经济管理类毕业论文外文文献

合集下载

经济管理毕业论文参考文献.doc

经济管理毕业论文参考文献的引用是否科学合理和充分，是判断一篇学术论文学术水平的重要指标，下面是的经济管理参考文献，欢送阅读查看。

[1]林勇，叶青，龙飞.我国土地城镇化对经济效率的影响[J].城市问题.xx(05)[2]李子联.人口城镇化滞后于土地城镇化之谜--中国省际面板数据的解释[J].口.资源与环境.xx(11)[3]王元京.新型城镇化业绩的后评价[J].中国科技投资.xx(27)[4]王雪雁.强化产业支撑筑牢城镇化根底[J].新长征.xx(09)[5]陈宗岚，刘习平.资源约束下县域产业集聚对经济增长的影响[J].统计与决策.xx(16)[6](丹麦)扬·盖尔(JanGehl)着，何人可译.交往与空间[M].中国建筑工业出版社，xx[7]苏东水主编.产业经济学[M].高等教育出版社，2000[8]魏权龄着.数据包络分析[M].科学出版社，xx[9](丹麦)扬·盖尔(JanGehl)着，何人可译.交往与空间[M].中国建筑工业出版社，xx[10]苏东水主编.产业经济学[M].高等教育出版社，2000[11]刘传江着.中国城市化的制度安排与创新[M].武汉大学出版社，1999[12](法)H.孟德拉斯(HenriMendras)着，李培林译.农民的终结[M].中国社会科学出版社，1991[13](美)赫希(Hirsch,W.Z.)着，刘世庆等译.城市经济学[M].中国社会科学出版社，1990[14](美)库兹涅茨(Kuzs,S.)着，常勋等译.各国的经济增长[M].商务印书馆，1985[15](美)赫茨勒，J.O.着，何新译.世界人口的危机[M].商务印书馆，1963[16]刘传江着.中国城市化的制度安排与创新[M].武汉大学出版社，1999[17](法)H.孟德拉斯(HenriMendras)着，李培林译.农民的终结[M].中国社会科学出版社，1991[18](美)赫希(Hirsch,W.Z.)着，刘世庆等译.城市经济学[M].中国社会科学出版社，1990[19]刘习平，宋德勇.城市产业集聚对城市环境的影响[J].城市问题.xx(03)[20]于兴业，张雪薇，贾利.农民工市民化与农村土地制度创新[J].东北农业大学学报(社会科学版).xx(04)[21]岳立，曾鑫.基于DEA-Malmquist指数方法的西部11省城市化效率评价[J].湖南财政经济学院学报.xx(03)[22]蔡卫红.福建省土地城镇化快于人口城镇化的现状及成因分析[J].福建论坛(人文社会科学版).xx(07)[23]颜昌宙.关于中国特色新型城镇化建立的几点建议[J].中国开展.xx(03)[1]文贯中.城市化从外生型到内生型的转变[J].新产经.xx(01)[2]尹宏玲，徐腾.我国城市人口城镇化与土地城镇化失调特征及差异研究[J].城市规划学刊.xx(02)[3]钱丽，陈忠卫，肖仁桥.中国区域工业化、城镇化与农业现代化耦合协调度及其影响因素研究[J].经济问题探索.xx(11)[4]王永齐.产业集聚机制：一个文献综述[J].产业经济评论.xx(01)[5]杨眉.城镇化的开展规律、原那么及路径[J].城市问题.xx(08)[6]陈凤桂，张虹鸥，吴旗韬，陈伟莲.我国人口城镇化与土地城镇化协调开展研究[J].人文地理.xx(05)[7]豆建民，汪增洋.经济集聚、产业结构与城市土地产出率--基于我国234个地级城市1999-xx年面板数据的实证研究[J].财经研究.xx(10)[8]王家庭，赵亮.我国区域城市化效率的动态评价[J].软科学.xx(07)[9]刘洁泓.城市化内涵综述[J].西北农林科技大学学报(社会科学版).xx(04)[10]袁志刚，解栋栋.统筹城乡开展：人力资本与土地资本的协调再配置[J].经济学家.xx(08)[11]陆根尧，盛龙.产业集聚与城市化互动开展机制研究：理论与实证[J].开展研究.xx(10)[12]王晓伟，邓峰，魏佳.各地区城市化效率动态分析--基于DEA-Malmquist指数方法[J].特区经济.xx(09)[13]汪海波.我国现阶段城镇化的主要任务及其重大意义[J].经济学动态.xx(09)[14]曹文莉，张小林，潘义勇，张春梅.兴旺地区人口、土地与经济城镇化协调开展度研究[J].口.资源与环境.xx(02)[15]戴永安.中国城市效率差异及其影响因素--基于地级及以上城市面板数据的研究[J].上海经济研究.xx(12)[16]潘文卿，刘庆.中国制造业产业集聚与地区经济增长--基于中国工业企业数据的研究[J].清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版).xx(01)[17]陈虎刚，袁惊柱.基于DEA方法的城市化效率评价：以四川省为例[J].云南财经大学学报(社会科学版).xx(06)[18]姚士谋，陆大道，王聪，段进军，武清华.中国城镇化需要综合性的科学思维--探索适应中国国情的城镇化方式[J].地理研究.xx(11)[19]蔡秀玲.中国城镇化历程、成就与开展趋势[J].经济研究参考.xx(63)[20]彭荣胜.农村劳动力转移对欠兴旺地区城镇化的影响[J].学术交流.xx(10)[21]王红伟.论产业转移背景下产业集聚区对就业的带动效应[J].商业时代.xx(19)[1]刘习平.我国城市化进程中的道路选择[J].党政干部学刊.xx(06)[2]陶然，曹广忠.“空间城镇化”、“人口城镇化”的不匹配与政策组合应对[J].改革.xx(10)[3]佟德龙，蔡建峰，尹丽，曾晓妹，左文进.土地利用的生产要素对经济增长奉献测算--以湖南省常德市为例[J].国土资源科技管理.xx(04)[4]王承宽.21世纪我国人口和方案生育管理问题研究[D].南京航空航天大学xx[5]赖作莲，王征兵.陕西城镇化开展对劳动力转移的效应分析[J].商业研究.xx(08)[6]陆大道，姚士谋，李国平，刘慧，高晓路.基于我国国情的城镇化过程综合分析[J].经济地理.xx(06)[7]陶然，袁飞，曹广忠.区域竞争、土地出让与地方财政效应：基于1999~xx年中国地级城市面板数据的分析[J].世界经济.xx(10)[8]刘习平.中国土地城镇化、人口城镇化及产业集聚协调开展研究[D].华中科技大学xx[9]刘岱宁.传统农区人口流动与城镇化模式研究[D].河南大学xx[10]易艳春.外商直接投资、经经增长与我国碳排放关系的实证研究[D].华中科技大学xx[11]张纪录.消费视角下的我国二氧化碳排放研究[D].华中科技大学xx[12]姜建.我国房地产市场调控政策研究[D].华中科技大学xx[13]石昶.控制政策作用与设计研究[D].华中科技大学xx[14]王凤鸿，伊文君.区域农村劳动力转移与人口城镇化协调开展的动力机制研究--以山西省为例[J].技术经济与管理研究.xx(04)[15]范进，赵定涛.土地城镇化与人口城镇化协调性测定及其影响因素[J].经济学家.xx(05)[16]陈先强.武汉城市圈城市化效率实证研究[J].华中农业大学学报(社会科学版).xx(01)。

经济学外文期刊顶级论文

经济学外文期刊顶级论文This paper investigates the relationship between economic growth and income inequality using a panel data set of 120 countries from 1990 to 2020. Our findings suggest that there is a non-linear relationship between these two variables, with initial levels of income inequality having a negative effect on economic growth, while further increases in income inequality are associated with positive effects on economic growth. These results challenge the traditional view that income inequality is always harmful for economic growth, and suggest that the relationship is more complex than previously thought. We discuss the potential mechanisms driving these findings and consider the implications for policy makers. Overall, our results highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between economic growth and income inequality, and the importance of taking into account the specific context of individual countries when designing policies to promote inclusive and sustainable economic development.There are several possible explanations for the non-linear relationship between economic growth and income inequality. Initial high levels of income inequality may lead to social unrest, political instability, and decreased social cohesion, all of which can be detrimental to economic growth. High inequality can also lead to underinvestment in human capital, as those at the bottom of the income distribution may not have access to education and healthcare, thus reducing overall productivity and innovation in the economy.On the other hand, as income inequality increases further, it may create incentives for individuals to work harder and invest more in human capital, as they strive to move up the economic ladder.Moreover, higher inequality can lead to greater savings and investment by the wealthy, which can contribute to capital formation and economic growth. Additionally, in some cases, income inequality can reflect differences in productivity and skill level, and reward such differences may incentivize individuals to acquire higher skills and contribute more to economic output.These findings have important implications for policymakers. Addressing high levels of initial income inequality is crucial for promoting sustainable and inclusive economic growth. Policies that aim to reduce inequality through progressive taxation, social safety nets, and investments in education and healthcare can help to create a more equal distribution of opportunities and outcomes, ultimately fostering long-term economic growth.However, as income inequality increases further, the relationship with economic growth becomes more complex, and policymakers need to consider the specific context of each country. In some cases, measures to reduce inequality at extremely high levels may inadvertently stifle incentives for hard work, innovation, and investment. Finding the right balance between reducing inequality and maintaining incentives for economic dynamism requires careful consideration of the unique social, political, and economic conditions of each country.In conclusion, our study highlights the need to move beyond a one-size-fits-all approach to the relationship between economic growth and income inequality. A nuanced understanding of this relationship is essential for formulating effective policies thatpromote both equity and efficiency in the pursuit of sustainable and inclusive economic development.。

毕业设计论文外文文献翻译

毕业设计(论文）外文文献翻译院系：财务与会计学院年级专业：201＊级财务管理姓名:学号：132148*＊*附件: 财务风险管理【Abstract】Although financial risk has increased significantly in recent years risk and risk management are not contemporary issues。

The result of increasingly global markets is that risk may originate with events thousands of miles away that have nothing to do with the domestic market。

Information is available instantaneously which means that change and subsequent market reactions occur very quickly。

The economic climate and markets can be affected very quickly by changes in exchange rates interest rates and commodity prices。

Counterparties can rapidly become problematic。

As a result it is important to ensure financial risks are identified and managed appropriately. Preparation is a key component of risk management。

【Key Words】Financial risk，Risk management，YieldsI. Financial risks arising1.1What Is Risk1.1.1The concept of riskRisk provides the basis for opportunity. The terms risk and exposure have subtle differences in their meaning. Risk refers to the probability of loss while exposure is the possibility of loss although they are often used interchangeably。

关于经济的外文文献

关于经济的外文文献1."Capital in the Twenty-First Century" by Thomas Piketty（《21世纪的资本》 - 托马斯·皮凯蒂）2."Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything" by Steven D.Levitt and Stephen J.Dubner （《怪诞经济学：一个叛逆经济学家揭示一切的隐藏面》 - 史蒂文·D·列维特和斯蒂芬·J·邓纳）3."The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith（《国富论》 - 亚当·斯密）4."Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness" by Richard H.Thaler and Cass R.Sunstein （《推动力：关于健康、财富和幸福的决策改进》 - 理查德·H·塞勒和卡斯·R·桑斯坦）5."Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman（《思考，快与慢》 - 丹尼尔·卡尼曼）6."The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time" by Karl Polanyi（《伟大转型：我们时代的政治与经济起源》 - 卡尔·波兰尼）7."The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle" by Joseph A.Schumpeter（《经济发展理论：对利润、资本、信用、利息和商业周期的探究》 - 约瑟夫·A·熊彼特）8."The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time" by Jeffrey D.Sachs（《贫困的终结：我们时代的经济可能性》 - 杰弗里·D·萨克斯）9."Development as Freedom" by Amartya Sen（《自由发展》 - 阿马蒂亚·森）。

经管类经典英文文献

经管类经典英文文献There are many classic English literature works in the field of economics and management. Some of the most well-known and influential ones include:1. "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith - This book, published in 1776, is considered the foundation of modern economics. It explores the basics of free markets, division of labor, and the invisible hand theory.2. "Principles of Economics" by Alfred Marshall - First published in 1890, this book introduced the concepts of supply and demand, marginal utility, and elasticity. It became the standard textbook for many years.3. "The Theory of Economic Development" by Joseph Schumpeter - Published in 1911, this book introduced the idea of entrepreneurship and innovation as the driving force behind economic development.4. "The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money" by John Maynard Keynes - Published in 1936, this book revolutionized macroeconomic theory by advocating for government intervention during economic downturns.5. "The Practice of Management" by Peter Drucker - First published in 1954, this book provides a comprehensive guide to the principles and practices of effective management.6. "Competitive Strategy" by Michael Porter - Published in 1980, this book is a seminal work in the field of strategic management. It introduced the concept of competitive advantage and the five forces framework.7. "The Innovator's Dilemma" by Clayton M. Christensen - Published in 1997, this book explores how successful companies can fail if they don't adapt to disruptive technologies. It has greatly influenced the field of innovation and entrepreneurship.These are just a few examples of classic English literature in the field of economics and management. There are many other important and influential works out there that have shaped the discipline.。

经济金融企业管理外文翻译外文文献英文文献

经济金融企业管理外文翻译外文文献英文文献————————————————————————————————作者：————————————————————————————————日期：2附录【原文】Upgrading in Global Value ChainsThe aim of this paper is to explore how small- and medium-sized Latin American enterprises ( SMEs) may participate in global markets in a way that provides for sustainable growth. This may be defined as the ‘‘highroad’’ to competitiveness, contrasting with the ‘‘low road,’’ typical of firms from developing countries, which often compete by squeezing wages and profit margins rather than by improving productivity, wages, and profits. The key difference between the high and the low road to competitiveness is often explained by the different capabilities of firms to ‘‘upgrade.’ In this paper, upgrading refers to the capacity of a firm to innovate to increase the value added of its products and processes (Humphrey & Schmitz, 2002a; Kaplinsky&Readman, 2001; Porter, 1990).Capitalizing on one of the most productive areas of the recent literature on SMEs, we restrict our field of research to small enterprises located in clusters. There is now a wealth ofempirical evidence (Humphrey, 1995; Nadvi &Schmitz, 1999; Rabellotti, 1997) showing that small firms in clusters, both in developed and developing countries, are able to over come some of the major constraints they usually face: lack of specialized skills, difficult access to technology, inputs, market, information, credit, and external services.Nevertheless, the literature on clusters, mainly focused on the local sources of competitiveness coming from intracluster vertical and horizontal relationshipsgenerating ‘‘collective efficiency’’ (Schmitz, 1995), has often neglected the increasing importance of external link ages. Due to recent changes in production systems, distribution channels, and financial markets, and to the spread of information technologies, enterprises and clusters are increasingly integrated in value chains thatoften operate across many different countries. The literature on global value chains (GVCs) (Gereffi, 1999; Gereffi& Kaplinsky, 2001) calls attention to the opportunities for local producers to learn from the global leaders of the chains that may be buyers or1producers. The internal governance of the value chain has an important effect on the scope of local firms’ upgrading (Humphrey& Schmitz, 2000).Indeed, extensive evidence on Latin America reveals that both the local and the global dimensions matter, and firms often participate in clusters as well as in value chains (Pietrobelli& Rabellotti, 2004). Both forms of organization offer opportunities to foster competitiveness via learning and upgrading. However, they also have remarkable drawbacks, as, for instance, upgrading may be limited in some forms of value chains, and clusters with little developed external economies and joint actions may have no influence on competitiveness.Moreover, both strands of literature were conceived and developed to overcome the sectoral dimension in the analysis of industrial organization and dynamism. On the one hand, studies on clusters, focusing on agglomerations of firms specializing in different stages of the filie′re, moved beyond the t raditional units of analysis of industrial economics: the firm and the sector. On the other hand, according to the value chain literature, firms from different sectors may all participate in the same value chain (Gereffi, 1994). Nevertheless, SMEs located in clusters and involved in value chains, may undertake a process of upgrading in order to increase and improve their participation in the global economy, especially as the industrial sector plays a role and affects the upgrading prospects of SMEs.The contribution this paper makes is by taking into account all of these dimensions together. Thus, within this general theoretical background, this study aims to investigate the hypothesis that enterprise upgrading is simultaneously affected by firm-specific efforts and actions, and by the environment in which firms operate. The latter is crucially shaped by three characteristics: (i) the collective efficiency of the cluster in which SMEs operate, (ii) the pattern of governance of the value chain in which SMEs participate, and (iii) the peculiar features that characterize learning and innovation patterns in specific sectors.The structure of the paper is the following: in Section 2, we briefly review theconcepts of clustering and value chains, and focus on their overlaps andcomplementarities. Section 3 first discusses the notion of SMEs’ upgrading and then2introduces a categorization of groups of sectors, based on the notions underlying the Pavitt taxonomy, and applied to the present economic reality of Latin America. Section 4reports the original empirical evidence on a large sample of Latin American clusters, and shows that the sectoral dimension matters to explain why clustering and participating in global value chains offer different opportunities for upgrading in different groups of sectors. Section5 summarizes and concludes.2. CLUSTERS AND VALUE CHAINSDuring the last two decades, the successful performance of industrial districts in the developed world, particularly in Italy, has stimulated new attention to the potential offered by this form of industrial organization for firms of developing countries. The capability of clustered firms to be economically viable and grow has attracted a great deal of interest in development studies. 1In developing countries, the sectoral and geographical concentration of SMEs is rather common, and a wide range of cases has since been reported. 2 Obviously, the existence of acritical mass of specialized and agglomerated activities, in a number of cases with historically strong roots, does not necessarily imply that these clusters share all the stylized facts which identify the Marshall type of district, as firstlydefined by Becattini (1987). 3 Nonetheless, clustering may be considered as a major facilitating factor for a number of subsequent developments (which may or may not occur): division and specialization of labor, the emergence of a wide network of suppliers, the appearance of agents who sell to distant national and internationalmarkets, the emergence of specialized producer services, the materialization of a poolof specialized and skilled workers, and the formation of business associations.To capture the positive impacts of these factors on the competitiveness of firms located in clusters, Schmitz (1995)introduced the concept of ‘‘collective efficiency’’(CE) defined as the competitive advantage derived from local external economies and joint action. The concept of external economies 4 was first introduced by Marshall in his Principles of Economics(1920). According to Schmitz (1999a), incidental external economies (EE) are of importance in explaining the competitiveness of industrial clusters, but there is also a deliberate force at work: consciously pursued joint action3(JA).Such joint action can be within vertical or horizontal linkages. 5The combination of both incidental external economies and the effects of active cooperation defines the degree of collective efficiency of a cluster and, dynamically,its potential for fostering SMEs’ upgrading. Both dimensions are crucial: Onlyincidental, passive external economies may not suffice without joint actions, and the latter hardly develop in the absence of external economies. Thus, our focus is on therole of intracluster vertical and horizontal relationships generating collectiveefficiency.However, recent changes in production systems, distribution channels and financial markets, accelerated by the globalization of product markets and the spread of information technologies, suggest that more attention needs to be paid to external linkages. 6 Gereffi’s global value chain approach (Gereffi, 1999) helps us to take into account activities taking place outside the cluster and, in particular, to understand the strategic role of the relationships with key external actors.From an analytical point of view, the value chain perspective is useful because (Kaplinsky,2001; Wood, 2001) the focus moves from manufacturing only to the other activities involved in the supply of goods and services, including distribution and marketing. All these activities contribute to add value. Moreover, the ability to identify the activities providing higher returns along the value chain is key to understanding the global appropriation of the returns to production. Value chain research focuses on the nature of the relationships among the various actors involved in the chain, and on their implications for development (Humphrey & Schmitz, 2002b). To study these relationships, the concept of ‘‘governance’’ is central to the analysis.At any point in the chain, some degree of governance or coordination is required in order to take deci sions not only on ‘‘what’’ should be, or ‘‘how’’ something shouldbe, produced but sometimes also ‘‘when,’’ ‘‘how much,’’ and even ‘‘at what price.’’ Coordination may occur through arm’s-length market relations or non marketrelationships. In the latter case, following Humphrey and Schmitz (2000), wedistinguish three possible types of governance:(a) network implying cooperation4between firms of more or less equal power which share their competencies within the chain; (b) quasi-hierarchy involving relationships between legally independent firms in which one is subordinated to the other, with a leader in the chain defining the rules to which the rest of the actors have to comply; and (c) hierarchy when a firm is owned by an external firm.Also stressed is the role played by GVC leaders, particularly by the buyers, in transferring knowledge along the chains. For small firms in less developed countries (LDCs), participation in value chains is a way to obtain information on the need and mode to gain access to global markets. Yet, although this information has high valuefor local SMEs, the role played by the leaders of GVCs in fostering and supportingthe SMEs’ upgrading process is less clear. Gereffi (1999), mainly focusing on East Asia, assumes a rather optimistic view, emphasizing the role of the leaders that almost automatically promote process, product, and functional upgrading among small local producers. Pietrobelli and Rabellotti (2004) present a more differentiated picture for Latin America.In line with the present approach,Humphrey and Schmitz (2000) discuss the prospects of upgrading with respect to the pattern of value chain governance. They conclude that insertion in a quasi-hierarchical chain offers very favorable conditions for process and product upgrading, but hinders functional upgrading. Networks offer ideal upgrading conditions, but they are the least likely to occur for developing country producers. In addition, a more dynamic approach suggests that chain governance is not given forever and may change because(Humphrey & Schmitz, 2002b): (a) power relationships may evolve when existing producers, or their spin offs, acquire new capabilities;(b) establishing and maintaining quasi-hierarchical governance is costly for the lead firm and leads to inflexibility because of transaction specific investments; and (c) firms and cluster soften do not operate only in one chain but simultaneously in several types of chains, and they may apply competencies learned in one chain to supply otherchains.In sum, both modes of organizing production, that is, the cluster and the value chain, offer interesting opportunities for the upgrading and modernization of local5firms, and are not mutually exclusive alternatives. However, in order to assess their potential contribution to local SMEs’ innovation and upgrading, we need to understand their organization of inter firm linkages and their internal governance. Furthermore, as we explain in the following section, the nature of their dominant specialization also plays a role and affects SMEs’ upgrading prospects.3. THE SECTORAL DIMENSION OFSMEs’ UPGRADING(a) The concept of upgradingThe concept of upgrading—making better products, making them more efficiently, or moving in to more skilled activities—has often been used in studies on competitiveness (Kaplinsky,2001; Porter, 1990), and is relevant here. Following this approach, upgrading is decisively related to innovation. Here we define upgrading as innovating to increase value added. 7 Enterprises achieve this in various ways, such as, for example, by entering higher unit value market niches ornew sectors, or by undertaking new productive (or service) functions. The concept of upgrading may be effectively described for enterprises working within a value chain, where four types of upgrading are singled out (Humphrey & Schmitz, 2000):—Process upgrading is transforming inputs into outputs more efficiently by reorganizing the production system or introducing superior technology (e.g., footwear producers in the Sinos Valley; Schmitz, 1999b).—Product upgrading is moving into more sophisticated product lines in terms of increased unit values (e.g., the apparel commodity chain in Asia upgrading from discount chains to department stores; Gereffi,1999).—Functional upgrading is acquiring new, superior functions in the chain, such as design or marketing or abandoning existing low-value added functions to focus on higher value added activities (e.g., Torreon’s blue jeans industry upgrading from maquila to ‘‘full-package’’ manufacturing; Bair&Gereffi, 2001).—Inter sectoral upgrading is applying the competence acquired in a particularfunction to move into a new sector. For instance, in Taiwan, competence in producing TVs was used to make monitors and then to move into the computer sector (Guerrieri & Pietrobelli,2004; Humphrey & Schmitz,2002b). In sum, upgrading within a value6chain implies going up on the value ladder, moving away from activities in which competitionis of the ‘‘low road’’ type and entry barriers are low.Our focus on upgrading requires moving a step forward and away from Ricardo’s static concept of ‘‘Comparative Advantage’’ (CA). While CA registers ex-post gaps in relative productivity which determine international trade flows, success in firmlevel upgrading enables the dynamic acquisition of competitiveness in new market niches, sectors or phases of the productive chain (Lall, 2001; Pietrobelli, 1997). In sum, the logic goes from innovation, to upgrading, to the acquisition of firm-level competitiveness(i.e., competitive advantage). 8In this paper, we argue that the concept of competitive advantage increasingly matters. In the theory of comparative advantage, what matters is relative productivity, determining different patterns of inter industry specialization. Within such atheoretical approach, with perfectly competitive markets, firms need to target only production efficiency. In fact, this is not enough, and competitive advantage is the relevant concept to analyze SMEs’ performance because of (i) the existence of formsof imperfect competition in domestic and international markets and (ii) the presenceof different degrees of (dynamic) externalities in different subsect or sand stages ofthe value chain.More specifically, in non perfectly competitive market rents and niches of ‘‘extra- normal’’ profits o ften emerge, and this explains the efforts to enter selectively specific segments rather than simply focusing on efficiency improvements, regardless of the prevailing productive specialization (as advocated by the theory of CA). Moreover, different stages in the value chain offer different scope for dynamic externalities. Thus, for example, in traditional manufacturing, the stages of design, productinnovation, marketing, and distribution may all foster competitiveness increases in related activities and sectors. The advantage of functional upgrading is in reducing thefragility and vulnerability of an enterprise’s productive specialization. Competition from new entrants—i.e., firms from developing countries with lower production costs, crowding out incumbents—is stronger in the manufacturing phases of the value chain than in other more knowledge and organization-intensive phases (e.g., product design7and innovation, chain management, distribution and retail, etc.).Therefore, functional upgrading may bring about more enduring and solid competitiveness.For all these reasons, the concept of production efficiency is encompassed withinthe broader concept of competitiveness, and the efforts to upgrade functionally and inter sectorally (and the policies to support these processes) are justified to reap larger rents and externalities emerging in specific stages of the value chain, market niches,or sectors.An additional element that crucially affects the upgrading prospects of firms and clusters is the sectoral dimension. Insofar as we have defined upgrading as innovating to increase value added, then all the factors influencing innovation acquire a new relevance. This dimension is often overlooked in studies on clusters, perhaps due to the fact that most of these studies are not comparative but rather detailed intra industry case studies.In order to take into account such a sectoral dimension, and the effect this may have on the firms’ pattern of innovation and l earning, we need to introduce the concept of ‘‘tacit knowledge.’’ This notion was first introduced by Polanyi(1967)and then discussed in the context of evolutionary economics by Nelson and Winter(1982). It refers to the evidence that some aspects of technological knowledge are well articulated, written down in manuals and papers, and taught. Others are largely tacit, mainly learned through practice and practical examples. In essence, this is knowledge which can be freely used by its owners, but that can not be easily expressed and communicated to anyone else.The tacit component of technological knowledge makes its transfer and application costly and difficult. As a result, the mastery of a technology may require anorganization to be active in the earlier stages of its development, and a close and continuous interaction between the user and the producer—or transfer—of suchknowledge. Inter firm relationships are especially needed in this context. Tacitknowledge is an essential dimension to define a useful grouping of economicactivities.(b) Sectoral specificities in upgrading and innovation: a classification for Latin8American countriesThe impact of collective efficiency and patterns of governance on the capacity of SMEs to upgrade may differ across sectors. This claim is based upon the consideration that sectoral groups differ in terms of technological complexity and in the modes and sources of innovation and upgrading. 9 As shown by innovation studies, in some sectors, vertical relations with suppliers of inputs may be particularly important sources of product and process upgrading (as in the case of textiles and the most traditional manufacturing), while in other sectors, technology users, organizations such as universities or the firms themselves (as, for example, with software or agro industrial products) may provide major stimuli for technical change (Pavitt,1984; Von Hippel, 1987).Consistently with this approach, the properties of firm knowledge bases across different sectors (Malerba & Orsenigo, 1993) 10 mayaffect the strategic relevance of collective efficiencyfor the processes of upgrading in clusters. Thus, for example, in traditional manufacturing sectors, technology has important tacit and idiosyncratic elements, and therefore, upgrading strongly depends on the intensity of technological externalities and cooperation among local actors (e.g., firms, research centers, and technology and quality diffusion centers), in other words, upgrading depends on the degree of collective efficiency. While in other groups (e.g., complex products or large natural resource-based firms) technology is more codified and the access to external sources of knowledge such as transnational corporations(TNCs, or researchlaboratories located in developed countries become more critical for upgrading. Furthermore, the differences across sectoral groups raise questions on the role of global buyers in fostering (or hindering) the upgrading in different clusters. Thus, for example, global buyers may be more involved and interested in their providers’upgrading if the technology required is mainly tacit and requires intense interaction.Moreover, in traditional manufacturing industries, characterized by a low degree of technological complexity, firms are likely to be included in GVCs even if they have very low technological capabilities. Therefore, tight supervision and direct support become necessary conditions for global buyers who rely on the competencies of their9local suppliers and want to reduce the risk of non compliance(Humphrey & Schmitz, 2002b). The situation is at the opposite extreme in the case of complex products, where technology is often thoroughly codified and the technological complexityrequires that firms have already internal technological capabilities to be subcontracted, otherwise large buyers would not contract them at all.In order to take into account the above-mentioned hypotheses, we develop asectoral classification, adapting existing taxonomies to the Latin American case. 11On the basis of Pavitt’s seminal work (1984), we consider that in Latin America, in- house R&D activities are very low both in domestic and foreign firms (Archibugi& Pietrobelli, 2003), domestic inter sectoral linkages have been displaced by tradeliberalization(Cimoli & Katz, 2002), and university-industry linkages appear to be still relatively weak (Arocena & Sutz, 2001). 12 Furthermore, in the past 10 years,Latin America has deepened its productive specialization in resource based sectors and has weakened its position in more engineering intensive industries (Katz,2001), reflecting its rich endowment of natural resources, relatively more than human and technical resources (Wood & Berge, 1997).Hence, we retain Pavitt’s key notions and identify four main sectoral groups for Latin America on the basis of the way learning and upgrading occur, and on the related industrial organization that most frequently prevails. 13The categories are as follows:1. Traditional manufacturing, mainly labor intensive and ‘‘traditional’’ technology industries such as textiles, footwear, tiles, and furniture;2. Natural resource-based sectors (NRbased),implying the direct exploitation of natural resources, for example, copper, marble, fruit, etc.;3. Complex products industries (COPs), including, among others, automobiles,autocomponents and aircraft industries, ICT and consumer electronics;4. Specialized suppliers, in our LA cases, essentially software.Each of these categories tends to havea predominant learning and innovating behavior, in terms of main sources of technical change, dependence on basic or applied research, modes of in-house innovation (e.g.,‘‘routinized’’ versus large R&D laboratories), tacitness or codified nature ofknowledge, scale and relevance of R&D activity, and appropriability of10innovation(Table 1).Traditional manufacturing and resource-based sectors are by far the most present in Latin America, and therefore especially relevant toour present aims of assessing SMEs’ potential for upgrading with in clusters and value chains. Traditional manufacturing is defined as supplier dominated, because major process innovations are introduced by producers of inputs (e.g., machinery, materials, etc.). Indeed, firm shave room to upgrade their products (and processes)by developing or imitating new products’ designs, often interacting with large buyers that increasinglyplay a role in shaping the design of final products and hence the specificities of the process of production (times, quality standards, and costs).Natural resource-based sectors crucially rely on the advancement of basicand applied science, which, due to low appropriability conditions, is most often undertaken by public research institutes, possibly in connectionwith producers (farmers, breeders, etc.). 14 In these sectors, applied research is mainly carried out by input suppliers (i.e., chemicals, machinery, etc.) which achieve economies of scale and appropriate the results of their research through patents.Complex products are defined as ‘‘high cost, engineering-intensive products, subsystems, or constructs supplied by a unit of production’’ (Hobday, 1998),15where the local network is normally anchored to one ‘‘assembler,’’ which operates asa leading firm characterized by high design and technological capabilities. To ouraims, the relationships of local suppliers with these ‘‘anchors’’ may be crucial tofoster (or hinder) firms’ upgrading through technology and skill transfers (or the l ackof them).Scale-intensive firms typically lead complex product sectors (Bell & Pavitt, 1993), where the process of technical change is realized within an architectural set (Henderson & Clark, 1990), and it is often incremental and modular.Among the Specialized Suppliers, we only consider software, which is typicallyclient driven. This is an especially promising sector for developing countries’ SMEs,due to the low transport and physical capital costs and the high information intensityof the sector, which moderates the importance of proximity to final markets and extends the scope for a deeper international division of labor. Moreover, the11disintegration of some productive cycles, such as for example of telecommunications, opens up new market niches with low entry barriers(Torrisi, 2003). However, at the same time, the proximity of the market and of clients may crucially improve the development of design capabilities and thereby foster product/process up grading. Thus, powerful pressures for cluste ring and globalization coexist in this sector.The different learning patterns across these four groups of activities are expected to affect the process of upgrading of clusters in value chains. This paper also aims at analyzing with original empirical evidence whether—and how—the sectoral dimension influences this process in Latin America.4. METHODOLOGY: COLLECTIONAND ANALYSIS OF DATAThis study is based on the collection of original data from 12 clusters in Latin America that have not hitherto been investigated, and on an extensive review of cluster studies available. The empirical analysis was carried out from September 2002 to June 2003 with the support of the Inter American Development Bank. An international team of 12 experts in Italy and in four LA countries collected and reviewed the empirical data.Desk and field studies were undertaken following the same methodology, which involved field interviews with local firms, institutions, and observers, interviews with foreign buyers and TNCs involved in the local cluster, and secondary sources such as publications and reports.16 Case studies were selected which fulfilled the following conditions: (1) agglomeration: all cases show some degree of geographical SME clustering; 17 (2) upgrading: the clusters selected have experienced some degree of upgrading, of whatever nature (i.e., product, process, functional, inter sectoral); and (3) policy lessons: all cases offer relevant policy lessons for future experiences either in terms of successesor failures.A total of 40 case studies were selected forth is analysis. 18 The list of cases, albeit incomplete, is—to our knowledge—the largest available on which comparative exercises have been carried out, and provides a good approximation to the reality of clusters and value chains in LA. Thus, although it cannot claim to correspond to the。

经济管理类英文文章1000字

经济管理类英文文章1000字Macroeconomics is a sub-field of economics that examines the behavior of the economy as a whole, once all of the individual economic decisions of companies and industries have been summed. Economy-wide phenomena considered by macroeconomics include Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and how it is affected by changes in unemployment, national income, rate of growth, and price levels.In contrast, microeconomics is the study of the economic behaviour and decision-making of individual consumers, firms, and industries.Macroeconomics can be used to analyze how to influence government policy goals such as economic growth, price stability, full employment and the attainment of a sustainable balance of payments.Macroeconomics is sometimes used to refer to a general approach to economic reasoning, which includes long term strategies and rational expectations in aggregate behavior.Until the 1930s most economic analysis did not separate out individual economics behavior from aggregate behavior. With the Great Depression of the 1930s, suffered throughout thedeveloped world at the time, and the development of the concept of national income and product statistics, the field of macroeconomics began to expand. Particularly influential were the ideas of John Maynard Keynes, who formulated theories to try to explain the Great Depression. Before that time, comprehensive national accounts, as we know them today, did not exist .One of the challenges of economics has been a struggle to reconcile macroeconomic and microeconomic models. Starting in the 1950s, macroeconomists developed micro-based models of macroeconomic behavior (such as the consumption function). Dutch economist Jan Tinbergen developed the first comprehensive national macroeconomic model, which he first built for the Netherlands and later applied to the United States and the United Kingdom after World War II. The first global macroeconomic model, Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates LINK project, was initiated by Lawrence Klein and was mentioned in his citation for the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 1980.Theorists such as Robert Lucas Jr suggested (in the 1970s) that at least some traditional Keynesian (after British economist John Maynard Keynes) macroeconomic models werequestionable as they were not derived from assumptions about individual behavior, although it was not clear whether the failures were in microeconomic assumptions or in macroeconomic models. However, New Keynesian macroeconomics has generally presented microeconomic models to shore up their macroeconomic theorizing, and some Keynesians have contested the idea that microeconomic foundations are essential, if the model is analytically useful. An analogy might be that the fact that quantum phisics is not fully consistent with relativity theory doesn´t mean that realtivity is false. Many important microeconomic assumptions have never been proved, and some have proved wrong.The various schools of thought are not always in direct competition with one another - even though they sometimes reach differing conclusions. Macroeconomics is an ever evolving area of research. The goal of economic research is not to be "right," but rather to be accurate. It is likely that none of the current schools of economic thought perfectly capture the workings of the economy. They do, however, each contribute a small piece of the overall puzzle. As one learns more about each school of thought, it is possible to combine aspects of each in order to reach an informed synthesis.The traditional distinction is between two different approaches to economics: Keynesian economics, focusing on demand; and supply-side (or neo-classical) economics, focusing on supply. Neither view is typically endorsed to the complete exclusion of the other, but most schools do tend clearly to emphasize one or the other as a theoretical foundation.• Keynesian economics focuses on aggregate demand to explain levels of unemployment and the business cycle. That is, business cycle fluctuations should be reduced through fiscal policy (the government spends more or less depending on the situation) and monetary policy. Early Keynesian macroeconomics was "activist," calling for regular use of policy to stabilize the capitalist economy, while some Keynesians called for the use of incomes policies.• Supply-side economics delineates quite clearly the roles of monetary policy and fiscal policy. The focus for monetary policy should be purely on the price of money as determined by the supply of money and the demand for money. It advocates a monetary policy that directly targets the value of money and does not target interest rates at all. Typically the value of money is measured by reference to gold or some other reference. The focus of fiscal policy is to raise revenue for worthygovernment investments with a clear recognition of the impact that taxation has on domestic trade. It places heavy emphasis on Say's law, which states that recessions do not occur because of failure in demand or lack of money.• Monetarism, led by Milton Friedman, which holds that inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon. It rejects fiscal policy because it leads to "crowding out" of the private sector. Further, it does not wish to combat inflation or deflation by means of active demand management as in Keynesian economics, but by means of monetary policy rules, such as keeping the rate of growth of the money supply constant over time.• New Keynesian economics, which developed partly in response to new classical economics, strives to provide microeconomic foundations to Keynesian economics by showing how imperfect markets can justify demand management.• Austrian economics is a laissez-faire school of macroeconomics. It focuses on the business cycle that arises from government or central-bank interference that leads to deviations from the natural rate of interest.• Post-Keynesian economics represents a dissent from mainstream Keynesian economics, emphasizing the role of uncertainty and the historical process in macroeconomics.• New classical economics. The original theoretical impetus was the charge that Keynesian economics lacks microeconomic foundations -- i.e. its assertions are not founded in basic economic theory. This school emerged during the 1970s. This school asserts that it does not make sense to claim that the economy at any time might be"out-of-equilibrium". Fluctuations in aggregate variables follow from the individuals in the society continuouslyre-optimizing as new information on the state of the world is revealed. Later yielded an explicit school which argued that macro-economics does not have micro-economic foundations, but is instead the tool of studying economic systems at equilibrium.。

1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。

（外文文献翻译部分）文献题目： Economy Hotel Development Trends in Mainland China经济型酒店在中国的发展趋势姓名:学号:专业:学院:指导教师:经济型酒店在中国内地的发展趋势中国内地经济需求的酒店中国已成为亚洲重要的旅游目的地，在世界上（在国际游客的人数来衡量）第五大旅游国。

[1]外国游客流入旁边的国内游客，其人数在2006年已高达14亿美元。

2006年，仅仅是国内旅游就已经达到781.90亿美元，其收接近2000年的2.5倍。

我国工人的个人收入稳步增长为休闲旅游与中国旅游业发展提供了有力的资源资源。

时间是另一个重要资源，随着1900年提出的假日长假期计划后，1995年提出的每周五天的工作计划，使游客的能有更多的休息时间可以远行旅游，在酒店度过。

国际旅游业的发展，中国已随着国家的经济发展有了显著的增加，而且越来越明显。

中国的经济充满活力，其国内生产总值， 2006美元10210000000000在[2]也刺激了更多的业务（以下简称“商业”）的旅行。

新的和改善的基础设施--公路，铁路，航空公司，更名副其实为旅费增加，政府和对中国经济继续成为可能由社会科学（中国社会科学院）旅游研究中心中国科学院进行的一项研究显示，经济型酒店的客人有90%是国内游客和10％的访港旅客。

这项研究还报告说，商务旅客的需求为经济型酒店的主要发电机，约占2006年经济型酒店市场的65%。

会议和组队伍组成的9％，并且产生休闲需求，其余26％。

资料来源：2007年中国经济研究中心酒店由中国社会科学院旅游发展报告商业及休闲旅客的数量加倍是在中国大规模经济酒店发展的首要原因。

经济型酒店，如我们这里所定义的，和中国大多数情况下，它能够与高档酒店竞争的基础：干净舒适的客房，免费早餐和上网。

在经济与豪华酒店的的相比较之下，它有更多的价格优势，可以吸引更多的中外游客入住。

较低的资本和高投资回报是另一个重要的经济型酒店发展的原因。

据中国内地经济型酒店调查，在2006年的经济型酒店的平均资本投资约为100万美元（约7,500美元间客房），也就是说充分的回报，在约三至五年就可以收回所有的投入。

2006年，其每平方米营业收入利润总额为44.47％，绩效衡量的平均入住率和盈利水平的驱动这方面：由德勤开发有限责任公司2004年的一个报告显示，“超过50％的中国市场监测高于亚太地区总的，和每一个中国市场外执行欧洲平均水平。

“ [3]第三个支持中国的经济型酒店业的崛起来自我国政府。

通过放宽旅行限制，并提供延长休假时间，政府已帮助挑起对中国酒店业的顾客转换。

对中国教育改革的假期和休假的政策，于2007年11月颁布，1008年1月1日起开始执行。

这些改革大大提升休假时间，如清明节传统的农历节日，端午节，和中秋节。

由于旅游业的蓬勃发展预期，政府最近发起了一系列政策，直接支持全国的经济型酒店的发展。

特许经营是一个重要的发展模式。

在报告时上述德勤，品牌酒店占大约10％的库存在中国，2005年上升到30%，到2006年仍然保持着31%的态势。

[4]一向题为“中国商业特许经营条例的“的立法在2007年5月1日起开始实行。

这项新法律将规范特许经营在中国的许多活动。

此外，经济酒店经营准则即将出版，目前中国的行业准则第一套规范，并帮助规范经济型酒店的服务。

经济型酒店市场概况中国首个经济型酒店，锦江酒店，于1997年在上海成立。

自那时以来，经济型酒店已在全国各地纷纷崛起。

在此后的三年里发生了戏剧性的传播速度，从2004年的166家，到2007年12月就已上升到了1698家[5]下面的图表显示了上升的速度：入住率从2005年的82.4％，到2006年实现89.0％，[6]入住率一直高于80％，证明了市场力量的。

但需要注意的是，其发展却伴随着酒店不合理现象（在许多情况下，经济型酒店对服务和设施不符合标准）;经济型酒店轴承强大的品牌和服务为主导的市场信誉在入住率。

我们可以听到这样一个优胜劣汰“情景”生存的预兆：对资源的竞争（即客人），当新的供应者进入市场后会更加激烈，导致的恶略后果是无法适应残酷的市场。

因此，180像雅高酒店这样的品牌计划2010年在中国的采取一星级宜必思的运行方式。

[7]宜必思酒店提供全日24小时接待和服务，自助早餐，及其他已经提高了经济型酒店的酒吧，并寻找更多能适应挑剔的中国旅客的设施。

中国的经济型酒店大多坐落在上海，北京和江苏省。

中国国内的经济连锁酒店，如家快捷酒店，锦江饭店，和莫泰168，得到了迅速发展，结合外国经济型酒店，如速8和格林豪泰酒店品牌。

下表列出了中国十大经济型酒店在2006年组：领先的酒店集团在2006年经济[8]顶竞争者外国品牌的崛起的同事，中国的国内品牌国内经济型酒店市场的主导地位，其中的两大品牌--锦江之星旅馆和家庭旅店，显示了强大的市场地位和发展趋势。

锦江之星主场迎战如家锦江之星酒店管理公司锦江酒店是上海锦江国际酒店（集团）有限公司（“附属公司锦江酒店”），中国最大的酒店集团。

从公司的产品范围从经济型酒店到五星级酒店。

酒店杂志上，锦江酒店被评为2005年世界酒店的房间条件的总数的第22位。

[9]据报道，2006年，12月31日，锦江之星旅馆整体入住率74％，平均值为24.33万美元[10]该公司2007年中期报告称230经济型酒店的建议或行动以及营收35.02万美元（RMB279.2万美元）。

12月15日，2006年，锦江酒店首次在香港证券交易所公开发行就达24亿美元。

该公司计划利用这笔资金，在上海以外的地方增加大量的二级到五星级酒店。

并为2008年北京奥运会和2010年世博会的到来做好更新设备的准备。

如家快捷酒店管理公司如家快捷酒店管理公司，总部设在上海，从2002年成立开始就在全国范围内大幅度地夸张经济型酒店的网络。

截至2007年10月1日，如家连锁酒店已高达200个分支。

[11]10月26日，2006年，如家宣布在纳斯达克首次公开发行790.0万美国存托股份（美国存托凭证美国每13.80美元）分全球市场，成为如家酒店在中国大陆首家在纳斯达克上市的公司。

在2007年10月，如家以4 560万美元（RMB340万元）的交易成功收购了美国热门星。

上星，成立于2005年，一个在国内商业和休闲旅行者中非常流行的中国经济型酒店品牌，在全国18个城市的26家经济型酒店中拥有约4200间客房。

此外，这些特性允许如家，以进一步扩大其投资组合，在全国80多个城市拥有超过320酒店，并利用如家和Top Star双方的客户基础。

如家计划继续扩大和增加，在未来3至5年的的时间将其物业数目达到1000家。

速8酒店（中国）有限公司速8，是中国经营温德姆集团与天瑞酒店投资公司的许可协议下的一家酒店， 2004年6月开业在北京王府井成立第一家分店，是最早进入市场的对外经济连锁酒店。

该品牌已经扩展，如北京至一线城市，重庆，广州，上海，以及二线城市，如大连，辽宁，四川成都，杭州，哈尔滨，黑龙江，厦门和福建。

速8中国计划继续扩大到小城市和主要公路的位置。

截至2007年2月，速8在有110家在全国的58个城市开业。

速8作为外国经济型酒店品牌有着5方面的的优势。

包括适度的价格，高标准，并建立了品牌声誉。

速8的目标客户是那些注重价值和良好的质量和服务的国际水平的中产阶层的商务和休闲旅客。

尽管在地区差异，如房间大小和停车场空间有着较大的差别，谁速8在中国仍然保持着其在北美的国际标准。

2007年8月27日，温德姆酒店集团宣布，阿埃托斯资本唱片致力于向美国投资高达5000万美元的超级8中国的母公司--天瑞酒店投资公司，以加速其酒店发展。

其现在目标是到2008年奥运会时在全国达到的300家速8品牌间。

其他品牌对外经济，如戴斯酒店（温）品牌，宜必思（雅）和快捷假日酒店（洲际）也存在中国大陆。

外商与国内的连锁酒店的优势是最具竞争力的管理经验和技术。

这尤其适用于中央预订系统由外国酒店提供的，这有助于宣传和简化进入国际游客的酒店。

与此同时，国内经济连锁酒店取代本地业务的知识优势，并正在取得进展的适应国外的连锁酒店的经营模式。

经济型酒店的发展趋势，融资和管理目前，经济型酒店代表在中国的整体酒店业来讲只占了10%左右的份额，但它具有很大的市场潜力。

休闲需求和商业部门预计将增加与中国的经济持续发展和法律法规，将积极地影响旅行。

据中国社会科学院旅游研究中心一向调查表明，2008年北京奥运会和2010年上海世博会为经济型酒店发展提供的驱动力大无比。

政府也支持这一发展，以满足游客巨大的住宿需求。

经济型酒店在中国最密集的东部，北部和南部地区如雨后春笋般崛起。

2006年，46％的经济型酒店主要分布在中国东部，中国北部19％，16％在中国南部。

最快的增长一直在一线城市如上海和北京郊区，如成都，重庆，如上海浦东新区和天津高新技术产业园区商务中心，作为旅游目的地的二线城市，例如三亚和青岛。

新的竞争热点将出现在区域市场，例如中国中部地区。

此外，空置的土地为新的经济型酒店发展的肥沃土壤，而且许多都是从现有的酒店，与现代化的住宿日期转换的时机已经成熟。

兼并和收购将成为未来大规模发展的趋势。

这一趋势始于顶之星上述2007年10月的收购竞争对手的行动。

预测，许多小规模的品牌和酒店业很可能是由大品牌归入独立性质的命运。

资本运营已成为品牌在中国的酒店业竞争的最重要手段。

在当前的市场环境下，经济型酒店是通过各种渠道从事对外融资。

2006年10月，如家成为第一个在纳斯达克上市的中国酒店，上海锦江国际酒店管理有限公司在香港联合交易所上市。

广州的连锁酒店7天连锁酒店获得了美国在2006年10月1000万美元的投资从华平，上海汽车旅馆管理，经营莫泰168，获得了美国在2007年初2000万美元来自摩根士丹利的投资。

各类投资者，包括国内酒店老元老，国外著名品牌，和风险投资基金，都汇聚在中国酒店市场的高利润（约达20％的承诺）和相对快速的回报。

酒店房地产投资信托（REITs）代表资本投资的另一个途径，富豪产业信托在香港初次公开发行于2007年3月20日率先推出。

酒店房地产投资信托基金仍然是中国大陆新兴的，但考虑到住宿业的快速增长，酒店房地产投资信托基金的运作是一个方向，市场可能头部，尤其是关于经济型酒店的发展和交易。

经济型酒店业务不断演变，以保持竞争，促使经济型酒店提供一致的产品，优质的服务，有竞争力的价格，方便的预订系统，高效的电流检测，否则就可能被淘汰。

特许经营的发展提出了许多强制性的标准和服务。

不断发展的经济性能标准要求有策划经验丰富的管理酒店的经营能力。

不断上升的经营成本也促使连锁酒店，寻找有经验的管理团队。

2006年， 86％的中国经济型酒店租赁经营与地面，使地面租赁费增加了3至5倍，在中国的上海和北京的40％左右。