FDI在发展中国家的决定因素分析外文翻译

中文 3568 字 毕业论文外文翻译 外文题目 ： Analyses of FDI determinants in developing countries 出 处： Economics.2009(36):105-123. 作 者： Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Erso y 原文： Analyses of FDI determinants in developing countries Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Ersoy ABSTRACT Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the best determinants of foreign direct investment (FDI) in developing countries. Design/methodology/approach: This paper investigates whether FDI determinants affect FDI based on both a panel of data (FMOLS-fully modified OLS) and cross-section SUR (seemingly unrelated regression) for 24 developing countries, over the period 1983-2005 for FMOLS and 1976-2005 for cross-section SUR. Findings: The interaction of FDI with some FDI determinants have a strong positive effect on economic progress in developing countries, while the interaction of FDI with the total debt service/GDP and inflation have a negative impact. The most important determinant of FDI is the communication variable. 1.Introduction Trade has traditionally been the principal mechanism linking national economies in order to create an international economy. FDI is a similar mechanism linking national economies; therefore, these two mechanisms reinforce each other. The trade effects of FDI depend on whether it is undertaken to gain access to natural resources, to consumer markets or whether the FDI is aimed at exploiting locational comparative advantage or other strategic assets such as research and development capabilities. Most developing countries lack technology capability and FDI to facilitate technology transfer and reduce the technology gap (TGAP) between developing countries and developed countries. In fact, it is suggested that spillovers or the external effects from FDI are the most significant channels for the dissemination of modern technology (Blomstrom, 1989). FDI has innumerable other effects on the host countrys economy. It influences the income, production, prices, employment, economic growth, development and general welfare of the recipient country. It is also probably one of the most significant factors leading to the globalization of the international economy. Thus, the enormous increase in FDI flows across countries is one of the clearest signs of the globalization of the world economy over the past 20 years (UNCTAD, 2006). Therefore, we can conclude that FDI is a key ingredient for successful economic growth in developing countries, because the very essence of economic development is the rapid and efficient transfer and adoption of “best practice” across borders. On the other hand, in general, foreign investors are influenced by three broad groups of factors: The profitability of the projects. The ease with which subsidiaries operations can be integrated into investors global strategies. The overall quality of the host countrys enabling environment. A large number of studies have been conducted to identify the determinants of FDI but no consensus has emerged, in the sense that there is no widely accepted set of explanatory variables that can be regarded as the “true” determinants of FDI. The results produced by studies of FDI are typically sensitive to these factors, indicating a lack of robustness. For example, factors such as labor costs, trade barriers, trade balance, exchange rate, R&D and tax have been found to have both negative and positive effects on FDI. Chakrabarti (2001) concludes that “the relation between FDI and many of the controversial variables (namely, tax, wages, openness, exchange rate, tariffs, growth and trade balance) are highly sensitive to small alterations in the conditioning information set”. The important question is “Why do companies invest abroad?” Dunning (1993) developed his theory by synthesizing the previously published theories, because existing explanations could not fully justify the existence of FDI. According to Dunning, international production is the result of a process affected by ownership, internalization and localization advantages. The latter is the most important: the factors based on which an investor selects a location for a project. These include the factors affecting the availability of local inputs such as natural resources, the size of the market, geographical location, the position of the economy, the cultural and political environment, factor prices, transport costs and certain elements of the economic policy of the government (trade policy, industrial policy, budget policy, tax policy, etc.). 2.The determinants of FDI: theory and evidence FDI has been regarded in the last decades as an effective channel to transfer technology and foster growth in developing countries. This point of view vividly contrasts with the common belief that was accepted in some academic and political spheres in the 1950s and 1960s, according to which FDI was harmful for the economic performance of less developed countries. The theoretical discussion that permeated part of the development economics of the second half of the twentieth century has been approached from a new angle on the light of the New Growth Theory. Thus, the models built in this novel framework provide an interesting background in order to study the correlation between FDI and the growth rate of GDP (Calvo and Robles, 2003). In the neoclassical growth model technological progress and labor growth are exogenous, inward FDI merely increases the investment rate, leading to a transitional increase in per capita income growth but has no long-run growth effect (Hsiao and Hsiao, 2006). The new growth theory in the 1980s endogenizes technological progress and FDI has been considered to have permanent growth effect in the host country through technology transfer and spillover. There is ongoing discussion on the impact of FDI on a host country economy, as can be seen from recent surveys of the literature (De Mello, 1997, 1999; Fan, 2002; Lim, 2001). According to the neoclassical growth theory model, FDI does not affect the long-term growth rate. This is understandable if we consider the assumptions of the model, namely: constant economies of scale, decreasing marginal products of inputs, positive substitution elasticity of inputs and perfect competition (Sass, 2003). Within the framework of the neo-classical models (Solow, 1956), the impact of FDI on the growth rate of output was constrained by the existence of diminishing returns in the physical capital. Therefore, FDI could only exert a level effect on the output per capita, but not a rate effect. In other words, it was unable to alter the growth rate of output in the long run (Calvo and Robles, 2003). As a consequence, of endogenous growth theory, FDI has a newly-perceived potential role in the growth process (Bende-Nabende and Ford, 1998). In the context of the New Theory of Economic Growth, however, FDI may affect not only the level of output per capita but also its rate of growth. This literature has developed various hypotheses that explain why FDI may potentially enhance the growth rate of per capita income in the host country (Calvo and Robles, 2003). However, the endogenous growth theory, which dispenses with the assumption of perfect competition, leaves more scope for the impact of FDI on growth. In this theoretical framework, investment, including FDI, affects the rate of growth through research and development (R&D) or through its impact on human capital. Even if the return on investment is declining, FDI may influence growth through externalities. Particularly, FDI displaces domestic savings (Papanek, 1973; Cohen, 1993; Reinhart and Talvi, 1998). In a seminal paper, Papanek (1973) showed the significant negative impacts of different types of capital on national savings. Based on a sample of 85 developing countries, Papanek found that foreign capital displaced domestic savings. Specifically, he showed that foreign aid, private investment and other capital crowded out national savings, and a reduction in domestic savings could lead to further increase on the dependency on foreign capital (Baharumshah and Thanoon, 2006). Another determinant, tariffs, has a positive effect on FDI if they are combined with the growth rate and openness, but they produce a negative effect when combined with wages. The real exchange rate produces a positive effect when it is combined with openness, domestic investment and government consumption. When domestic investment is excluded, the effect becomes negative. This supports the argument that an efficient environment that comes with more openness to trade is likely to attract foreign firms. This conclusion is also supported by Asiedu (2002) and Edwards (1990). In this model, investment tax and wages have a negative impact on FDI, while infrastructure and market size have a significantly positive impact on FDI. Generally, only in the case of export oriented FDI, cheap labor in terms of lower wages works as an incentive (Wheeler and Mody, 1992). On the other hand Tomiura (2003) study confirms that the positive association between FDI and R&D is robust even if firms undertaking no FDI and/or no R&D are included. In this respect, Morck and Yeung (1991) hypothesize and provide evidence that FDI creates wealth when an expanding firm possesses intangible assets, such as superior production and management skills, marketing expertise, patents and consumer goodwill. 3.Data definition The indicators tested in this study are selected on the basis of FDI theories and previous empirical literature. The indicators tested in the panel study and cross-section SUR, are the FDI determinants for which the data have been found for developing countries for at least 30 years. Data sets related to a number of developing countries are sometimes discontinuous for some variables (i.e. not available for all 30 years). For that reason while defining the main determinants of FDI in this study, 24 developing countries for which uninterrupted data sets for 30 years at some variables could be used Developing countries list is reported in the Appendix. Hence, the forecasts related to main determinants of FDI in this study were obtained under these constraints. At the same time, some variables referred as FDI determinants by UNCTAC and used in literature were used in the same sampling. 4.Methodology Panel data techniques has been used to estimate the FDI equations because of their advantages over cross-section and time series in using all the information available, which are not detectable in pure cross-sections or in pure time series. In this study, the pool data (cross-section time series) has been created for 24 countries over 1975-2005 periods. T denotes the number of periods and N denotes the number of observations for each period. For making the evidence more reliable, five basic models were set up for analyses. After reliable estimators were derived from SUR and fully modified OLS (FMOLS) models, convergence model was defined; countries that capture less FDI are converging to countries capturing more FDI. 5.Conclusion Competition among governments to attract FDI has grown significantly. Many countries have not only reduced or eliminated such restrictions, but also moved toward encouraging FDI with tax and other incentives. Appropriate domestic policies will help attract FDI and maximize its benefit, while at the same time removing obstacles to local businesses. Foreign enterprises, like domestic ones, pursue the good business environment rather than the special favors offered to induce the foreign enterprises to locate in the incentive offering regions, transparency and accountability of governments and corporations are fundamental conditions for providing a trustworthy and effective framework for the social, environmental, and economic life of their citizens. They bring huge domestic governance challenges not only for the benefit of foreign investors, but also for domestic business and society at large as well. In the study the main determinants of FDI have been identified. It is possible for the countries to develop policies particular to their own economic structure by looking at the main FDI determinants. For example, when looking at the “Gross Capital Formation” indicator in country X, we can conclude that this country can develop policies to encourage the import of investment goods instead of the import of consumption goods. Again country Y can improve intra trade policies by taking the “Openness” indicator into account. Or by taking the “Total Debt Service-GDP ratio” indicator into account, country Z can develop policies related to utilization of resources provided from external debt in productive fields in order to cover the countrys capital inadequacy. So, the role of FDI in country growth can be expressed by the effects of each of the determinants or by the effects of all determinants together. In this way, the role of FDI at the country growth can be used effectively. 译文： FDI 在发展中国家的决定因素分析 Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Ersoy 摘 要 目的：本文的目的是调查 FDI 在发展中国家的决定因素。 方法：本文基于 24 个发展中国家 1983 至 2005 年期间面板数据研究了外国直接投资的决定因素对 FDI 引入的影响程度。 结果：外国直接投资与其决定因素的相互作用对发展中国家的经济进步具有强烈的正面影响，而对国内生产总值和通货膨胀则产生负面影响。外国直接投资的最重要的决定因素是通讯变量。 一、 介绍 为了 发展 一个国际经济 体系， 贸易历来是联系各国经济的 主要机制 ， 外国直接投资是一个联系 两国 经济 的 类似机制 ， 因此，这两种机制相辅相成。外国直接投资的影响取决于它是否是 开展旨在 获得自然资源 的投资活动 ， 是否选择消费者 市场还是 意 在通过投资活动扩大区域性比较优势 ， 或者 旨在 获得 其他战略资产 如：研发能力的提高 。大多数发展中国家缺乏技术能力 ， 外国直接投资促进技术转移 ，并且缩小了 发展中国家 与 发达国家之间的技术差距， 实际 上外国直接投资 的 外部溢出效应 被认为 是现代技术传播的最重要渠道。 外国直接投资对东道国 的 经济 有很多 其他的影响。它影响着收入 、 产量 、 价格 、就业 、 经济增长， 以及发展和普 及所在国的福利 。它也可能是导致了国际经济全球化的最重要因素之一。因此，外国直接投资 国际间 流动的大量增加是过去 20 年世界经济全球化的最明显标志之一。因此，我们可以得出结论：外国直接投资是发展中国家的经济成功增长的关键因素，因为经济发展的本质是快速，有效地转移和通过跨越国界的 “ 最佳做法 ”的采用 。 另一方面 ,一般来说 ,外国投资者也受到了三 组要素的影响： （ 1）、 项目的盈利能力 ； （ 2）、附属公司从事的一些经营活动， 可以 很容易的 被整合到投资者全球战略 的操作； （ 3）、东道国对环境的支持力度。 为了确定外国直接投资的 决定因素已经进行了大量的研究， 但没有 达成 共识 ，在某种意义上说，没有一套被广泛接受解释变量，可以被看作是“真正的”外国直接投资的决定因素。 FDI 研究所得的结果通常都比较敏感，这表明结果缺乏稳健性。 例如 ，劳动力成本 、 贸易壁垒、贸易平衡、汇率和税收 这些因素都对 FDI 产生消极与积极双方面的影响。 Chakrabarti(2001)认为 “ FDI 与具有争议的各个变量 (即，税收，工资，开放，汇率很多，关税，增长和贸易平衡 )间的关系对一些信息的变动 是高度敏感 的”。 重要的问题是 “ 为什么公司 要 在海外 进行 投资 ？”杜宁（ 1993） ，他通过整合前人提出的理论发展了自己的观点 ,因为现有的解释不能完全的证明 FDI 的存在。 根据杜宁的理论， 国际生产 是所有权、国际化、本土化的优势等一系列影响的结果 。 后者是最重要的 ：投资者是基于哪些因素才选择一个地区开展项目计划 。这些包括的影响当地有效性的投入因素 ： 自然资源、市场规模 、 地理 位置、经济体位置 、文化和政治环境 、要素 价格 、 运输成本与政府经济政策 （ 贸易政策、产业政策 、 预算政策、税收政策 ) 等。 本研究的主要目是确定 在全球框架下 外国直接投资 的资本流向发展中国家 的主要影响 因素 。外国直接投资流动是全球化现象的 主要动力之一，因此外国直接投资的决定因素，将有助于国家的政治发展进程。 二、 FDI 的影响因素 :理论与证据 过去几十年 间， 外国直接投资 已经成为发展中国家一种传播技术与促进发展的有效途径， 这种观点 与五、六十年代学术、政治领域普遍接收的信仰形成了 鲜明 的 对 比 ，根据 这些观点 外国直接投资对欠发达国家的经济表现是有害的。 理论性的 讨论 揭示了二十世纪后半叶的一些发展经济体已经在全新增长理论指导下开发出一种新视角。因此，在这个新的框架内建立的模型为研究外国直接投资与 GDP增长率的相关性而刻画了一个有趣的背景（ Calvo and Robles， 2003）。 在新古典增长模型的技术进步和劳动增长 前提下 ，外来直接投资仅仅增加了投资率，导致了人均收入的增长过渡性增加，但并没有长期增长的影响。在 20世纪 80年代的新增长理论 内生性 技术进步 ， 外国直接投资一直被认为 可以通过技术转移与溢出效应而 在东道国 产生 永久 的 增长 效应。我在讨论 FDI对东道国的影响 ，这可以从最近的 研究中看出来（ De Mello， 1997， 1999； Fan， 2002； Lim， 2001）。 根据新古典增长理论模型， 外国直接投资不影响长期增长率。如果我们了解一下 模型的假设，我们就会发 现这是可以理解的，这些假设是：不变的规模经济，持续的边际产出的降低，完全竞争市场 （ Sass， 2003） ，积极的投入品的替代弹性。在新古典模型的框架下，外国直接投资对产量增长速度的影响由于实物资本收益递减的存在而受到了限制 （ Solow， 1956） 。因此外商直接投资只是对人均产出水平产生了一定的影响，而并没有影响其增长率，换言之，从长远来看这是无法改变产出增长率的 （ Calvo and Robles， 2003） 。 因此 ,内生增长理论表明 外国直接投 资在增长过程中有一个被新认知的潜在的作用（ Bende-Nabende and Ford， 1998） 。 在此背景下的新经济增长理论认为 ， 外国直接投资可能不仅影响了人均产出水平，而且也影响其增长率 。这 些文献假设 可能解释 了 为什么外国直接投资在主办国家提高人均收入的增长率 （ Calvo and Robles， 2003） 。然而 ， 内生增长理论 ，忽略 了完全竞争市场结构假设下 ,给 FDI 在经济增长的影响方面留了更大的空间 。在这个理论框架 下， 投资 ， 包括 外国直接投资，通过研发与其他人力资本 影响 所在国 的发展速度。即使投资回报率下降 ,外商直接投资 会通过外部性影响经济发展 。 外国直接投资取代国内储蓄 （ Papanek， 1973； Cohen， 1993； Reinhart and Talvi，199