20 2013 pp. 37 52 1 Robinson, E. A. G. 2013 10 16 37
1 2 3 3 2 1 Robinson, E. A. G. (1931) Hobson, J. A. (1909) 3 Marshall, A. (1890) 4 Steindl, J. (1947) 5 Robinson, E. A. G. Robinson, E. A. G. 6 Robinson, E. A. G. 7 Robinson, E. A. G. 8 Robinson, E. A. G. 5 9 Robinson, E. A. G. 3 Robinson, E. A. G. 38
10 11 Robinson, E. A. G. 12 13 2 14 15 16 1 2 1 50 2 3 17 18 2 1 19 2 20 21 39
22 23 40 20 24 25 26 27 Robinson, E. A. G. 4 1 28 2 29 3 30 4 31 32 Robinson, E. A. G. 33 Robinson, E. A. G. 34 40
35 1 2 3 4 5 Robinson, E. A. G. 36 37 38 39 40 1 2 41 81 2 42 41
43 2 1 44 45 2 46 47 48 1 2 49 1 50 1 51 42
52 1 53 2 54 Steindl, J (1947) 1 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 1 2 43
3 4 56 5 6 7 7 Robinson, E. A. G. (1931) 1 57 1 58 2 59 3 60 44
61 3 62 3 Marshall, A. (1890) Marshall, A. 63 Marshall, A. Marshall, A. Robinson, E. A. G. (1931) Robinson, E. A. G. (1931) Steindl, J. (1947) Steindl, J. 64 1955 65 45
66 67 2 1 68 2 69 Marshall, A. 70 Marshall, A. Marshall, A. Steindl, J. Robinson, E. A. G Robinson, E. A. G Robinson, E. A. G 1 2 3 4 5 71 5 Robinson, E. A. G 1 2 72 3 73 3 46
Robinson, E. A. G 1 2 74 Robinson, E. A. G Marshall, A. 1 Robinson, E. A. G 47
1 1986 2 22008 79 80 3 Hobson, J. A. (1909) 3 4 Marshall, A. (1890) 2008 85 Darwin, C. R 5 Steindl, J. (1947) 4 1 2 3 4 6 Robinson (1931) 6 1958 7 7 Robinson (1931) 15 1958 19 8 Robinson (1931) 16 1958 20 9 Robinson (1931) 16 17 1958 20 10 Robinson (1931) 17 1958 21 48
11 Robinson (1931) 34 35 1958 40 12 Robinson (1931) 34 35 1958 40 13 Robinson (1931) 34 35 1958 40 14 Robinson (1931) 34 35 1958 41 15 Robinson (1931) 34 35 1958 41 16 Robinson (1931) 36 1958 43 17 Robinson (1931) 39 1958 46 47 18 Robinson (1931) 54 1958 63 19 Robinson (1931) 54 1958 63 20 Robinson (1931) 54 1958 63 21 Robinson (1931) 54 1958 63 22 Robinson (1931) 64 1958 74 23 Robinson (1931) 64 1958 74 24 Robinson (1931) 64 1958 74 75 25 Robinson (1931) 65 1958 75 26 Robinson (1931) 66 67 1958 77 27 Robinson (1931) 83 1958 96 28 Robinson (1931) 83 1958 96 29 Robinson (1931) 83 1958 96 30 Robinson (1931) 83 1958 96 31 Robinson (1931) 83 1958 96 32 Robinson (1931) 88 1958 102 33 Robinson (1931) 94 1958 109 34 Robinson (1931) 97 1958 109 35 Robinson (1931) 86 1958 99 36 Robinson (1931) 15 1958 19 37 381957 14 391978 401957 29 411957 42 421937 62 431937 64 441937 162 451937 164 461937 165 471937 165 481937 167 491956 501956 16 511956 16 49
521956 17 18 531956 18 541956 25 55 1987 3 56 1987 17 57 1987 27 58 1987 86 59 1987 86 87 60 1987 87 61 1987 87 62 1965 18 63 Marshall, A (1920) 1965 304 64 1973 8 65 1973 18 661960 207 208 67 68 1967 279 69 1967 279 70 1967 279 71 Robinson (1931) 16 17 72 1987 86 87 73 1987 87 741956 1957 Hobson, J. A. (1909) The Industrial System, Augustus M. Kelley. Marshall, A. (1890) Principles of Economics, London Macmillan, 1890. 1928 1978 1986 Robinson, E. A. G. (1931) The Structure of Competitive Industry, Nisbet and Cambridge University Press. 1958 1986 19 57 69 1995 61 297 313 2008 1983b 26 50
5 85 101 1961 Steindl, J. (1947) Small and Big Business, Economic Problem of the size of Firm, Basil Blackwell Oxford 1956 1965 1973 1987 51
Hidenobu HASEGAWA This paper has considered the optimal size theory located in the one system of the theories about existence of small and medium enterprises. By the optimal size theory, as compared with a major company, the side of too little nature has small and medium enterprises, and so, although an existence base is vulnerable, it argues about the factor which is enabling existence maintenance of small and medium enterprises. Optimal size the scholar of an Anglo-Saxon system discussing, the too little nature of small and medium enterprises is caught in the affirmative, and it is shown clearly that small and medium-sized enterprises can exist by the type of industry which cannot enter easily for a major company. On the other hand, by the optimal size theory which a Japanese scholar discusses, there is an idea of affirmative and negative both about existence of small and medium enterprises. Comparison examination of the optimal size theory is carried out, and, as for this paper, the competitive advantage of the small and medium enterprises by the administrative behavior which harnessed efficiently the size of business of both concerning existence of small and medium enterprises too little nature paying attention to an affirmative argument for which the factor which enables existence maintenance of small and medium enterprises is clarified is examined. Key words: Small and Medium Enterprises, too Little Nature, optimal size, efficiency 52