異質性廠商國際貿易理論強調廠商生產力在出口與對外直接投資扮演重要角色，但實證研究同時考慮廠商生產力對出口與對外直接投資的影響研究仍在少數。臺灣製造業廠商進行出口與對外投資以及同時有出口與對外直接投資的情況十分普遍，本文以總要素生產力衡量廠商異質性，研究生產力對臺灣製造業廠商之出口、對外直接投資與兼具兩種策略的影響。利用股票上市櫃製造業廠商1990-2018年的追蹤資料，並利用panel多項式羅吉特機率模型(panel multinomial Logit model)進行估計，實證結果如下。未考慮其他廠商特性時，生產力最高的廠商同時進行出口與對外直接投資，次之者進行對外直接投資，再次之者僅從事出口，生產力最低的廠商留在國內市場。考慮廠商特性、產業與時間固定效果，結果有所改變。高生產力的廠商同時進行出口與對外直接投資，次之者從事出口；低生產力的廠商進行對外直接投資或留在國內市場，且二者的生產力無顯著差異。此結果並不符合Helpman et al. (2004)的理論，原因在於臺灣的對外直接投資集中在中國。此尋求低生產成本的防禦型投資受惠於中國的優惠政策與雷同的語言和文化，對外投資的沉沒成本較低，故所需的生產力門檻較低。利用三種不同估計方式的TFP進行的估計得到相同結果，獲致實證研究結果的頑強性。

Theories of heterogeneous firms and international trade have emphasized the role of productivity played on decisions of exports and foreign direct investment (FDI), while studies considering how productivity affect both decisions of exports and FDI remain limited. Internationalization strategies of exporting, FDI and both behaviors are prevailing in manufacturing firms in Taiwan. Thus, this thesis examines how total factor productivity (TFP) differentiates firms’ internationalization strategies among exporting, FDI, and both strategies. Based on a firm-level panel dataset of manufacturing firms listed on stock market and adopting the panel multinomial logit model to implement empirical estimations, empirical results are as follows. We find that, without controlling for firm characteristics, highest productivity firms undertaking both exporting and FDI, followed by firms undertaking FDI and firms engaging in exports, whereas lowers productive firms serve only domestic market. After controlling for firm characteristics and industry and time fixed effects, results change moderately. Most productive firms undertake both exports and FDI, followed by firms engaging in exports; while low productivity firms undertake FDI or serve the domestic market and there is no significant difference in TFP in both groups. These findings contradict theoretical arguments in Helpman et al (2004). The possible interpretation is that Taiwan’s FDI concentrate on defensive FDI toward China to exploit low production costs. China government provides various policy instruments, adding share similar language and culture, helping lower sunk costs of FDI. Thus, the productivity threshold of FDI is low, enabling low productivity firms to undertake FDI. Various measures of TFP obtain similar results, ensuring robustness of estimating results.

Ackerberg, D. A., Caves, K., & Frazer, G. (2015). Identification properties of recent production function estimators. Econometrica, 83(6), 2411-2451.
Ariu, A., Biewen, E., Blank, S., Gaulier, G., Gonzalez, M.J., Meinen, P., Mariz, D., Martin, C., & Tello, P. (2019). Firm heterogeneity and aggregate business services exports: Micro evidence from Belgium, France, Germany and Spain. World Economy 42(2), 564-589.
Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., Redding, S. J., & Schott, P. K. (2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 105-130.
Cui, L., Jiang, F., & Stening, B.(2011). The entry‐mode decision of Chinese outward FDI: Firm resources, industry conditions, and institutional forces. Thunderbird International Business Review, 53(4), 483-499.
Damijan, J. P., Polanec, S., & Prašnikar, J. (2007). Outward FDI and productivity: Micro-evidence from Slovenia. World Economy, 30(1), 135-155.
Demirhan, A. A., (2016). Export Behavior of the Turkish Manufacturing Firms. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade 52(11), 2646-2668.
Denk, N., Kaufmann, L., & Roesch, J.F. (2012), Liabilities of foreignness revisited: A review of contemporary studies and recommendations for future research, Journal of International Management, 18, 322-334.
Dunning, J. H. (1988), The eclectic paradigm of international production: a restatement and some possible extensions, Journal of International Business Studies, 19(1), 1-31.
Dunning, J. H. (2000), The eclectic paradigm as an envelope for economic and business theories of MNE activity, International Business Review, 9(2), 163-190.
Engel, D., & Procher, V. (2012). Export, FDI and firm productivity. Applied Economics, 44(15), 1931-1940.
Grubel, H. & Lloyd, P. (1975). Intra-industry trade: the theory and measurement of international trade in different products. The Economic Journal N: 85.
Hallward-Driemeier, M., Iarossi, G., & Sokoloff, K. L. (2002). Exports and manufacturing productivity in East Asia: A comparative analysis with firm-level data. NBER Working Paper, (w8894).
Head, K., & Ries, J. (2003). Heterogeneity and the FDI versus export decision of Japanese manufacturers. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 17(4), 448-467.
Helpman, E., & Krugman, P. R. (1985). Market structure and foreign trade: Increasing returns, imperfect competition, and the international economy. MIT press.
Helpman E. (1981). International Trade in the Presence of Product Di_erentiation, Economies of Scale, and Monopolistic Competition: A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin model. Journal of International Economics. 11, 305-40.
Helpman, E., Melitz, M. J., & Yeaple, S. R. (2004). Export versus FDI with heterogeneous firms. American Economic Review, 94(1), 300-316. doi:10.1257/000282804322970814
Kimura, F., & Kiyota, K., (2006). Exports, FDI, and productivity: Dynamic evidence from Japanese firms. Review of World Economics, 142(4), 695-719.
Krugman P. (1980). Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade. American Economic Review. 70, 950-59.
Lu, J., Liu, X., Filatotchev, I., & Wright, M., (2014). The impact of domestic diversification and top management teams on the international diversification of Chinese firms. International Business Review, 23(2), 455-467.
Lu, J., Lu. Y. & Tao, Z., (2017). Intermediaries, firm heterogeneity and exporting behavior. World Economy 40(7), 1381-1404.
Melitz, M. J., (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica 71(6): 1695-1725.
Melitz, M., Helpman, E., & Yeaple, S., (2004). Export versus FDI with heterogeneous firms. American Economic Review 94, 300-316.
Mollisi, V., & Rovigatti, G. (2017). Theory and practice of TFP estimation: The control function approach using STATA.
Serti, F. & Tomasi, C. (2008). Self-Selection and Post-Entry Effects of Exports: Evidence from Italian Manufacturing Firms. Review of World Economics 144, 660-694.
Shao, Y., & Shang, Y. (2016). Decisions of OFDI Engagement and Location for Heterogeneous Multinational firms: Evidence from Chinese firms. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 112, 178-187.
Solow, R. M., (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312-320.
Todo, Y. (2011). Quantitative Evaluation of the Determinants of Export and FDI: Firm‐level Evidence from Japan. World Economy, 34(3), 355-381.
Tomiura, E. (2007). Foreign outsourcing, exporting, and FDI: A productivity comparison at the firm level. Journal of International Economics, 72(1), 113-127.
Wagner, J. (2002). The causal effects of exports on firm size and labor productivity: First evidence from a matching approach. Economics Letters 77(2), 287-292.
Wagner, J. (2007). Exports and productivity in Germany. Jena Economic Research Paper (2007-026).
Wanger, J. (2007). Exports and productivity: A survey of the evidence from firm-level data. World Economy 30(1), 60-82.
Wei, Y., Zheng, N., Liu, X., & Lu, J. (2014). Expanding to outward foreign direct investment or not? A multi-dimensional analysis of entry mode transformation of Chinese private exporting firms. International Business Review, 23(2), 356-370.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). On estimating firm-level production functions using proxy variables to control for unobservables. Economics letters, 104(3), 112-114.
Yang, C. H., & Tsou, M. W., (2018). Firm heterogeneity, market choice and productivity: Evidence from foreign‐owned enterprises in China. The World Economy, 41(12), 3482-3502.
Yang, C.H. and Chen, Y.H. (2012). R&D, Productivity and Exports: Plant-Level Evidence from Indonesia. Economic Modelling, 29(2), 208-216.
Yang, Y. & Mallick, S. (2010). Export premium, self-selection and learning-by-exporting: Evidence from Chinese matched firms. World Economy 33(10), 1218-1240.