為加速產業升級提昇國家競爭力，生物科技產業為國家重點發展產業。本文利用1997年第一季至2006年第三季取樣期間，我國生物科技產業上市櫃廠商中，產值最大之生技製藥業及生技醫療器材業為研究對象，選取27家有專利權公司為樣本，建立長期追蹤資料以固定效果模型及隨機效果模型進行實證分析，探討研究創新指標、健保合作與企業特性等議題和生技廠商經營績效之關連性，藉此掌握研發型生物科技產業發展趨勢。實證結果發現生技製藥業與生技醫療器材業，其研發支出與公司報酬確實具有顯著正向相關。而「累積專利權許可數」對於製藥廠商績效的影響並不顯著。在與中央健保局建立合作機制後，帶動生技製藥產業經營正面影響之效果；並且公司成立年數與績效呈現非線性之變化趨勢。

To accelerate the industrial up-grading and promote national competitiveness, biotechnology industry is viewed as Taiwan’s crucial developing industry. This paper employs two cores – pharmaceutical industry and medical equipment industry as samples for they occupy the largest production value in Taiwan’s biotech industry. 27 patent-owned biotech firms are chosen and the period is spanned from the first quarter, 1997 to the third quarter, 2006. Fixed effect model and random effect model are utilized for the empirical analysis to catch the future developing trend for biotech industry in Taiwan. The results reveal that, for both pharmaceutical and medical equipment industries, R&D expenditure exhibits a significant positive correlation to the firm returns. However, the accumulating patent numbers are insignificant to pharmaceutical firms’ performance, while the cooperation with the Bureau of National Health Insurance promotes the firm profitability only in pharmacy. The impacts of firm ages on performance exhibit a non-linear shape tendency for both industries.

中文文獻
1. 2006製藥產業年鑑，財團法人生物技術開發中心(IT IS)出版。
2. 2006醫療器材工業年鑑，財團法人生物技術開發中心(IT IS)出版。
3. 周雅雲 (2005)，「影響我國生物科技廠商財務績效之因素」，東吳大學經濟研究所碩士論文。
4. 邱永和、胡均立與曹嘉麟 (2003)，「台灣生物科技廠商之成本效率分析」，農業與經濟，第31期，55-78頁。
5. 楊志海與陳忠榮 (2001)，「研究發展、技術引進與專利－一般動差法於可數資料的應用」，經濟論文叢刊，29:1，69-87頁。
6. 楊志海與陳忠榮 (2002)， 「研究發展、專利與生產力－台灣製造業的實證研究」，經濟論文叢刊，30:1，27-48頁。
參考網址
1. 中華民國專利資訊網 (www.twpat.com)。
2. 台灣證券交易所公開資訊觀測站。
3. 經濟部國際貿易局網站。
英文文獻
1. Aghion. P. and Howitt, P. (1998), Endogenous Growth Theory, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
2. Austin, D.(1993), “An Event Study Approach to Measuring Innovative Output”, American Economic Review, 83(2), 253-258.
3. Battese, G. E. and T. J. Coelli (1995), “A Model for Technical Inefficiency Effects in a Stochastic Frontier Production Function for Panel Data”, Empirical Economics, 20, 325-332.
4. Bosworth, D. and M. Roger (2001), “Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firm”, Economic Record, 77, 323-337.
5. Chu, W. (2000), “The OEM Model of Development: Can the East Asian NIC Catch Up?”, The Conference on Nationalism: The East Asian Experience, Academia Sinica, Taipei.
6. Cumming D. J. and J. G. Macintosh (2000), “The Determinants of R&D Expenditures: A Study of the Canadian Biotechnology Industry”, Review of Industrial Organization, 17, 357-370.
7. DeCarolis, D. M. and D. L. Deeds (1999), “The Impact of Stocks and Flows of Organizational Knowledge on Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation of the Biotechnology Industry”, Strategic Management Journal, 20, 953-968.
8. Dugal, S. S. and Morbey, G. K. (1995), “Revising Corporate R&D Spending during a Recession”, Research Technology Management, 38(4), 23-27.
9. Deeds, D. L. (2001), “The Role of R&D Intensity, Technical Development and Absorptive Capacity in Creating Entrepreneurial Wealth in High Technology Start-ups”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 18(1), 29-47.
10. Espicom Business Intelligence (2005).
11. Goudey, J., and D. Nath (1997), Canadian Biotech: Coming of Age. Toronto, Ontario: Ernst & Young.
12. Griliches, Z. (1980), “Returns to research and development expenditures in the private sector”, in J. Kendrick and B. Vaccara (eds.), New Developments in Productivity Measurement and Analysis, University of Chicago Press, 419-461.
13. __________ (1981), “Market Value, R&D and Patents”, Economic Letters, 7, 183-187.
14. __________ (1990), “Patent Statistics as an Economic Indicators: A Survey”, Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661-1707.
15. Hall, B. H. (1993), “The Stock Market Valuation of R&D Investment during the 1980s”, American Economic Review, 83, 259-264.
16. Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A. and Trajtenberg, M. (2000), “Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look”, NBER Working Paper No. 7741.
17. Hall, L. A. and S. Bagchi-Sen (2002), “A Study of R&D, Innovation and Business Performance in the Canadian Biotechnology Industry”, Technovation, 22, 231-244.
18. Hausman, J. A. (1978), “Specification Tests in Econometrics”, Econometrica, 46, 1251-1271.
19. Kotabe, M., (1990), “The Relationship between Offshore Sourcing and Innovativeness”, Journal of International Business Studies, 21(4), 623-639.
20. Mansfield, E., (1962), “Entry, Gibrat’s Rule, Innovation and Growth of Firms”, American Economic Review, 52, 1023-1051.
21. Mansfield, E., (1981), “Composition of R&D Expenditures Relationship to Size of Firm, Concentration, and Innovative Output”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 63, 610-615.
22. Morbey, G. K. and Reithner, R. M. (1990), “How R&D Affects Sales Growth, Productivity and Profitability”, Research Technology Management, 33(3), 11-14.
23. Megna, P. and M. Klock(1993), “The Impact of Intangible Capital on Tobin’s Q in the Semiconductor Industry”, American Economic Review, 83, 265-269.
24. Narian, F., and Noma, E. (1987), “Patent as Indicators of Corporate Technology Strength”, Research Policy, 16, 143-156.
25. Pazderka, B. (1999), “Patent Protection and Pharmaceutical R&D Spending in Canada”, Canadian Public Policy, 25, 29-46.
26. Pearl, J. (2001), “Intangible Investment, Tangible Results”, Sloan Management Review, 43(3), 13-14.
27. Sougiannis, T. (1994), “The Accounting Based Valuation of Corporate R&D”, The Accounting Review, 69(1), 44-68.
28. Theodosiou, M. and Katsikeas, C. (2001), “Factors Influence the Degree of International Pricing Strategy Standardization of Multinational Corporations”, Journal of International Marketing, 9(3), 1-18.
29. Trajtenberg, M. (1990), “A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovation”, The Rand Journal of Economics, 21(1), 172-187.
30. Trina L. A. and Srini S. S. (2003), “Advertising Intensity and R&D Intensity: Differences across Industries and Their Impact on Firm’s Performance”, International Journal of Business and Economics, 2(2), 167-176