由於大陸大力發展鋼鐵業，造成產能過剩，加上兩岸經濟架構協議(ECFA)簽定降低部分不鏽鋼鋼材進口至零關稅，大陸不鏽鋼產品趁此利用低價外銷台灣。本研究希望透過深度訪談及個案研究，從台灣不鏽鋼業者角度來看政府在規劃及推動兩岸經貿政策時，實際對業者的影響，並且找出創新的兩岸營運佈局策略。
本研究依鑽石模型，歸納出不鏽鋼業者面對ECFA及貨貿協議之主要挑戰為：基層生產力員工短缺、中國的不鏽鋼市場飽和，業者都在進行削價競爭。而且原物料成本對不鏽鋼業影響很大，尤其是鎳價。現在原物料的價格還是處於低點狀態，代表不鏽鋼市場景氣也不好，所以業者有減產的現象。業者認為ECFA及貨貿實施後，短期對台灣不鏽鋼業應該是威脅，但長期來看，應該是有幫助的，畢竟大陸的市場很大，尤其是一些國家政策。
另外，以全球的角度來看，目前各國之間用關稅壁壘和貿易措施去管控，所以歐洲、美國不鏽鋼的價格相較於其他各國，削價競爭的現象沒有那麼嚴重。未來，貨貿協議開放後，兩岸會變成完全競爭市場，在成本上的競爭也必定將會更激烈；不過，業者相信，也會存在許多對高品質產品的需求。可是業者並不容易採取差異化的策略，除非特殊鋼種煉製技術在產業間慢慢普及。業者可以考慮的是朝向U型的微笑曲線右端去發展通路。目前台灣政府對產業的發展仍有過多干預，相關法令規範也沒有一套執法標準。
未來不鏽鋼業者主要策略包括：透過工廠自動化來解決基層人力缺工的問題，並將焦點轉向技術跟品質的提昇、多樣性及客製化生產、完善客戶服務、交期控制準確，還有特定規範規格生產，盡可能將原物料價格的威脅減到最低。此外，實施貨貿協議後，業者期待以更便宜的價格取得原物料，這樣子以品質換來的附加價值會更高，現在大陸的品質很差，但是他們也承認，如果當中國大陸開始重視品質時，他們的進步也會相當的快速，台灣的不鏽鋼業者必須要提早在他們起跑前先起跑，取得先驅者優勢。台灣的不鏽鋼業者若能在成本、品質、交期、服務等條件持續增強，則開放並不是威脅，反而可以增加銷售。
除了中國，業者也考慮新興國家的新市場策略。最後，關於政府角色部份，企業如果有政府做為強力的支持及後盾，在國際發展上將有更大的競爭力。相關法令規範也應該要有一套執法標準，否則會讓守法的中小企業無所適從。另外，政府也可以多舉辦一些國際展覽，或是協助業者至國外參展，開發更多商機。
本研究採取個案研究的方式，以台灣不鏽鋼產業為範圍，並以個案研究方式，針對當前產業發展態勢、ECFA及貨貿協議實施後之兩岸不鏽鋼企業可能之競爭合作策略進行專家訪談及研究，並依研究發現提出結論；本研究屬於質性的個案研究，對於其他產業鏈上的企業或其他產業並不能一體適用。後續研究者可透過整合多種產業或企業的想法及策略目標進行研究，以獲得更全面性的結論。
本研究訪談對象僅針對台灣不鏽鋼業進行訪談，因個人立場情境不同，無法排除其主觀意識的表達，建議後續研究者在研究方法上可搭配不同的工具，例如觀察法、問卷調查等方法，強化研究之信效度。
關鍵字：ECFA、貨貿協議、不鏽鋼業、FTA、鑽石模型

The Impacts of Cross-straits Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) on Taiwan’s stainless steel industry and Their Coping Strategies
OU,SHAO-XUAN
LI,DE-JIANG
Advanced Master Business Administration College of Management
SUMMARY
This study hopes to stand on the point of Taiwanese stainless steel business to explore the actual impacts on this industry as our government planning and promoting ECFA, and then, to find the innovative developing strategy for business operating on both sides by in-depth interviews and case study.
The major challenges are: the shortage of operational workers, the saturation of China's stainless steel market leads price competition. The interviees believe that ECFA and Agreement on Trade in Goods will bring Taiwanese stainless steel industry threats in the short-term. However, in the long term, it should be helpful. Because China market is huge, especially there are important national policies to support this industry. In addition, though the cost competition will be more intense in the future, but there also exists demands for high quality products. Taiwanese government still has too much intervention on the industry, and relevant laws and norms do not set standards of enforcement.
The mail strategies include: factory automation, turn the focus to technology and quality upgrade, diversity and customized production, customer service improvment, accurate delivery control, and certain specifications production. The companies hope to lower the threats from raw material price to minimum as much as possible. Besieds China, the companies can also consider new market strategy of emerging countries. Finally, if they have government support in international development, they will have greater competitive edges.

Key words: ECFA, Cross-Strait Agreement on Trade in Goods, stainless steel industry, FTA, dimond model

 
INTRODUCTION
Because the mainland China actively developed steel industry, it results in excess capacity. In addition, due to the signing of Cross-strait Economic Framework Agreement (ECFA) which allows the import tariffs of part of stainless steel decreasing to zero, the Chinese stainless steel products took the advantage of low-cost to export to Taiwan. This study hopes to stand on the point of Taiwanese stainless steel business to explore the actual impacts on this industry as our government planning and promoting cross-strait economic and trade policies, and then, to find the innovative developing strategy for business operating on both sides by in-depth interviews and case study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This research takes the method of case study and the scope covers Taiwanese stainless industry. We aim at current industrial development situation, trends, and the coopetition strategies the two-sides enterprises may take after the implementation of Cross-strait ECFA and Agreement on Trade in Goods by the expert interview, and finally propose conclusions and practical suggestions according to findings. This study belongs to qualitative case study. We use Poter’s Dimond model structure to design the interview questions outline and analyze the transcripts of interview.
Therefore, it may not be suitable for the businesses on other section of stainless steel industry chain or other industries. Following researchers can study through the integration of a variety of industries or business’s strategic objectives in order to obtain a more comprehensive conclusion.
Because of different personal standpoint and situation, this research may not totally exclude researcher’s subjective consciousness expression. We recommend the following researchers can adopt different research methods with different tools, such as observations, surveys and so on to strengthen research reliability and validity.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
According to Diamond Model, this study summed up the major challenges of stainless steel industry as facing ECFA and Agreement on Trade in Goods are: the shortage of operational workders, the saturation of China's stainless steel market makes companies carry out price competition. In addition, the cost of raw materials has significant impact on the stainless steel industry, particularly the nickel price. Currently, the price of raw materials is still at a low state, this reflects the bad stainless steel market status, and companies are dropping in production. The companies we interviewed believe that after the implementation of ECFA and Agreement on Trade in Goods, it will bring Taiwanese stainless steel industry threats in the short-term. However, in the long term, it should be helpful. After all, the market of mainland China is huge, especially there are important national policies to support this industry.
Besides, if we view the industry from global perspective, all countries currently control their stainless steel markets by tariff and trade measures. This is also the reason that the phenomenon of stainless steel price competition is not so serious in Europe and the US compared to other countries.
In the future, after the opening of Cross-strait Agreement on Trade in Goods, though the two sides will also become a fully competitive market, and the cost competition will be more intense, but they believe there also exists many demands for high quality products. The stainless steel companies are not easy to adopt differential strategies, unless the refining technology of special steel gradually spreads in the industry. The players can consider towards the right hand side of U-shaped smile curve to develop their channels. Now, the Taiwanese government still has too much intervention on the development of the industry, and relevant laws and norms do not set standards of enforcement.
The mail strategies of stainless steel industry include: factory automation, turn the focus to technology and quality upgrade, diversity and customized production, customer service improvment, accurate delivery control, and certain specifications production. By these ways, they hope to lower the threats from raw material price to minimum as much as possible. In addition, after the implementation of the goods trade agreement, the business expect to get cheaper prices of raw materials so the added value of quality will be higher. Now, the products from Mainland China still have poor quality, but the interviewees also acknowledged that if they start to pay attention to quality, their progress will be quite rapid. Taiwanese stainless steel industry must first start early before they wake up, so that we may probably get pioneer first-mover advantage. If Taiwanese stainless steel industry can continue to improve in terms of cost, quality, delivery, service and other competitive conditions, the opening will not be threat but increase sales.
Besieds China, the companies can also think about new marketing strategy of emerging countries. Finally, regarding the role of government, if the enterprises have strong government support and back-up in international development, they will have greater competitive edges. Relevant laws and norms should also have a set of enforcement standards; otherwise, it will make law-abiding small and medium enterprises at a loss. In addition, the government can hold more international exhibitions, or help the stainless steel companies to attend foreign exhibitors to explore more business opportunities.
CONCLUSION
ECFA indeed has an impact on both sides of many industries and the development of corporates strategies, the stainless steel industry is no exception. Since ECFA will reduce some stainless steel import tariffs to zero, the imports from China will increase. The main consideration of downstream of this industry becomes cost factor, while the product quality of upstream in China, Korea has been close to Taiwanese companies. The main purpose of this study is to examine the impacts of cross-strait ECFA on Taiwan stainless steel industry and propose the business strategy for the stainless steel industry such as: factory automation, turn the focus to technology and quality upgrade, diversity and customized production, customer service improvment, accurate delivery control, and certain specifications production. The companies hope to lower the threats from raw material price to minimum as much as possible. Besieds China, the companies can also consider new market strategy of emerging countries. Finally, if they have government support in international development, they will have greater competitive edges.

一、中文部份：
1.吳芝儀、李奉儒(1998), 質的評鑑與研究, 台北:桂冠。
2.王鳳生(2010), “高雄市產業網絡建構與區域競爭力之研究”, 中華亞太經濟與管理學會。
3.呂長民(2001), 行銷研究－研究方法與實例應用, 台北:前程企業管理有限公司。
4.李辰晨(2013), “ ECFA下兩岸銀行業交流與合作研究”, 國立交通大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
5.李宜靜(2014), “自由貿易協定的成效-以韓國為例”, 經濟前膽,第151期。
6.李明軒、邱如美(1996), 國家競爭優勢(上)、(下) (Michael E. Porter, 1990), 台北市：天下文化出版(股)公司。
7.李美華(1998), 社會科學研究方法,台北,時英出版社。
8.李健安(2008) , “臺灣不鏽鋼產業競爭力分析”, 淡江大學國際貿易學系國際企業學碩士在職專班碩士論文。
9.林可凡、胡太山、解鴻年、賈秉靜(2012), “地方產業群聚之演化–以新竹地區為例”, 建築與規劃學報, 第13卷第1期, 第45-74頁。
10.林雅廸、張世其、虞孝成(2010), “結合決策試驗與實驗評估法及鑽石模型探討台灣發展電子設計自動化產業之關鍵成功因素”, 中華管理學報,第11卷第03期, 第67 – 91頁。
11.林錦煌(2008), 產業分析-競合與策略, 台中：滄海。
12.金家禾、周志龍(2007), “臺灣產業群聚區域差異及中國效應衝擊”, 地理學報, 第49期, 第55-79頁。
13.張翔一(2014.4), “ECFA早收 三年成績大解密”, 天下雜誌,第546期。
14.許茵爾(2014), “對台灣影響重大之五大自由貿易協定進展”, 經濟前膽,第154期。
15.許瑞翔、許立鴻(2011), “台灣產業群聚成長的探索”, 北台灣學報, 第 34 期 2011 年 6 月 頁129-140
16.郭明洲(2015), “不鏽鋼製造業景氣動態報告”, 台灣經濟研究院產經資料庫。
17.陳志豪(2011), “ECFA 簽訂後對石化產業衝擊之研究-以中日台韓乙烯產品及其衍生物為例”, 銘傳大學經濟學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。
18.陳坤成、袁建中(2008), “產業群聚與企業經營模式關聯性之探討—以臺灣精密機械產業為例”, 科技管理學刊, 第13卷第3期,頁87-125。
19.陳萬淇(1992), 個案研究法,台北:華泰。
20.黃筑婕(2009), “台灣玻璃產業競爭群聚之研究”, 中原大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
21.黃暖婷(2013), “論APEC與WTO和自由貿易協定的互動”, 臺灣經濟研究月刊, 第36卷第7期。
22.經濟部(2014.11), “陸韓FTA完成簽署，鋼鐵、工具機、面板、紡織業首當其衝，加速整備”, 創新、樂活,第34期,第8頁.
23.劉彬(2010), “海峽兩岸經合框架協議若干法律問題新探”, 時代法學,第8卷第5期, 第111-115頁。
24.鄧利娟(2010), “ECFA與兩岸金融合作雙贏”, 台灣研究集刊, 第5期,第47-56頁。
25.閻永祺(2004), “產業群聚與區域產業發展關係之研究─以南部區域為例”, 國立台北大學都市計劃研究所論文。

二、英文部份：
1.Anderson, G.(1994), “Industry Clustering for Economic Development , ” Economic Development Review,12(2), pp.26-32.
2.Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D. and Mead M.(1987), “The case research strategy in studies of information system.”, MIS Quarterly, 11(3), pp.369-386.
3.Dayasindhu, N. (2002), “Embeddedness, Knowledge Transfer, Industry Cluster and Global Competitiveness: A Case Study of the Indian Software Industry” , Techovation, Vol. 22(3), pp.551-560.
4.Enright, M. J., and Brian, H. R.(2001), “Regional clustering in Australia”, Australia Journal of Management, 26, pp.65-85.
5.Fontana, A. and Frey, J. H. (1998), Collecting Interpreting Qualitative Materials, London: Sage Publications.
6.Herzog,T. (1996), Research Methods and Data Analysis in the social Science, New York : Wesley Logman Publichers Inc.
7.Hu, T.S., Lin, C.Y., and Chang, S.L. (2005), “Technology-based regional development strategies and the emergence of technological communities: a case study of HSIP, Taiwan” , Technovation, Vol. 25(2), pp.367-380.
8.Jacobs, D., de Man, A.P.(1996), “Clusters, industrial policy and firm strategy: a menu approach”, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 8 (4), pp.425–437.
9.Koka, B.R. and Prescott, J.E. (2002), “Strategic alliances as social capital: a multidimensional view” , Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 23(9), pp. 795-816.
10.Krafft, J. (2004), “Entry, exit and knowledge: evidence from a cluster in the info-communications industry” , Research Policy, Vol. 33(10), pp. 1687-1706.
11.Krugman, P. (1991), “Geography and Trade” , The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
12.Krugman, P. (1995), “Development, Geography and Economic Theory,” The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
13.MacKinnon, D., Cumbers, A. and Chapman, K. (2002), “ Learning, innovation and regional development: a critical appraisal of recent debates”, Progress in Human Geography, 26 (3), pp.293-311.
14.Malmberg, A. and Maskell, P. (2002), “The elusive concept of localization economies: towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering”, Environment and Planning A, 34 (3), pp.429-49.
15.Marshall and Rossman (1995), Designing qualitative research, 2nd ed., Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2003), “Deconstructing clusters: chaotic concept or policy panacea”, Journal of Economic Geography, 3 (1), pp.5-35.
17.Maskell, P. (2001), “The firm in economic geography”, Economic Geography, 77 (4):, pp.329-344.
18.Maskell, P.(2001), “Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), pp.921-943.
19.McCann, P., Arita, T. and Gordon, I.R. (2002), “Industrial clusters, transactions costs and the institutional determinants of MNE location behavior”, International Business review, Vol. 11(6), pp.647-663.
20.Porter, M.E. (1993), “The Competitive Advantage of Nations,” The Free Press, New York.
21.Porter, M.E. (1998), “Cluster and the New Economics of Competition,” Harvard Business Review, Nov.~ Dec., pp.77-90.
22.Porter, M.E.(1985), “Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance”, The Free Press, New York.
23.Porter, M.E.(1990), “The Competitive Advantage of Nations”, Free Press, New York.
24.Romanelli, E., and Khessina, O. M.(2005), “Reginal Industrial Identity: Cluster Configurations and Economic Development”, Organizational Science, l6(4), pp.344-358.
25.Steinar Kvale. (1996), Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, London:SAGE.
26.Steinle, C., and H. Schiele(2002), “When do industries cluster? A proposal on how to access an industry’s propensity to concentrate at a single region or location”, Research Policy, 31(6), pp.849-858.
27.Storper, M., and Scott, A. J.(1995), “The wealth of regions: market forces and policy imperatives in local and global context”, Futures, 27(5), pp.505-526.
28.Swann, P. and Prevezer, M. (1996), “A comparison of the dynamics of industrial clustering in computing and biotechnology,” Research Policy, 25(2), pp.1139-1157.
29.Thomas III, L.G. (2004), “Are we all global now? Local vs. foreign sources of corporate competence: the case of the Japanese pharmaceutical industry”, Strategic Management Journal, 25(8-9), pp. 865-886.
30.Yin, R. K.,(1989), Case study research: Design and methods, Sage.

三、網站部份：
1.林偉凱(2010), 不銹鋼產業的現況與展望, 經濟部技術處ITIS簡報資料, http://www.isu.edu.tw/upload/27/9/991008-3.pdf