nomen

44、on. In stead, firm panel data would illumi nate the impact of export performa nee on firm behavior. Our approach, however, explores the impact of a firm decisions on export performa nee. This is con siste nt with related in ter- natio nal trade literature that suggests a positive relati on ship betw

45、ee n exports and firm performa nee is better expla ined in an empirical sense by a self-selectio n phe nomenon (i.e. better firms are able to export), and not by the effect of learning-by-exporting (i.e. the idea that exporters improve their performa nee by access ing附录:国际商业评论 13期（2004） 383-400中小企业出

46、口成功的根源探究：公共服务的影响罗伯特-艾薇儿智利圣地亚哥经济系摘要本文分析了中小企业中公司出口的不同点。 普遍认为，这些中小企业在国际市场 竞争中存在一些弱点。然而，也有研究表明，这些公司中也存在非常成功的，通过分 析来自智利公司的数据，我们研究了小型和大型出口商之间的不同，研究结果显示， 在国际商务中更多要做的就是良好的服务，过程的创新，以及在出口中积极地做好推 广都会对中小企业的发展起到促进作用。另外，我们发现有些形式的干预比其他的要 好：交易会和贸易代表团不会影响长久出口的可能性，但是，出口国委员会会起到积 极地影响作用。关键词：出口实绩；出口促进；中小企业1.概述国际贸易实际表明公司

47、的规模会影响出口实绩，我们已经发现一些原因来解释为什么大型企业在国际市场更占优势。经济规模越大，专业化程度越高，更容易在资本 市场获得财富，更能够提高其抵御风险的能力。并且，从来自罗伯特、波特、伯纳多 和杰森的研究可以得出中小企业在走向成功出口商的道路上比大型企业面临更多的 限制。然而，一些实证证实，在中小企业中已经有些公司能够成功的在国际市场上进行 竞争。本文从四个方面对出口公司进行分析。第一，比较相同规模公司的出口实绩； 第二，仅对于出口公司，区别小型和大型专业化出口企业；第三，对295家出口商进行详细的调查，这个调查收集信息公司活动不是传统上包括在其他的实证研究。第四,我们对一个最近几年

48、出口多样化大幅提升的国家智利进行研究取证，智利的发展对于 世界其他发展中国家的中小企业提高国际竞争力具有积极地作用。本文基于两个很明显的事实，首先，通过对其他国家经济现状的分析，得出出口 可能性中小企业比大型企业低。例如，在智利的加工企业，在1990年到1996年期间，仅有14%的中小企业实现了产品出口。然而，在相同时期，74%的大型企业已经实现了出口。另外，出口商的数量正在持续减少。在这些出口公司中，仅有20%能够在这期间实现连续出口，中小企业的成功出口商比例就更低了，仅仅7%能够实现长久出口。和那些大型企业相比，成功出口商占据了大约40%。表1 1990-1996年智利制造业出口现状出口现

49、状小型中型大型数量百分比数量百分比数量百分比非出口商428486.078048.013225.6零星出口商65013.165940.622042.6永久出口商470.918511.416431.8合计4981100.01624100.0516100.0数据来源：全国范围制造业调查数据在此我们关键要分析的是为什么有些中小企业会比和他规模相同企业做的成功。 接下来第二部分，我们对零星的和长久的出口公司进行专业调查。第三部分，通过建 立Probit模型来分析影响出口实绩的决定性因素。第四部分得出结论进行总结。2可能的解释这一部分，我们探讨关于出口商的不同点。这一步的目的是证实，公司活动的差 异，能否

50、解释为何有些中小企业会比其他同类企业更加成功。首先，我们利用数据来 分析。再者我们从四个方面测试存在的问题：技术革新国际企业管理管理者对 出口障碍的预见中小企业利用公共工具提高生产效率和科研能力，增加出口，进入资本市场。2.2.1科技创新科技创新会通过提高生产效率或研制国际市场新产品来影响出口现状。这可能是分析的背景下，企业之间的竞争在分化的产品市场。企业或许会在国内市场出售低质量的产品，但是如果他们想把自己的商品出售到国外，就必须提高他们的科学技术进而 生产出高质量的商品。我们从三种不同的创新方式进行探究：产品创新、过程创新和 组织创新。我们将研究结果通过表二呈现，它显示出在所有出口商之间都存在不同。 长久出口商比零星出口商更重视科技创新，这个不同点还不是最主要的。然而，主要 不同点在于过程和组织的创新方面。结果显示，长久出口商比中小企业在生产过程中 更多的采用专业化地电脑科技，长久出口商更加具有创新性，为产品质量的提高投入 比较大。表2科技创新创新种类不同行业差异产品创新技术改良0.110.15新产口口0.51-0.16设计上的革新0.100.10包装的改良0.43-0.11过程创新专业机械的数量0.170.09引入质量监测0.380.05外包0.93-0.22引入信息技术0.77-0.2