本文討論有關全球化論述中的三個關鍵問題:全球化是否真的出現.?在地(local)或區域空間本身是否在全球化中失去意是?以及後進園，例如來亞'的發展是否在全球化過程中失去競爭條件?本文將指出質疑全球化是否發生的論點並沒有看到資本主義在質上的轉變，而且某些區域在全球化階段也不會失去重妥性。我將指出這些區域受到區域特殊資源因素和交易成本的影響，而且具才學習型區域的特質。從此角度，本文將討論第三個問題，指出後進國或采亞在全球化階段的發展，受到這二因素的影響。生產要素決定性低的產業，由於全球化而外移;而前翔在世界分工中累積和學習的知識，則在區域內形成社會機制，成為區域性但又全球迷結的產業。我將說明後進國經濟發展的學習和追趕特質'3E以此反省既有的發展理論及其缺憾。

This paper intends to clarify three major issues in the current debates on theories of globalization. Does globalization really occur? Does locality lose its significance in the age of globalization? And， do the latecomers such as the East Asian economies have lost their competitiveness in the new era? I will argue that those who decline the thesis of globalization miss the qualitative transformation of global capitalism. Also， this paper argues that some local· ities will not lose its importance in the age of globalization for their distinctive local resources or assets and due to the factors of transaction costs. I use the learning region theory to support this argument on the global· local nexus. Based upon the above discussion， I will argue that the latecomers will not lose their important role in the highly mobilized global economies. For these econ· omies have learnt knowledge and skills in the former stages and these have become their social capital. Some industries that are based on low skills may have migrated to other regions， however those that need high skills and tacit knowledge have to depend on social institutions to support and these are not tradable goods and non-transferable. Finally， I will argue against various the· ories of development based on the above statements and emphasize the importance of learning and social institutions in the caching up economics﹒