基于CAGE距离模型之资源型央企国际市场进入模式研究
|
摘要
在世界经济一体化的大趋势下,矿产资源的全球化配置已成为经济全球化的重要组成部分。矿产资源是人类社会经济发展不可或缺的物质基础,更关乎一国的外交战略部署与国家安全。我国经济的快速发展带来了对能源和重要矿产资源需求的快速增长,随着工业化、城镇化和农业现代化的推进,矿产资源的需求总量还将持续攀升。在资源全球化背景下,越来越多的企业开始通过进入海外市场以实现资源的最优配置和企业利益的最大化。央企是我国实施“走出去”战略的主体。资源型央企则是中国参与矿产资源全球化再配置的重要主导者。
目标市场选择和国际市场进入模式是企业国际化的基石,并直接影响企业在一国市场未来所有的战略决策与经营。在全球化越演越烈的今天,国与国之间的“距离”依然存在,“距离”势必影响企业国际目标市场和进入模式的选择。本文从资源型央企国际市场进入的特征出发,在资源产业背景下,通过实证分析研究资源型央企进入国际市场的案例样本,验证目标市场因素对于进入模式选择的影响,进而为资源型央企进入国际市场模式选择提供决策模型。
本研究基于Pankaj Ghemawatt提出的CAGE距离理论,首先对选取的资源型央企国际市场进入实例样本中涉及的37个东道国,运用CAGE距离模型对中国与东道国之间在矿产资源行业的文化距离、行政距离、地理距离、经济距离的定量数据,通过K-MEANS聚类分析法计算出这些国家与中国的距离,进而根据CAGE四个维度的距离远近进行聚类分析得到四类目标国际市场：浅水湾市场、绿洲市场、沼泽市场、深海市场,并通过交叉分析,并得到四类市场所对应的典型国家。随后,通过Logistic回归分析得到样本实例中目标市场国家CAGE距离对资源型央企进入模式选择的影响大小及影响方向,进而通过交叉分析得出四类目标国际市场适用的进入模式。最后,通过实证分析构建了资源型央企国际目标市场与进入模式LEMS决策模型,用于国际目标市场分类、备选进入模式与评估、进入模式确定,构建了辅助资源型央企国际目标市场判别与进入模式选择的一种全新决策方法。
Global configuration of the mineral resources has become an important part of the economic globalization. Mineral resources are important natural materials for human Social-economic development as well as affect a country's foreign strategic plan and national security. China's rapid economic development has brought rapid growth of energy and mineral resources demand, with the process of industrialization, urbanization and agricultural modernization, the total demand for mineral resources will continue to increase. Today. more and more companies began to enter the overseas market in order to achieve optimal allocation of resources and maximization of corporate interests. Central enterprises play important role in China's implementation of "going out" strategy. Resource-based central enterprises participate the mineral resources re-configuration within global wide.
Selection of target markets and market entry modes are the key for enterprise internationalization, which directly impact on the enterprise's future strategic decision-making and management in a country market. Global communications are shrinking the world in recent years, turning it into a small and relatively homogeneous place.But when it comes to business, distance still matters, and companies must explicitly and thoroughly account for it when they make decisions about global expansion. This article from the resource-based central enterprises to international markets into the characteristics of the departure, in the context of the resources industry, through empirical analysis research resource type central enterprises to enter the international market, the case sample, verify that the target market factors into the mode selection, and thus for the resource-based central enterprises to enter the international The market mode selection decision model.
Based on Prof. Pankaj Ghemawatt's CAGE distance theory, Atthe author firstly selected100resource-based central enterprises international market entry cases which involved with37host countries as study cases. Then, using the CAGE distance model to get the quantitative data of distances between China and the host country in the mineral resources industry from cultural, administrative, geographical, and economic dimension. Using K-means clustering analysis method, according to the distance between these countries with China to cluster four types of target international markets:Repulse Bay market, oasis market, swamp market, deep-sea market. Further, the author made a cross-analyzes for the four types market corresponding to the typical countries. Binary logistic regression analysis of empirical data was used to test the influence of CAGE distance to entry model selection for resource-based central enterprises. Through cross-analyzes, the superior entry mode can be get for four types of target international markets. Finally, Location and Entry Model Selection (LEMS) Decision-making Model was designed for guiding resource-based central enterprises to select international target market and entry mode.
目标市场选择和国际市场进入模式是企业国际化的基石,并直接影响企业在一国市场未来所有的战略决策与经营。在全球化越演越烈的今天,国与国之间的“距离”依然存在,“距离”势必影响企业国际目标市场和进入模式的选择。本文从资源型央企国际市场进入的特征出发,在资源产业背景下,通过实证分析研究资源型央企进入国际市场的案例样本,验证目标市场因素对于进入模式选择的影响,进而为资源型央企进入国际市场模式选择提供决策模型。
本研究基于Pankaj Ghemawatt提出的CAGE距离理论,首先对选取的资源型央企国际市场进入实例样本中涉及的37个东道国,运用CAGE距离模型对中国与东道国之间在矿产资源行业的文化距离、行政距离、地理距离、经济距离的定量数据,通过K-MEANS聚类分析法计算出这些国家与中国的距离,进而根据CAGE四个维度的距离远近进行聚类分析得到四类目标国际市场：浅水湾市场、绿洲市场、沼泽市场、深海市场,并通过交叉分析,并得到四类市场所对应的典型国家。随后,通过Logistic回归分析得到样本实例中目标市场国家CAGE距离对资源型央企进入模式选择的影响大小及影响方向,进而通过交叉分析得出四类目标国际市场适用的进入模式。最后,通过实证分析构建了资源型央企国际目标市场与进入模式LEMS决策模型,用于国际目标市场分类、备选进入模式与评估、进入模式确定,构建了辅助资源型央企国际目标市场判别与进入模式选择的一种全新决策方法。
Global configuration of the mineral resources has become an important part of the economic globalization. Mineral resources are important natural materials for human Social-economic development as well as affect a country's foreign strategic plan and national security. China's rapid economic development has brought rapid growth of energy and mineral resources demand, with the process of industrialization, urbanization and agricultural modernization, the total demand for mineral resources will continue to increase. Today. more and more companies began to enter the overseas market in order to achieve optimal allocation of resources and maximization of corporate interests. Central enterprises play important role in China's implementation of "going out" strategy. Resource-based central enterprises participate the mineral resources re-configuration within global wide.
Selection of target markets and market entry modes are the key for enterprise internationalization, which directly impact on the enterprise's future strategic decision-making and management in a country market. Global communications are shrinking the world in recent years, turning it into a small and relatively homogeneous place.But when it comes to business, distance still matters, and companies must explicitly and thoroughly account for it when they make decisions about global expansion. This article from the resource-based central enterprises to international markets into the characteristics of the departure, in the context of the resources industry, through empirical analysis research resource type central enterprises to enter the international market, the case sample, verify that the target market factors into the mode selection, and thus for the resource-based central enterprises to enter the international The market mode selection decision model.
Based on Prof. Pankaj Ghemawatt's CAGE distance theory, Atthe author firstly selected100resource-based central enterprises international market entry cases which involved with37host countries as study cases. Then, using the CAGE distance model to get the quantitative data of distances between China and the host country in the mineral resources industry from cultural, administrative, geographical, and economic dimension. Using K-means clustering analysis method, according to the distance between these countries with China to cluster four types of target international markets:Repulse Bay market, oasis market, swamp market, deep-sea market. Further, the author made a cross-analyzes for the four types market corresponding to the typical countries. Binary logistic regression analysis of empirical data was used to test the influence of CAGE distance to entry model selection for resource-based central enterprises. Through cross-analyzes, the superior entry mode can be get for four types of target international markets. Finally, Location and Entry Model Selection (LEMS) Decision-making Model was designed for guiding resource-based central enterprises to select international target market and entry mode.
引文
Agarwal S, Ramaswami S N. Choice of foreign market entry mode:Impact of ownership, location and internalization factors. Journal of International business studies,1992:1-27.
Ahmed Z U, Mohamad O, Tan B, et al. International risk perceptions and mode of entry:A case study of Malaysian multinational firms. Journal of Business Research,2002,55(10):805-813.
Andersson T, Svensson R. Entry modes for direct investment determined by the composition of firm-specific skills. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics,1994,96(4):551-560.
Axinn C N, Matthyssens P. Limits of internationalization theories in an unlimited world. International Marketing Review,2002,19(5):436-449.
Bachmeier L J, Griffin J M. Testing for market integration:crude oil, coal, and natural gas. The Energy Journal,2010,27(2):55-72.
Bartlett C A, Ghoshal S. Going global:lessons from late movers. Reading,2000,1:3.
Bertrand O, Mucchielli J L, Zitouna H. Location choices of multinational firms:the case of mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Economic Integration,2007,22(1):181-209.
Bhaumik S K, Gelb S. Determinants of entry mode choice of MNCs in emerging markets: Evidence from South Africa and Egypt. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade,2005,41(2):5-24.
Brouthers K D. Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of international business studies,2002,33(2):203-221.
Buckley P J, Casson M C. Analyzing foreign market entry strategies:Extending the internalization approach. Journal of international business studies,1998:539-561.
Buckley P J, Casson M. The optimal timing of a foreign direct investment. The Economic Journal,1981,91(361):75-87.
Buckley P J, Ghauri P N. International mergers and acquisitions:A reader. Cengage Learning Emea,2002.
Buckley, P.J. and Pearce, R.D. overseas production and exporting by the world's largest enterprise:a study in sourcing policy, Journal of International Business Studies, (1979),10,9-20.
Carlson S. How foreign is foreign trade? A problem in international business research.1975.
Chang S J, Rosenzweig P M. The choice of entry mode in sequential foreign direct investment. Strategic Management Journal,2001,22(8):747-776.
Chatterjee S. EXCESS RESOURCES, UTILIZATION COSTS, AND MODE OR ENTRY. Academy of Management Journal,1990,33(4):780-800.
Chen H, Hu M Y. An analysis of determinants of entry mode and its impact on performance. International Business Review,2002.11(2):19-210.
Cheng Y M. Determinants of FDI mode choice:Acquisition, brownfield, and greenfield entry in foreign markets. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration,2006,23(3):202-220.
Claeys S, Hainz C. Acquisition versus greenfield:The impact of the mode of foreign bank entry on information and bank lending rates.2006.
Cloodt M, Hagedoorn J, Van Kranenburg H. Mergers and acquisitions:Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries. Research policy,2006,35(5): 642-654.
Coviello N E, Munro H J. Growing the entrepreneurial firm:networking for international market development. European journal of marketing,1995,29(7):49-61.
Davis P S, Desai A B, Francis J D. Mode of international entry:An isomorphism perspective. Journal of International Business Studies,2000:239-258.
Driscoll A M, Paliwoda S J. Dimensionalizing international market entry mode choice. Journal of Marketing Management,1997,13(1-3):57-87.
Duarte C, Canal E. The effect of firm and host country characteristics on the choice of entry mode:empirical evidence from Spanish firms. Journal of Management and Governance,2002,6(2): 153-168.
Dunning, J.H. The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production:an Update and Some Possible Extension. Journal of International Business Studied,1988,(19):64-70
Ekeledo I, Sivakumar K. International market entry mode strategies of manufacturing firms and service firms:A resource-based perspective. International Marketing Review,2004,21(1): 68-101.
Elango B, Sambharya R B. The influence of industry structure on the entry mode choice of overseas entrants in manufacturing industries. Journal of International Management,2004,10(1): 107-124.
Erramilli M K. The experience factor in foreign market entry behavior of service firms. Journal of international business studies,1991:479-501.
Gatignon H, Anderson E, Helsen K. Competitive reactions to market entry:Explaining interfirm differences. Journal of Marketing Research,1989:44-55.
Ghemawat P. Distance still matters. Harvard business review,2001,79(8):137-147.
Globerman S, Shapiro D. Assessing international mergers and acquisitions as a mode of foreign direct investment. Governance, multinationals and growth,2005:68-99.
Goodnow J D. Developments in international mode of entry analysis. International Marketing Review,1985,2(3):17-30.
Grunfeld L, Randaccio F S. Greenfield investment or Acquisition? Optimal foreign entry mode with knowledge spillovers in a cournot game[C]//31 st Annual Conference of the European International Business Academy (EIBA).2005:10-13.
Guimaraes P, Figueiredo O, Woodward D. Industrial Location Modeling:Extending the Random Utility Framework*. Journal of Regional Science,2004,44(1):1-20.
Harzing A W. Acquisitions versus greenfield investments:International strategy and management of entry modes. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(3):211-227.
Hennart J F, Park Y R. Greenfield vs. acquisition:The strategy of Japanese investors in the United States. Management science,1993,39(9):1054-1070.
Hennart J F, Reddy S. The choice between mergers/acquisitions and joint ventures:The case of Japanese investors in the United States. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(1):1-12.
Hill C W L, Hwang P, Kim W C. An eclectic theory of the choice of international entry mode. Strategic Management Journal,1990,11(2):117-128.
Innovative forms of organizing:international perspectives. SAGE Publications Limited,2003.
Jung J. Acquisitions or joint ventures:Foreign market entry strategy of US advertising agencies. The Journal of Media Economics,2004,17(1):35-50.
Kiefer H, Mittelbach E, Nystrom C. International Market Entry[D]. Vaxjo University, SCHWEDEN,2004.
Kim W C, Hwang P. Global strategy and multinationals' entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies,1992:29-53.
Kiyoshi Kojima, Direct Foreign Investment:A Japanese Model of Multinational Business Operations, Taylor & Francis,1978.
Kogut B, Singh H. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of international business studies,1988:411-432.
Kumar V, Subramanian V. A contingency framework for the mode of entry decision. Journal of World Business,1997,32(1):53-72.
Levinson A. Environmental regulations and manufacturers' location choices:Evidence from the Census of Manufactures. Journal of Public Economics,1996,62(1):5-29.
Makino S, Neupert K E. National culture, transaction costs, and the choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary. Journal of International Business Studies,2000,31(4): 705-713.
Malhotra N K, Agarwal J, Ulgado F M. Internationalization and entry modes:a multitheoretical framework and research propositions. Journal of international marketing,2003: 1-31.
Malhotra N. The nature of knowledge and the entry mode decision. Organization Studies.2003, 24(6):935-959.
Mattoo A, Olarreaga M, Saggi K. Mode of foreign entry, technology transfer, and FDI policy. Journal of Development Economics,2004,75(1):95-111.
Meyer K E, Nguyen H V. Foreign Investment Strategies and Sub-national Institutions in Emerging Markets:Evidence from Vietnam*. Journal of Management Studies,2005,42(1): 63-93.
Muller T. Analyzing modes of foreign entry:Greenfield investment versus acquisition. Review of International Economics,2007,15(1):93-111.
Mutinelli M, Piscitello L. The entry mode choice of MNEs:an evolutionary approach. Research Policy,1998,27(5):491-506.
Nitsch D, Beamish P, Makino S. Entry mode and performance of Japanese FDI in Western Europe. MIR:Management International Review,1996:27-43.
Pan Y, Tse D K. The hierarchical model of market entry modes. Journal of International Business Studies,2000:535-554.
Peng M W. The resource-based view and international business. Journal of Management,2001, 27(6):803-829.
Raff H, Ryan M, Stahler F. The choice of market entry mode:Greenfield investment, M&A and joint venture. International Review of Economics & Finance,2009,18(1):3-10.
Salant S W. Imperfect competition in the international energy market:a computerized Nash-Cournot model. Operations Research,1982,30(2):252-280.
Sanchez-Peinado E, Pla-Barber J. A multidimensional concept of uncertainty and its influence on the entry mode choice:An empirical analysis in the service sector. International Business Review,2006,15(3):215-232.
Sarkar M, Cavusgil S T. Trends in international business thought and literature:a review of international market entry mode research:integration and synthesis. The International Executive, 1996,38(6):825-847.
Schug A, Wenzel W, Hansmann U H E. Energy landscape paving simulations of the trp-cage protein. The Journal of chemical physics,2005,122:194711.
Shaver J M. Accounting for endogeneity when assessing strategy performance:Does entry mode choice affect FDI survival?. Management Science,1998,44(4):571-585.
Shenkar O. Cultural distance revisited:Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of international business studies,2001:519-535.
Shimizu K, Hitt M A, Vaidyanath D, et al. Theoretical foundations of cross-border mergers and acquisitions:A review of current research and recommendations for the future. Journal of International Management,2004,10(3):307-353.
Stahl G K, Voigt A. Do cultural differences matter in mergers and acquisitions? A tentative model and examination. Organization Science,2008,19(1):160-176.
Tihanyi L, Griffith D A, Russell C J. The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance:a meta-analysis. Journal of International Business Studies,2005,36(3):270-283.
Wang A. The Choice of Market Entry Mode:Cross-Border M&A or Greenfield Investment. International Journal of Business and Management,2009,4(5):P241.
Weber Y, Shenkar O, Raveh A. National and corporate cultural fit in mergers/acquisitions:An exploratory study. Management science,1996,42(8):1215-1227.
Welch L S, Luostarinen R. Internationalization:evolution of a concept. The Internationalization of the Firm:A Reader,1993:155-171.
Woodcock C P, Beamish P W, Makino S. Ownership-based entry mode strategies and international performance. Journal of international business studies,1994:253-273.
Xu D, Shenkar O. INSTITUTIONAL DISTANCE AND THE MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISE. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(4):608-618.
Young S, Hamill J, Wheeler C, et al. International market entry and development:strategies and management. Hemel Hempstead:Harvester Wheatsheaf,1989.
陈宇红.我国企业海外投资的问题与对策研究.兰州交通大学学报(社会科学版),2005,10.
仇明.“走出去”战略研究：国际商务理论方法的阐述.世界经济,2002,4：011.
冯春丽.跨国公司股权进入模式选择研究.华中科技大学，2005.
付铁铮.中央企业海外并购与国际竞争力评估[D].北京交通大学,2008.
高伟光.试论我国企业进入国际市场的主要模式及策略.煤炭经济研究,2005(9)：26-27.
国土资源部信息中心.世界矿产资源年评[A].地质出版社.2012.12
何本芳,张祥.我国企业对外直接投资区位选择模型探索.财贸经济,2009,2：96-101.
黄宇池.基于资源基础论的区域市场进入模式选择研究：[博士学位论文].浙江：浙江大学,2007
黄速建,刘建丽.中国企业海外市场进入模式选择研究.中国工业经济,2009,l：108-117.
黄友星.中国海外直接投资母国驱动因素的实证研究.山东社会科学,2011,4：029.
李波,蔡淑琴.海外市场进入的混合模式理论和应用研究.工业工程与管理,2005,3：97-101.
李平,徐登峰.我国企业跨国并购的影响因素与进入模式选择.2008.
李贻伟.跨文化营销的两种市场进入模式探析.四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003,6：007.
李众敏.中国企业海外并购：回顾与展望,2009.
理查德·罗宾逊著,企业国际化导论,对外贸易教育出版社,北京,1989
刘明前,庄培章,王宗军.跨国直接投资方式及其比较探析.当代经济,2009,2.
刘晓宁.企业国际市场进入模式选择研究现状述评.工业技术经济,2006,25(10)：98-102.
鲁桐.中国企业海外市场进入模式研究.经济管理出版社,2007.
潘镇.国际市场进入模式选择理论评述.经济学动态,2005,5：114-118.
彭轶丽.中国钢铁企业海外投资的区位及模式选择问题研究.企业经济,2007,10：024.
宋亚辉,郭继鸣,李胜歌.跨国经营企业国际市场进入方式选择的影响因素研究.河北工业大学学报,2004,33(6).
潘文宇,解巍.浅析信息技术对资源型企业作用机理[J].中国林业企业,2000(1)：94
孙锦梅,夏敏仁.国际市场进入模式影响因素分析.商业研究,2003,2(12.15).
谭秋贤.资源型企业周边地区稳定的经济学思考.经济师,2001,11：56-58.
王静娴.中国资源型企业国际化实证研究.贵州财经学院,2011.
王秀岩.中国石油企业国际化经营战略研究.2008.
吴红斌.全球金融危机背景下我国海外并购矿产资源的对策研究.冶金经济与管理,2010(2).
吴晓云,焦勇兵.国际市场进入模式研究：一种网络的.商业经济与管理,2007.
武力聪,吴爱祥.关于我国企业海外矿业投资现状的思考和建议.中国矿业,2009,18(6)：20-23.
向平,孔杰.中国企业跨国并购式海外市场进入模式现状分析与风险管理串.2008.
谢军.基于企业国际经验的国外市场选择和进入模式研究.国际贸易问题,2007,1：91-94.
谢军.中国企业的技术能力与国外市场进入模式的实证研究.科技进步与对策,2008,25(8)：51-53.
徐维佳.中国国企跨国并购所面临的挑战与对策研究.商业研究,2008,1.
徐雪,谢玉鹏.我国对外直接投资区位选择影响因素的实证分析.管理世界,2008,4：167-168.
徐振强,王育红.国际石油合作合同模式的特征及演进.国际经济合作,2003,1：50-53.
许陈生,夏洪胜.试论在华跨国公司进入模式的独资倾向及我国的对策.国际贸易问题,2005，3：022.
薛求知,韩冰洁.东道国腐败对跨国公司进入模式的影响研究.经济研究,2008,4：88-98.
尹国伟,段鹏.资源型企业文化的影响因素分析.法制与社会,2007,11：334.
尹盛焕.企业所有权优势与进入模式——中国企业在韩投资研究.国际贸易问题,2004,11：019.
张传忠.国际市场进入方式的差异及其选择.江苏商论,2003,9：58-61.
张华.中国企业投资并购海外矿产资源现状与措施建议.中国国土资源经济,2010,23(011)：20-22.
张娟.国际直接投资区位理论综述.经济纵横,2006,8.
张钦,张慧明,周爱前.我国煤炭企业跨区域投资进入模式的研究.能源技术与管理,2007,5：116-119.
张颖.基于跨国公司经验的中央企业海外并购战略研究[D].北京交通大学,2009.
周长辉,张一弛,俞达.中国企业对外直接投资驱动力与进入模式研究的理论探索：个整合性框架.南大商学评论,2005,4：009.
朱院利.资源型企业转型路径研究.经济纵横,2008,6.
Ahmed Z U, Mohamad O, Tan B, et al. International risk perceptions and mode of entry:A case study of Malaysian multinational firms. Journal of Business Research,2002,55(10):805-813.
Andersson T, Svensson R. Entry modes for direct investment determined by the composition of firm-specific skills. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics,1994,96(4):551-560.
Axinn C N, Matthyssens P. Limits of internationalization theories in an unlimited world. International Marketing Review,2002,19(5):436-449.
Bachmeier L J, Griffin J M. Testing for market integration:crude oil, coal, and natural gas. The Energy Journal,2010,27(2):55-72.
Bartlett C A, Ghoshal S. Going global:lessons from late movers. Reading,2000,1:3.
Bertrand O, Mucchielli J L, Zitouna H. Location choices of multinational firms:the case of mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Economic Integration,2007,22(1):181-209.
Bhaumik S K, Gelb S. Determinants of entry mode choice of MNCs in emerging markets: Evidence from South Africa and Egypt. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade,2005,41(2):5-24.
Brouthers K D. Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of international business studies,2002,33(2):203-221.
Buckley P J, Casson M C. Analyzing foreign market entry strategies:Extending the internalization approach. Journal of international business studies,1998:539-561.
Buckley P J, Casson M. The optimal timing of a foreign direct investment. The Economic Journal,1981,91(361):75-87.
Buckley P J, Ghauri P N. International mergers and acquisitions:A reader. Cengage Learning Emea,2002.
Buckley, P.J. and Pearce, R.D. overseas production and exporting by the world's largest enterprise:a study in sourcing policy, Journal of International Business Studies, (1979),10,9-20.
Carlson S. How foreign is foreign trade? A problem in international business research.1975.
Chang S J, Rosenzweig P M. The choice of entry mode in sequential foreign direct investment. Strategic Management Journal,2001,22(8):747-776.
Chatterjee S. EXCESS RESOURCES, UTILIZATION COSTS, AND MODE OR ENTRY. Academy of Management Journal,1990,33(4):780-800.
Chen H, Hu M Y. An analysis of determinants of entry mode and its impact on performance. International Business Review,2002.11(2):19-210.
Cheng Y M. Determinants of FDI mode choice:Acquisition, brownfield, and greenfield entry in foreign markets. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration,2006,23(3):202-220.
Claeys S, Hainz C. Acquisition versus greenfield:The impact of the mode of foreign bank entry on information and bank lending rates.2006.
Cloodt M, Hagedoorn J, Van Kranenburg H. Mergers and acquisitions:Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries. Research policy,2006,35(5): 642-654.
Coviello N E, Munro H J. Growing the entrepreneurial firm:networking for international market development. European journal of marketing,1995,29(7):49-61.
Davis P S, Desai A B, Francis J D. Mode of international entry:An isomorphism perspective. Journal of International Business Studies,2000:239-258.
Driscoll A M, Paliwoda S J. Dimensionalizing international market entry mode choice. Journal of Marketing Management,1997,13(1-3):57-87.
Duarte C, Canal E. The effect of firm and host country characteristics on the choice of entry mode:empirical evidence from Spanish firms. Journal of Management and Governance,2002,6(2): 153-168.
Dunning, J.H. The Eclectic Paradigm of International Production:an Update and Some Possible Extension. Journal of International Business Studied,1988,(19):64-70
Ekeledo I, Sivakumar K. International market entry mode strategies of manufacturing firms and service firms:A resource-based perspective. International Marketing Review,2004,21(1): 68-101.
Elango B, Sambharya R B. The influence of industry structure on the entry mode choice of overseas entrants in manufacturing industries. Journal of International Management,2004,10(1): 107-124.
Erramilli M K. The experience factor in foreign market entry behavior of service firms. Journal of international business studies,1991:479-501.
Gatignon H, Anderson E, Helsen K. Competitive reactions to market entry:Explaining interfirm differences. Journal of Marketing Research,1989:44-55.
Ghemawat P. Distance still matters. Harvard business review,2001,79(8):137-147.
Globerman S, Shapiro D. Assessing international mergers and acquisitions as a mode of foreign direct investment. Governance, multinationals and growth,2005:68-99.
Goodnow J D. Developments in international mode of entry analysis. International Marketing Review,1985,2(3):17-30.
Grunfeld L, Randaccio F S. Greenfield investment or Acquisition? Optimal foreign entry mode with knowledge spillovers in a cournot game[C]//31 st Annual Conference of the European International Business Academy (EIBA).2005:10-13.
Guimaraes P, Figueiredo O, Woodward D. Industrial Location Modeling:Extending the Random Utility Framework*. Journal of Regional Science,2004,44(1):1-20.
Harzing A W. Acquisitions versus greenfield investments:International strategy and management of entry modes. Strategic Management Journal,2002,23(3):211-227.
Hennart J F, Park Y R. Greenfield vs. acquisition:The strategy of Japanese investors in the United States. Management science,1993,39(9):1054-1070.
Hennart J F, Reddy S. The choice between mergers/acquisitions and joint ventures:The case of Japanese investors in the United States. Strategic Management Journal,1997,18(1):1-12.
Hill C W L, Hwang P, Kim W C. An eclectic theory of the choice of international entry mode. Strategic Management Journal,1990,11(2):117-128.
Innovative forms of organizing:international perspectives. SAGE Publications Limited,2003.
Jung J. Acquisitions or joint ventures:Foreign market entry strategy of US advertising agencies. The Journal of Media Economics,2004,17(1):35-50.
Kiefer H, Mittelbach E, Nystrom C. International Market Entry[D]. Vaxjo University, SCHWEDEN,2004.
Kim W C, Hwang P. Global strategy and multinationals' entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies,1992:29-53.
Kiyoshi Kojima, Direct Foreign Investment:A Japanese Model of Multinational Business Operations, Taylor & Francis,1978.
Kogut B, Singh H. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of international business studies,1988:411-432.
Kumar V, Subramanian V. A contingency framework for the mode of entry decision. Journal of World Business,1997,32(1):53-72.
Levinson A. Environmental regulations and manufacturers' location choices:Evidence from the Census of Manufactures. Journal of Public Economics,1996,62(1):5-29.
Makino S, Neupert K E. National culture, transaction costs, and the choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary. Journal of International Business Studies,2000,31(4): 705-713.
Malhotra N K, Agarwal J, Ulgado F M. Internationalization and entry modes:a multitheoretical framework and research propositions. Journal of international marketing,2003: 1-31.
Malhotra N. The nature of knowledge and the entry mode decision. Organization Studies.2003, 24(6):935-959.
Mattoo A, Olarreaga M, Saggi K. Mode of foreign entry, technology transfer, and FDI policy. Journal of Development Economics,2004,75(1):95-111.
Meyer K E, Nguyen H V. Foreign Investment Strategies and Sub-national Institutions in Emerging Markets:Evidence from Vietnam*. Journal of Management Studies,2005,42(1): 63-93.
Muller T. Analyzing modes of foreign entry:Greenfield investment versus acquisition. Review of International Economics,2007,15(1):93-111.
Mutinelli M, Piscitello L. The entry mode choice of MNEs:an evolutionary approach. Research Policy,1998,27(5):491-506.
Nitsch D, Beamish P, Makino S. Entry mode and performance of Japanese FDI in Western Europe. MIR:Management International Review,1996:27-43.
Pan Y, Tse D K. The hierarchical model of market entry modes. Journal of International Business Studies,2000:535-554.
Peng M W. The resource-based view and international business. Journal of Management,2001, 27(6):803-829.
Raff H, Ryan M, Stahler F. The choice of market entry mode:Greenfield investment, M&A and joint venture. International Review of Economics & Finance,2009,18(1):3-10.
Salant S W. Imperfect competition in the international energy market:a computerized Nash-Cournot model. Operations Research,1982,30(2):252-280.
Sanchez-Peinado E, Pla-Barber J. A multidimensional concept of uncertainty and its influence on the entry mode choice:An empirical analysis in the service sector. International Business Review,2006,15(3):215-232.
Sarkar M, Cavusgil S T. Trends in international business thought and literature:a review of international market entry mode research:integration and synthesis. The International Executive, 1996,38(6):825-847.
Schug A, Wenzel W, Hansmann U H E. Energy landscape paving simulations of the trp-cage protein. The Journal of chemical physics,2005,122:194711.
Shaver J M. Accounting for endogeneity when assessing strategy performance:Does entry mode choice affect FDI survival?. Management Science,1998,44(4):571-585.
Shenkar O. Cultural distance revisited:Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of international business studies,2001:519-535.
Shimizu K, Hitt M A, Vaidyanath D, et al. Theoretical foundations of cross-border mergers and acquisitions:A review of current research and recommendations for the future. Journal of International Management,2004,10(3):307-353.
Stahl G K, Voigt A. Do cultural differences matter in mergers and acquisitions? A tentative model and examination. Organization Science,2008,19(1):160-176.
Tihanyi L, Griffith D A, Russell C J. The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance:a meta-analysis. Journal of International Business Studies,2005,36(3):270-283.
Wang A. The Choice of Market Entry Mode:Cross-Border M&A or Greenfield Investment. International Journal of Business and Management,2009,4(5):P241.
Weber Y, Shenkar O, Raveh A. National and corporate cultural fit in mergers/acquisitions:An exploratory study. Management science,1996,42(8):1215-1227.
Welch L S, Luostarinen R. Internationalization:evolution of a concept. The Internationalization of the Firm:A Reader,1993:155-171.
Woodcock C P, Beamish P W, Makino S. Ownership-based entry mode strategies and international performance. Journal of international business studies,1994:253-273.
Xu D, Shenkar O. INSTITUTIONAL DISTANCE AND THE MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISE. Academy of Management Review,2002,27(4):608-618.
Young S, Hamill J, Wheeler C, et al. International market entry and development:strategies and management. Hemel Hempstead:Harvester Wheatsheaf,1989.
陈宇红.我国企业海外投资的问题与对策研究.兰州交通大学学报(社会科学版),2005,10.
仇明.“走出去”战略研究：国际商务理论方法的阐述.世界经济,2002,4：011.
冯春丽.跨国公司股权进入模式选择研究.华中科技大学，2005.
付铁铮.中央企业海外并购与国际竞争力评估[D].北京交通大学,2008.
高伟光.试论我国企业进入国际市场的主要模式及策略.煤炭经济研究,2005(9)：26-27.
国土资源部信息中心.世界矿产资源年评[A].地质出版社.2012.12
何本芳,张祥.我国企业对外直接投资区位选择模型探索.财贸经济,2009,2：96-101.
黄宇池.基于资源基础论的区域市场进入模式选择研究：[博士学位论文].浙江：浙江大学,2007
黄速建,刘建丽.中国企业海外市场进入模式选择研究.中国工业经济,2009,l：108-117.
黄友星.中国海外直接投资母国驱动因素的实证研究.山东社会科学,2011,4：029.
李波,蔡淑琴.海外市场进入的混合模式理论和应用研究.工业工程与管理,2005,3：97-101.
李平,徐登峰.我国企业跨国并购的影响因素与进入模式选择.2008.
李贻伟.跨文化营销的两种市场进入模式探析.四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003,6：007.
李众敏.中国企业海外并购：回顾与展望,2009.
理查德·罗宾逊著,企业国际化导论,对外贸易教育出版社,北京,1989
刘明前,庄培章,王宗军.跨国直接投资方式及其比较探析.当代经济,2009,2.
刘晓宁.企业国际市场进入模式选择研究现状述评.工业技术经济,2006,25(10)：98-102.
鲁桐.中国企业海外市场进入模式研究.经济管理出版社,2007.
潘镇.国际市场进入模式选择理论评述.经济学动态,2005,5：114-118.
彭轶丽.中国钢铁企业海外投资的区位及模式选择问题研究.企业经济,2007,10：024.
宋亚辉,郭继鸣,李胜歌.跨国经营企业国际市场进入方式选择的影响因素研究.河北工业大学学报,2004,33(6).
潘文宇,解巍.浅析信息技术对资源型企业作用机理[J].中国林业企业,2000(1)：94
孙锦梅,夏敏仁.国际市场进入模式影响因素分析.商业研究,2003,2(12.15).
谭秋贤.资源型企业周边地区稳定的经济学思考.经济师,2001,11：56-58.
王静娴.中国资源型企业国际化实证研究.贵州财经学院,2011.
王秀岩.中国石油企业国际化经营战略研究.2008.
吴红斌.全球金融危机背景下我国海外并购矿产资源的对策研究.冶金经济与管理,2010(2).
吴晓云,焦勇兵.国际市场进入模式研究：一种网络的.商业经济与管理,2007.
武力聪,吴爱祥.关于我国企业海外矿业投资现状的思考和建议.中国矿业,2009,18(6)：20-23.
向平,孔杰.中国企业跨国并购式海外市场进入模式现状分析与风险管理串.2008.
谢军.基于企业国际经验的国外市场选择和进入模式研究.国际贸易问题,2007,1：91-94.
谢军.中国企业的技术能力与国外市场进入模式的实证研究.科技进步与对策,2008,25(8)：51-53.
徐维佳.中国国企跨国并购所面临的挑战与对策研究.商业研究,2008,1.
徐雪,谢玉鹏.我国对外直接投资区位选择影响因素的实证分析.管理世界,2008,4：167-168.
徐振强,王育红.国际石油合作合同模式的特征及演进.国际经济合作,2003,1：50-53.
许陈生,夏洪胜.试论在华跨国公司进入模式的独资倾向及我国的对策.国际贸易问题,2005，3：022.
薛求知,韩冰洁.东道国腐败对跨国公司进入模式的影响研究.经济研究,2008,4：88-98.
尹国伟,段鹏.资源型企业文化的影响因素分析.法制与社会,2007,11：334.
尹盛焕.企业所有权优势与进入模式——中国企业在韩投资研究.国际贸易问题,2004,11：019.
张传忠.国际市场进入方式的差异及其选择.江苏商论,2003,9：58-61.
张华.中国企业投资并购海外矿产资源现状与措施建议.中国国土资源经济,2010,23(011)：20-22.
张娟.国际直接投资区位理论综述.经济纵横,2006,8.
张钦,张慧明,周爱前.我国煤炭企业跨区域投资进入模式的研究.能源技术与管理,2007,5：116-119.
张颖.基于跨国公司经验的中央企业海外并购战略研究[D].北京交通大学,2009.
周长辉,张一弛,俞达.中国企业对外直接投资驱动力与进入模式研究的理论探索：个整合性框架.南大商学评论,2005,4：009.
朱院利.资源型企业转型路径研究.经济纵横,2008,6.