北京典型行业微区位选址比较研究——以北京企业管理服务业和汽车制造业为例

以微观企业数据为基础,采用核密度空间平滑和条件逻辑选择模型等方法,重点关注企业在城市内部微观尺度下的区位选择,并对北京典型现代服务业和制造业区位选择的差异进行对比分析。结果表明：① 北京中小型制造企业倾向于在集聚区分布,符合马歇尔式产业集群的特征,而服务业则是大型企业更倾向于集中布局;② 尽管微观尺度下多样化和上下游产业链对现代服务业和制造业依然有重要影响,但是与宏观尺度下不同的是对于现代服务业来说过度多样化并不利于其发展,对于制造业来说区域专业化劳动力规模而非专业化程度更为重要;③ 政府对地铁等公共设施布局选址将对现代服务业的微观区位产生重要影响。

Comparative study on micro-scale location choice of typical industries: The case study of management service and automobile manufacturing in Beijing

Industrial location has attracted much attention since classical location theories were built, but most of literature focused on location choice at macro scale. However, micro-scale location choice became a troublesome problem due to the reduction of land and the increase of land price. The research employed a unique micro-firm dataset to identify industrial agglomeration areas of service and manufacturing industries in Beijing and then uncovered factors which have impact on micro-scale location choice within urban areas. Importantly, the result further showed difference of location choice between two typical economic sectors--management service and automobile manufacturing in Beijing. The findings are obtained as follows: (1) 102 service and 130 manufacturing agglomeration areas were identified by firm and employment densities. Firms within these two kinds of agglomeration areas accounted for 72.66% and 44% in service and manufacturing industries respectively. Generally, most of large service firms had concentrated into those service clusters, while large manufacturing enterprises used to be located otherwise. Compared with large firms, small and medium-sized manufacturing firms were more inclined to distribute in agglomeration areas. (2) Although the results showed that urbanization economies had significant effect on location choice of both modern service (representing by management service) and manufacturing industry (representing by automobile manufacturing), the influence mechanisms are completely different. The former prefers a diversified local labor market and relatively diversified industrial environment, while the latter needs a complete industry supplying chain. It is only because the automobile industry has a diverse and comprehensive range of auto parts, it seems that automobile manufacturing firms prefer diversified environment. Naturally, upstream and downstream industry chains and specialized labors are key factors for location choice of automobile firms. Even for the service industry, it is not the more diversified the better at the micro scale. (3) Different from existing literature, the results showed that industrial policies had more influence on service than manufacturing industry. It is partly because one of important factors for location of management service is public infrastructure such as subway, on which local governments have enough impact; and partly because, automobile, as an advanced manufacturing industry, is not among the negative list of manufacturing. Besides, enterprise property has significant influence on location choice of both industries.