关联视角下兰州市生产性服务业与制造业空间分布及区位选择比较

基于微观企业数据从关联性视角对兰州市生产性服务业与制造业空间分布特征和模式进行分析,进而探讨其区位选择因素的异同。研究表明：① 生产性服务业与制造业的空间布局均呈现出以主城区为主体、外围局部地区为补充的“中心-外围”空间格局,但生产性服务业集聚区主要集中在河谷地带的主城区,制造业集聚区则呈现出明显的郊区化趋势,二者在空间上存在关联的同时又具有一定的可分性。② 生产性服务业形成了以城市中心区和郊区国家级新区及卫星城镇为多元空间载体的“紧凑型-中心性”模式,制造业则形成了以国家级新区和产业园区为空间载体的“离散型-郊区化”模式。③ 生产性服务业与制造业企业的区位选择需在产业环境、要素禀赋以及政策导向方面进行权衡,生产性服务业企业较为关注区域整体发展氛围,制造业企业则更注重自然因素、区位历史和产业政策的影响。④ 传统型生产性服务业企业区位选择受到地方化经济、区位资源禀赋的影响最为显著,现代型和高端型生产性服务业企业则更容易受到政策的导引从而形成空间集聚;劳动密集型制造业企业主要依附在劳动力资源较为丰富且交通便利的地区,资本密集型制造业企业倾向于具有产业政策优势及土地成本优势的开发区和新区布局,技术密集型制造业企业受成本要素的制约较小且更加注重集聚经济的外部效用。

Comparison of the spatial distribution and location selection of producer services and manufacturing in Lanzhou from the perspective of relevance

In this study, the spatial distribution and patterns associated with the producer services and manufacturing in Lanzhou were examined based on the microbusiness data from the perspective of relevance. Subsequently, the differences were discussed in terms of the factors that affect the selection of location. The findings are as follows. The spatial distribution of the producer services and manufacturing exhibits a ‘downtown periphery’ pattern; the former is concentrated in the downtown valley, whereas the latter is concentrated in the suburban areas. They are spatially connected yet separated. The factors that affect the location selection of the producer services and manufacturing sub-sectors conform to the overall characteristics of the two types of industries, but there are also certain differences between industries. The producer services distributed in the downtown area, national new districts in the suburban area and satellite towns indicate a ‘compact downtown’ pattern, whereas the manufacturing distributed in the national new districts and industrial parks exhibits a ‘discrete suburb’ pattern. The locations of the enterprises in the producer services and manufacturing are decided by weighing the industrial environment and investment factors. The companies that provide producer services have a stronger preference for spatial agglomeration than the companies in the manufacturing. They attach greater importance to the economic benefits generated owing to economic conglomeration. In contrast, manufacturing enterprises focus more on the terrain conditions, resources, suburban space distribution and favourable policies for development zones as well as new national districts. Generally, the producer service providers focus more on the overall development of the region, whereas the manufacturers place high value on industrial policies and infrastructural facilities. The factors that affect the locations of the companies in the producer services and manufacturing are dependent on the general features of these industries. Within the producer services, traditional enterprises are more subject to the local economy and resources when selecting locations. However, modern and high-end enterprises focus more on local economic conditions and policies. In the manufacturing industry, the labour-intensive businesses prefer locations with favourable geographical conditions, abundant labour resources and convenient transportation conditions, the capital-intensive enterprises that enjoy favourable industrial policies prefer the development zones and new districts and the technology-intensive enterprises value the agglomeration effects and an innovative environment because they are less constrained by costs.