本文比較了台灣南韓兩國自行車業的發展途徑，並說明它們成長模式典經濟表現的兵同，而台灣自行車業的表現一直都比南韓優兵。自行車業的產業特，挂一無資產特定性一意味著運用市場的成本會比用內部組織來的低，亦即在競爭之下這產業不會是垂直整合的。在台灣，當1971年左右美國訂單大批湧到之際，中小企業能大量及時湧玉昆並形成零組件網絡，是台灣能夠建立領先地位之關鍵因旁，南韓以大企業著稱，而大企業未能協助扶植一零組件網絡，直到1980年初改為大力介入協助扶植零組件網絡，南韓自行車業才開始快速成長，但時機已稍晚。這意味辛辛對產業發展而言，產業結構不是最重妥的因素，產業政策才是，在適當時機採行最適合的產業政策是促進產業發展的關鍵因素。

This paper compares the development of the bicycle industry in Taiwan and South Korea， and accounts for the different growth pattern. The performance of the bicycle industry in Taiwan has been much better than that of its Korean counterpart. The transaction cost hypothesis helps to explai n the advantage of the specialized system of parts production. Timely emergence of numerous small firms in Taiwan was crucial for its success， for it allowed the industry to achieve scale economies and specialization in both the assembling.and parts sectors simultaneously since export growth began. The Korean large enterprise alone was not able to achieve that. The Korean government was successful in pushing the assembling and parts sectors at the same time in 1982-86， but recent development proved that the effort came somewhat too late， for the overall economic changes have rendered Korea unsuitable for labor-intensive industries in the late 1980s. Itwould be hard for other LDCs to emulate Taiwan's success; while the Korean case might be more relevant to other LDCs.