產業分析報告范文

前言：我們精心挑選了數篇優質產業分析報告文章，供您閱讀參考。期待這些文章能為您帶來啟發，助您在寫作的道路上更上一層樓。

第1篇

This report aims to analyze competitiveness of internet industry in Australia using five forces model. Competition is more intensive between Telstra and Optus which have a remarked position in the market. The existence of several small operators and growing use of ADSL and wireless are good substitutes of cable solutions. Telstra's apparent government protection is yet a barrier for new entrants including Optus. This also imposes reduced bargaining power of retailers and high charges attached to their supply. The industry is relatively new in Australia and is still growing and offering more opportunities in remote regions. A new market structure has been demanded by operators in order to activate competition and reduce monopoly of fixed line services. Australian Government has been positively reacted by launching a new National Broadband Network （NBN） program although it has not yet selected the operators of this NBN.

1.METHODOLOGY AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Gathering information about the ISP industry was progressed through the use of the internet and its purpose was to understand the structure and the prospect of its industry. Numerous information were therefore obtained from company websites， industry and IT news articles， government websites， academic journals， announcements and report from companies， and recent industry reports.

As to effective and efficient ISP industry analysis， it was necessary to get superior and useful information which can be applied to Porter's five forces analysis as the key theory in this report. The information was utilised to determine competitiveness of the ISP industry and to analyse framework of the five forces， including internal rivalry， threat of entry， substitutes， supplier power， and buyer power （Appendix 1）.

Several statistic data from Australian government websites was especially used for comparative analysis to research on specific factors such as market share of the ISP industry. Moreover， the information obtained from various sources was used for the market research in order to accomplish an accurate analysis of the ISP industry.

2.INDUSTRY ANALYSIS USING PORTER'S FIVE FORCES

2.1Internal rivalry

The rapid growth in internet demand combined with relatively easy entry in Australian market in last ten years has contributed for a diversified yet heterogeneous supply. The industry is characterized by a proliferation of small business operators though dominated by small number of large firms. From a total number of 770 operators at end of 2007 less than 5% had 10，000 customers and nearly 1.2% could be considered very large with 100，000 clients （TIO statistics cited in Collins， L.， Love， P.， Landfeldt， B. and Coroneos， P.， 2008）.

Although several regulatory attempting of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission （ACCC） to boost competition， this is still regarded by operators as insufficient as it emphasizes on ULL and DSLAMs facilities rather than on resale. This undermines ISPs providers with large number of resale customers. Competition is described to be more accentuated among few very large operators and particularly between Telstra and Optus. Telstra Bigpond dominated market representing 34% of ADSL and proportionally shared cable market with Optus - 7% in 2007. Other retailers absorbed the remaining 49% of ADSL and 4% cable （Bharat Book Bureau， online assessed）. The monopoly of Telstra in network of fixed lines provision is a crucial bottleneck for economic performance of operators （Paul O'Sulivan CEO Optus speech on 21/10/08， Bharat Book Bureau assessed online）.

Owing to heavy initial investment and operational costs in this industry， only large players can obtain considerable profit margin. Indeed their large scale enables them to offer services with more standardized quality and at lower prices. Therefore they can attract and retain customers more successfully （Madden， G.， Savage， S.J. and Coble-Neal， G.， 1999）. Conversely， small players with their limited capacity can only operate as redistributors of larger industries offering added value services at higher charges. Transmission and interconnection costs are in general the primary costs for all operators （ABS 1997） and customer's easy migration from dial-up to broadband internet seems to squeeze margins. However customer's loyalty and intensive promotion campaigns can sustain leader's market margins. Telecommunication is described by Budde， P. 2005 as a commodity industry requiring very large scales to operate profitably.

2.2Threat of Entry

The ISP industry in Australia has gradually grown in recent years as home and business access to the internet has been increasing continuously （Appendix 2） and it entails significant economies of sales （DBCDE， 2008） （Appendix 3）.

The entrants need to attempt to overcome the cost advantage of incumbents because incumbents derive the cost advantage from economies of scope （Besanko， 2000）. Entrants need to achieve a market share to reach minimum efficient scale via establishing their brand loyalty. However， the large ISPs generally have already established a strong reputation and brand awareness with the large number of retailers and it results in that incumbents can have an advantage over the entrants.

No matter what types of the internet， ISPs must use the existing telephone line to provide the internet to customers. However， incumbents such as Telstra control infrastructure of cable， local loop， and telephone line networks in Australia （Howell， 2002）. It functions as a barrier to enter into the broadband market because they have to use the existing telephone line to provide the internet to customers （Optus， 2008）.

The Australian government has been carrying out a policy as NBN （National Broadband Network） to provide high-speed internet for 98 percent of Australian homes and businesses （DBCDE， 2008）. It is therefore regarded as that the government encourages the internet business. However， there has been a protection of incumbents by the government. For instance， Telstra had a monopoly in DSL for several years and it causes Telstra having been affecting anti-competition on the broadband market. Therefore， entrants such as Optus and other competitors had difficulties to enter the market in 2004. They have demanded new structural features to limit the market power of Telstra to activate competitive market （Browne， 2008）.

2.3Substitutes

The substitutes for DSL technology in Australia are wireless， cable， satellite and other non dial-up technologies. As at June quarter of 2008， non dial-up technologies （including mainly DSL， wireless， cable and satellite） are so popular that the number of subscribers amounts to 78% of total internet subscribers in Australia （ABS 2008） （Figure， Appendix 3）. It is thanks to non-dial up technology that nowadays consumers can access the internet with greater speeds and 'always on' connections and without tying up or paying extra costs for their phone lines. Within the expanding internet market over the reported periods， DSL is the dominant technology with 70% of the market share for non dial-up （ABS 2008） （Figure， Appendix 4）. In comparison to wireless and other non dial-up technologies， DSL has the advantages of fastest speeds （especially with the new ADSL2 and ADSL2+）， lowest costs and high quality. Moreover， DSL is more attractive to consumers in terms of price in the non dial-up competition. This is simply because there are many small ISPs offering ADSL （and currently increasing on ADSL2， 2+） but less on wireless and just two （Telstra and Optus） offering cable （ABS 2008）. However， the six-month period from Dec quarter 2007 to Jun quarter 2008 has seen a significant growth in wireless market share （almost double from 8% to 14%） and as a result， a decrease in DSL share （ABS 2008）. The increasing of wireless proportion over the reported period's signals that wireless technology may be a potential substitute for DSL in Australia in the future.

2.4Supplier power

The reasons for a certain supplier to gain the bargaining power include： the main production factors are only supplied by a few manufacturers， and no substitutes to be found； and at the same time， this industry is deficient to upgrade its production capability to produce the product by itself （Porter， 1980）. The most important production factor in the ISP industry is Broadband （Appendix 5）. Currently， there are two suppliers providing broadband service， namely Fixed Lines and Cable TV network， the latter provides broadband of the cable modem， while the former provides nearly all the broadband of wire connections.

No matter it is Fixed Lines or Cable TV， they both enjoy the trait of scale economy， which is dominated by a few of leading companies or groups， such as Telstra and Optus （Minder， 2006） and（ Morris， 2007）. With the fast development of Internet， ADSL has emerged as the high-speed Internet service （Finneran. M.， 2003）. Recent research shows that Telstra Bigpond occupies the market by 34% of ADSL， and Optus takes up 7% in the cable market， while leaving 49% of ADSL and 4% cable in 2007 for other dealers （Bharat Book Bureau， online assessed）.

While the ISP industries are failed to upgrade its service and set up Broadband by its own， the Broadband providers are easily to downgrade with the ISP industries. For this reason， Broadband suppliers enjoy the power to bargain with the ISP industries. What is worth noting is the fact that due to the open-up of the network of fixed line service， fixed network providing are developing rapidly， from the very few providers in the past to a number of the current providers， e.g. Optus， Telstra Bigpond， iiNet， Dodo， Vodafone， Virgin etc. Among which， Telstra enjoys the highest profit as a telecommunications company （Asialaw， 2008）. This indicates that the bargaining power of the internet service providers will decrease with the liberalization of the telecommunication industry.

2.5Buyer power

With the easy market entry in Internet service providers industry， internet use has been growing at a rapid pace and caused fierce competition. The number of internet subscribers has been increasing constantly as internet is now everywhere in people's daily life （Gary， M. & Grant， C. 2002）. Internet Service Providers mainly range between several large operators in Australia， and hence demand and supply of internet are continual experiencing to grow up rapidly. As long as customers have more preferences， buyers have a great power on ISPs' profit. Therefore， customers' retention is playing a vital role in the survival of ISPs. They are forced to increase services， decrease prices， and add more values and accessories to their products to keep consumers' loyalty. Moreover， high-performance services and products are required as well.

Household income has a great impact on the demand of the internet. This justifies the fact that ISPs are currently offering flat-rate pricing to pursue consumers （Biggs， P. & Kelly， T. 2006）. Price strategy may be a helpful and successful model for ISPs in the short-term. However for long-term， they are required to fully and in detail understand the demand of various factors in the market and consumers that would help them to attract further market shares （Yogesh， K. al. etc.， 2009）. Furthermore， an evaluation of consumers' future behavior and an in-depth analysis of current subscribers' choices are required because the internet is a highly competitive market for ISPs （Grigoroudis et. al. 2007）.

3.CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

Australian Bureau of Statistics （ABS）， 1998 - Telecommunication Services， Catalogue No. 8148， Canberra， AGPS.

accc.gov.au， Australian Competition and Consumer Commission （ACCC）.

Madden， G.， Savage， S.J. and Coble-Neal， G. （1999） - Subscribers churn in Australian Internet Market. Information， Economics and Policy 1999， 11， pp 195-207.

Australian Bureau of Statistics （ABS）， 2008 - Internet Activity， Catalogue No. 8153， Australia， June 2008.

， Bharat Book Bureau.

.au， Get connected - industry trends， assessed on 20/03/09

Budde， P. （2005）. Australian telecoms moving into 2006

.au Paul O'Sullivan Optus Chief Executive CommsDay Breakfast 21 October 2008， Securing Major Competitive Investment： How to repeat the success of the early Nineties.

Dwivedi， Y.K.， Lal， B.， and Williams. M. D.， （2009）， Managing consumer adoption of broadband： examining drivers and barriers， Industrial Management & Data Systems， Vol. 109， No. 3， pp 357-369.

Browne， M （2008） ISPs demand intervention on Telstra ADSL2+block， viewed 19 March，

http：//.au/news/communi-

cations/soa/ISPs-demand-intervention-on-Telstra-ADSL2-block/0，130061791，339286264，00.htm？feed=pt_adsl

DBCDE （Department of Broadband， Communications and the Digital Economy） （2008） Feasibility Study ISP Level Content Filtering， viewed 22 March，

http：//dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf

_file/0006/95307/Main_Report_-_Final.pdf

DBCDE （Department of Broadband， Communications and the Digital Economy） （2008） National Broadband Network， viewed 21 March，

http：//dbcde.gov.au/communications

_for_business/funding_programs__and__support/national_broadband_network

Howell， B （2002） Broadband Uptake and Infrastructure Regulation： Evidence from the OECD Countries， viewed 22 March，

http：//trp.hku.hk/papers/2003/broad-

band_uptake.pdf

Optus （2008） Optus Chief Executive ABN AMRO Communications Conference， viewed 21 March， http：//.au/dafiles/OCA

/AboutOptus/MediaCentre/Speeches/08.04.29%20Paul%20O%27Sullivan%20ABN%20AMRO%20speech%20FINAL.pdf

Porter， M.E. （1980） Techniques for Analy-

sing Industries and Competitors Competitive Strategy Free Press： New Work.

Finneran. M （2003）. ADSL2： Faster， farther and better. Business Communications Review， 33（5）， 20-23. Retrieved March 22， 2009

Australia's great broadband challenge （2008， May）. Asialaw Retrieved March 21， 2009

Minder， R （2006） Telstra sale doubles to nearly Dollars 12bn TELECOMS Financial Times，p. 27. Retrieved March 28， 2009

Morris， L（ 2007） Broadband investment dispute brewing in Australia. Telecommunications， p41（7）， 11. Retrieved March 28，2009

Gary， M. and Grant， C. （2002）， Internet Economics and Policy， An Australian Perspective. Economic Record， Vol. 78， pp. 343-357

Biggs， P.， and Kelly， T.， （2006）， Broadband pricing strategies， Info， Vol. 8， No. 6， pp 3-14

Grigoroudis， E.， Kyriazopoulos， P.， Siskos， Y.， Spyridakos， A.， and Yannacopoulos， D.， （2007）， Tracking changes of e-customer preferences using multicriteria analysis， Managing Service Quality， Vol. 17， No. 5， pp 538-562

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 - Porter's Five Forces （Investopedia， 2009）

Appendix 2

Use of PCs and the Internet by households （DBCDE， 2008）；Use of PCs and the Internet by all businesses （（DBCDE， 2008）；Use of broadband technology by home Internet users （DBCDE， 2008）；http：//archive.dbcde.gov.au/2008/01/statistical_benchmarking/online_statistics

The Australian Internet Market （Market

Clarity， 2007）

http：//.au/news

/07-01-03-newsletter.cfm

Appendix 3

Profile of ISP industry by customer base （DBCDE， 2008）

http：//dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets

/pdf_file

/0006/95307/Main_Report_-_Final.pdf

Appendix 4

Internet Activity Summary， Australia， ISPs with more than 10，000 active subscribers （ABS， 2008）

Internet subscribers by access technology， for ISPs with more than 10，000 active subscribers （ABS， 2008）

Appendix 5

Broadband users as percentage of State population

第2篇

摘要：產業是一個地區競爭力的重要來源。河北省處于工業化中前期，以重工業為主，產業結構不合理。本文旨在分析河北省的產業結構，并在多年數據基礎之上分析河北省近些年的產業結構變化狀況，為下一步的產業結構調整服務。

關鍵詞：河北省；工業；建筑業，第三產業；區位商

產業是一個地區競爭力的重要來源。產業結構是否合理決定了一個地區的競爭力水平。

一、河北2011年經濟發展現狀

2011年全年全省生產總值實現24228.2億元，比上年增長11.3%。其中，第一產業增加值2905.7億元，增長4.2%；第二產業增加值13098.1億元，增長13.4%；第三產業增加值8224.4億元，增長10.5%。第一產業增加值占全省生產總值的比重為12.0%，第二產業增加值比重為54.1%，第三產業增加值比重為33.9%。可見我省2012年仍然是以第二產業為主的產業結構。

通過數據分析自從1992年以來我國第二產業在全省GDP比重中始終占據第一的位置，基本在百分之50到百分之70之間，而且從2008年后有占比上升趨勢。而我省第三產業的在1995年后基本變化趨勢不大，始終處在百分之30到40之間，并且從2010年后占比有下降趨勢。而工業占比在第二產業中占比較大，其發展規律同第二產業基本相同，可見工業的競爭力在我省未來的競爭力來源中占據重要的地位。

二、工業競爭力及其分析

第二產業包括工業和建筑業，河北省工業占第二產業比重較大，對競爭力的影響較為明顯。

（一）判斷一個產業是否構成地區生產專業化部門一般采用區位商這一指標。當區位商數值大于1時可以認為該產業是本地區的專業化部門。其計算公式為：LQ=（Eij/Ei）/（Ekj/Ek）這里Eij指i地區產業j的產值，Ei指i地區總產值，Ekj指國家k產業j的總產值，Ek指國家k的總產值。

通過計算區位商大于2，產值比重大于15%的部門為一級主導專業化部門；區位商大于1.5，產值比重大于10%為二級主導部門。通過計算，2011年我省一級主導專業化部門為黑色金屬冶煉及壓延加工業，區位商為3.8，產業占比為29%。黑色金屬礦采選業雖然產業區位商非常高，其專業化程度高，但是產值占比卻僅僅5.5%左右，所以不能算是主導部門。而皮革、毛皮、羽毛（絨）及其制品業區位商為1.9，排名第三，但是產業比重僅為2%。其余產業區位商大于1的產業：金屬制品業，石油加工、煉焦及核燃料加工業，電力、熱力的生產和供應業，橡膠制品業產業比重均沒有超過10%。因此我省不存在2級主導產業。

為更好的研究工業狀況，將我省從2006年到2011年的工業現狀計算區位商及產業比重狀況發現，我省區位商大于2的產業連續五年均為黑色金屬礦采選業和黑色金屬冶煉及壓延加工業。黑色金屬冶煉及壓延加工業為主導產業的狀況始終沒有改變。

同時分析數據連續五年來黑色金屬礦采選業的區位商是不斷呈下降趨勢的，其產業比重卻在上升。也許未來的某年其會成長為河北省的一級主導產業其中之一。因此筆者預計，將來河北省的工業主導產業將會是兩大主導產業。

從2006年到2011年數據中發現區位商小于2但大于1.5的產業連續五年為 皮革、毛皮、羽毛（絨）及其制品業。而且皮革、毛皮、羽毛（絨）及其制品業的區位商是不斷上升的趨勢，其產業比重趨勢也是也不斷上升，因此如果改變一鋼獨大的格局，那未來皮革、毛皮、羽毛（絨）及其制品業將很有希望成長為河北的省的二級主導產業。

而區位商小于1.5，大于1的產業，河北省2009年到2011年的產業非常穩定為金屬制品業，石油加工、煉焦及核燃料加工業，電力、熱力的生產和供應業，橡膠制品業，煤炭開采和洗選業。從2006年、2007年時傳統的專業化水平較高的產業：食品制造業、非金屬礦物制品業、醫藥制造業、石油和天然氣開采業、農副食品加工業，其專業化水平不再大于1，即傳統的優勢產業其專業化水平是在下降。而橡膠制品業在2006到2007年中專業化水平均沒有大于1，但是在2009年中異軍突起區位商不斷上升。

（二）河北省工業產業梯度。比較勞動生產率大致能客觀地反映一個部門當年勞動生產率的高低，通常第一產業比較勞動生產率低于1，而第二、三產業比較勞動生產率高于1。比較勞動生產率越高，表明本部門的產值與勞動力比值越大。

當一個地區的比較勞動生產率和區位商均大于1，一般而言是本地區相對處于產業頂端的產業，是各種產業要素從其他地區向該地區集聚的結果，在該時期處于主導產業地位，并在地區的產業競爭中處于優勢地位。而處于產業梯度中間層的產業在適當的條件和發展趨勢下具有向其他地區轉移的可能。通過計算河北省的絕對優勢產業為：黑色金屬礦采選業、黑色金屬冶煉及壓延加工業 、皮革、毛皮、羽毛（絨）及其制品業、金屬制品業、煤炭開采和洗選業。而處于產業梯度中間層及（勞動生產率和區位商其中一個大于1）的產業為 ：石油加工、煉焦及核燃料加工業、電力、熱力的生產和供應業、橡膠制品業、電氣機械及器材制造業、農副食品加工業、造紙及紙制品業、飲料制造業、廢棄資源和廢舊材料回收加工業、有色金屬礦采選業、紡織業、食品制造業、塑料制品業、文教體育用品制造業木材加工及木、竹、藤、棕、草制品業、紡織服裝、鞋、帽制造業、家具制造業、印刷業和記錄媒介的復制。

三、河北省建筑業

由圖1可以看出河北省建筑業的產業比重總體來說是下降的，而且區位商的下降趨勢明顯，2000年河北省建筑業區位商大于1，專業化水平較高，但是到2011年區位商下降到0.713。

四、河北省第三產業

河北省第三產業中就業人數占河北省第三產業就業數比重，大于百分之十的產業為：批發和零售業（0.27），交通運輸、倉儲和郵政業（0.15）、住宿和餐飲業（0.12）、居民服務和其他服務業（0.10）、教育（0.1）。而產業比重大于10%的前五個產業其產業比重總值，占河北省第三產業比重的76%，可見河北省的第三產業集中度非常高。

按區位商計算計算出前三位的區位商，批發和零售業（8.2159），交通運輸、倉儲和郵政業（5.35133），住宿和餐飲業（7.76866），可以看出這三個的區位商非常大。并非是河北省的這三個產業專業化水平非常高，而是因為河北省第三產業的這5個產業集中度較高。而河北省第三產業發展滯后，其就業人數少。2011年河北省第三產業就業人數為1202.96萬人，全國當年第三產業就業人數為27282人，僅僅占全國的4.4%，遠遠低于全國水平。

五、結論

河北省在未來的幾年發展中，應當結合地區的優勢，在產業政策和區域政策合理配合的基礎上，調整地區的發展方向和產業的優化升級。應該優化工業的產業結構，著力培育新興的工業增長極。結合環境政策，改造傳統高耗能高污染的支柱工業產業。大力推動河北的城鎮化水平，促進建筑業的發展。培育適合本省省情的第三產業，在總體上提高第三產業的比重。（作者單位：河北經貿大學）

參考文獻：

[1]鄭適：《中國產業發展監測與分析報告》[J] 中國人民經濟出版社2008

第3篇

一、發展現狀

（一）基地規模快速壯大。年，全縣共種植蔬菜39.2萬畝，年產152萬噸，產值19億元，實現收入突破10億元。設施蔬菜面積達到17.2萬畝，無公害蔬菜基地面積達到18.5萬畝，無公害蔬菜產品達到19個，形成百畝以上的蔬菜示范園15個，千畝以上的專業村82個，萬畝以上的蔬菜生產鎮8個，規模位居西北之首。蔬菜產業已成為農民收入的主渠道，收入占到全縣農民人均純收入的45%以上。云陽的反季節蔬菜，口鎮的柴皮大蒜，王橋的胡蘿卜、香菜，蔣路、龍泉的甘藍、芹菜、洋蔥等蔬菜品種享譽省內外，“一鄉一業，一村一品”的生產格局已初步形成。

（二）產業化水平不斷提升。全縣現有云陽蔬菜市場、龍泉蔬菜批發市場等10個蔬菜市場，總占地面積450畝，年銷量達100余萬噸。其中云陽蔬菜市場占地150畝，日交易量1800噸，年交易量4.8億元，成為西北地區最大的蔬菜產地批發市場。龍泉蔬菜批發市場占地150畝，建有3000平方米大廳兩座，并采用微機監管，縣集批發、零售為一體的現代化大型市場，日交易量500噸以上，外運車輛達40余輛。全縣共有冷庫19座，貯藏能力達3100噸。全縣已組織流通服務組織150多個，從事蔬菜銷售的大小車輛5300多輛，從業人員18.6萬人。全縣擁有蔬菜技術員1300余人，鎮科技示范點13個，科技示范戶180個。

（三）市場占有率不斷擴大。從生產墻況看，年全市蔬菜播種面積123.3萬畝，產量338.3萬噸；縣年蔬菜播種面積39.2萬畝，占全市的31.8%，產量152萬噸，占全市的45%。從銷售情況看，西安市年均消費蔬菜300萬噸，其中，縣銷往西安的蔬菜50萬噸，占到西安市場的16%左右。另外，遠銷新疆、山西、內蒙、青海、吉林、北京等地的蔬菜達90萬噸。

二、存在問題

（一）規模化程度不高。與山東壽光的設施蔬菜幾乎同時起步，但至年，壽光大棚達40萬畝，占到蔬菜面積的50%以上，而大棚蔬菜只占面積的25%。雖然我縣堅持每年新增蔬菜1萬畝，但是發展的步伐仍然不快，規模化種植仍然比較滯后。按照目前西安市場的消費量，我們擴大規模的潛力仍然非常巨大。

（二）品牌效應不明顯。主要體現在品種結構單一，沒有打出地方特色品牌，目前，的設施和露地菜形成了以番茄、黃瓜、甘藍、西芹“老四樣”為主的特色菜種，但大宗菜、低檔菜品種面積大，而名特優新品種、高檔精細菜面積小，沒有形成質量優勢和規模優勢，特別是沒有形成具有影響力的外銷品種優勢。

（三）科技含量不高。新品種、新技術、新材料的應用推廣較差，大部分地區以傳統耕作為主，管理粗放，產量低，抵御自然災害能力差。菜農素質差、勞動生產率低下，嚴重影響蔬菜產品質量，降低商品價值。名優新特品種少，特別是市場認可，特點突出，對產業起支撐作用的主打品種較少，難以做到“人有我特，人特我優”。

（四）龍頭企業規模較小。包裝、保鮮、冷藏和加工數量小，延伸增值能力低。承包大量土地，經營蔬菜產業化的大公司在還未出現，以蔬菜深加工為主的企業在也是空白。現有的10個蔬菜市場占地只有450畝，不如壽光的一個大。蔬菜生產專業合作社功能不健全，抵御市場風險的能力不強。

（五）蔬菜銷售渠道單一。目前，蔬菜直銷、配送、訂單等先進的銷售模式還比較少，沒有實現菜籃子向菜碟子的根本轉變。蔬菜銷售大量依靠傳統模式，從產地市場到客商，再到城市的市場，再到老百姓的菜籃子，中間環節過多。

三、對策建議

“十二五”期間，我縣蔬菜產業發展要以建設西部蔬菜之鄉為目標，到2015年，蔬菜面積達到45萬畝，其中設施蔬菜20萬畝。

一、壯大基地規模。堅持每年新增蔬菜1萬畝，迅速擴大蔬菜產業規模，加快建設“涇云、涇橋、口魯”公路沿線三大蔬菜產業帶，重點發展反季節日光溫室蔬菜和無公害蔬菜生產，逐步形成區域規模優勢。大力發展專業村、專業戶，建設產業名鎮，逐步形成一批相對集中，規模較大的蔬菜生產基地，形成群體規模。

二、提高蔬菜品質。牢固樹立“科技興菜”的理念，切實提高蔬菜生產的科技含量，優化產品品質。首先要大力發展無公害蔬菜生產；其次是要大力進引市場銷路好的新蔬菜良種，填補市場空白，提高種菜效益。第三，積極發展名優新特品種，形成新的生產優勢，努力做到“人無我有，人有我無，人優我特，人特我轉”。第四，通過舉辦技術培訓班，組織技術觀摩交流，開展技術咨詢等方法，加強技術培訓。力爭2—3年內，使全縣80%以上的菜農基本掌握蔬菜栽培技術，使蔬菜生產技術水平明顯提高。

三、發展品牌蔬菜。市場經濟是品牌經濟。要圍繞特色蔬菜產品，積極申報一批蔬菜品牌，注冊商標，進一步擴大蔬菜的知名度。

四、加強市場建設。圍繞建設西部檔次最高的蔬菜批發市場，抓好云陽和龍泉蔬菜批發市場的改造，進一步提高服務質量和水平。鼓勵和支持蔬菜流通中介組織的發展，培育一批從事菜菜銷售的農民經紀人，壯大蔬菜營銷隊伍。