Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society (기술혁신학회지)

Korea Technology Innovation Society (한국기술혁신학회)
권호 표지

An Empirical Study on the Technology Innovation Distribution, Technology Imitation Distribution and New International Trade Theory

기술혁신분포, 기술모방분포 그리고 신 국제무역이론에 대한 실증연구

  • Received : 2017.11.21
  • Accepted : 2018.03.19
  • Published : 2018.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims at empirical analysis of the new international trade theory (Melitz, 2012, 2014, 2015). The new international trade theory is centered on the effect of heterogeneous firms on the technological competitiveness on the trade effect and resulted from the important assumption that the form of the enterprise technology distribution determines the trade effect. This study empirically estimated the distribution of enterprise technology in Korean manufacturing. For the purpose of this study, we divided Korea's total enterprise technology distribution into technological innovation and technical imitation distribution, then statistically verified the distribution type and evaluated the appropriateness of the new international trade theory. Based on the empirical results of this study, we briefly suggested the direction of technology policy.

본 연구는 신 국제무역이론(Melitz, 2012, 2014, 2015)에 대한 실증분석을 목적으로 한다. 신 국제무역이론은 기업기술역량에 대한 이질적 기업분포가 무역효과에 미치는 영향을 중심으로 전개되고 있으며, 기업기술역량분포형태가 무역효과를 결정한다는 중요한 가정에서 출발한다. 본 연구는 실증적으로 우리나라 제조업에 기업기술역량분포를 추정하였다. 이 연구목적을 위하여 우리나라 총 기업기술역량분포를 기술혁신과 기술모방분포로 분리하였으며, 분포형태의 적합성에 대하여 통계적으로 검증하고, 신 국제무역이론기반에 대한 적정성을 평가하였다. 연구시사점으로 본 분석결과를 바탕으로 기술정책 및 산업정책 방향을 간단하게 제언하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 과학기술정책연구원 (2014), 2005년 한국기업혁신조사 : KIS2005 제조업.
  2. 김영규.박혜리.금혜윤.이승래 (2016), 한국의 수입구조결정요인과 기업분포에 미치는 영향, 연구보고서 16-06, 대외정책연구원.
  3. 조상섭.민경세 (2017), "중소벤처기업규모와 무역후생", 벤처창업연구, 12: 41-48.
  4. Axtell, R. L. (2001), "Zipf Distribution of U.S. Firm Sizes", Science, 293(5536): 1818-1820. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062081
  5. Barabasi, A. L. and Albert, R. (1999), "Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks", Science, 286(5439): 509-512. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.286.5439.509
  6. Bee, M. and Schiavo, S. (2015), Powerless: Gains from Trade When Firm Productivity is not Pareto Distributed, OFCE Working Paper, 2015-19.
  7. Bee, M., Riccaboni, M. and Schiavo, S. (2011), "Pareto versus Lognormal: A Maximum Entropy Test", Physical Review E, 84: 102-104.
  8. Bernard, A. B., Eaton, J., Jensen, J. B. and Kortum, S. S. (2003), "Plants and Productivity in International Trade", American Economic Review, 93(4): 1268-1290. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803769206296
  9. Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., Redding, S. J. and Schott, P. K. (2007), "Firms in International Trade", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3): 105-30. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.21.3.105
  10. Clauset, A, Shalizi, A. and Newman, M. (2009), "Power-law Distributions in Empirical Data", SIAM Review, 51: 661-703. https://doi.org/10.1137/070710111
  11. Combes, P. P., Duranton, G., Gobillon, L., Puga, D. and Roux, S. (2012), "The Productivity Advantages of Large Cities: Distinguishing Agglomeration from Firm Selection", Econometrica, 80(6): 2543-2594. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA8442
  12. Di Giovanni, J. and Levchenko, A. A. (2013), "Firm Entry, Trade, and Welfare in Zipf's World", Journal of International Economics, 89(2): 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2012.08.002
  13. Eaton, J., Kortum, S. S. (2002), "Technology, Geography, and Trade", Econometrica, 70(5): 1741-1779. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00352
  14. Gabaix, X. (2009), "Power Laws in Economics and Finance", Annual Review of Economics, 1: 255-293. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.economics.050708.142940
  15. Head, K., Mayer, T. and Thoenig, M. (2014), "Welfare and Trade without Pareto", American Economic Review, 104(5): 30103-30116.
  16. Kleiber, C. and Kotz, S. (2003), Statistical Size Distributions in Economics and Actuarial Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  17. Melitz, M. J. (2003), "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity", Econometrica, 71: 1695-1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467
  18. Melitz, M. J. and Daniel, T. (2012), "Gains from Trade when Firms Matter", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(2): 91-118. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.26.2.91
  19. Melitz, M. J. and Stephen, J. R. (2014), "Missing Gains from Trade?", American Economic Review, 104(5): 317-21. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.5.317
  20. Melitz, M. J. and Redding, S. J. (2015), "New Trade Models, New Welfare Implications", American Economic Review, 105(3): 1105-1146. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130351
  21. Pisarenko, V. and Sornette, D. (2006), "New Statistic for Financial Return Distributions: Power Law or Exponential?", Physica A, 366: 387-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2005.10.015
  22. Reed, W. and Hughes, B. (2002), "From Gene Families and Genera to Incomes and Internet File Sizes: Why Power Laws are So Common in Nature", Physical Review E, 66: 067103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.66.067103
  23. Rossi-Hansberg, E. and Wright, M. L. (2007), "Establishment Size Dynamics in the Aggregate Economy", American Economic Review, 97(5): 1639-1666. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.5.1639
  24. Simon, H. (1955), "On a Class of Skew Distribution Functions", Biometrika, 42 (3-4): 425. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/42.3-4.425
  25. Virkar, Y. and Clauset, A. (2014), "Power-law Distributions in Binned Empirical Data", Annals of Applied Statistics, 8(1): 89-119. https://doi.org/10.1214/13-AOAS710