7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
1/91
T.Y. BMS Project Report on
AN OVERVIEW OF FDI
SUBMITTED BY,
CHIRAG NARESH CHAUDHARY
T.Y.BMS [Semester V]
UTTARI BHARTI SABHAS
RAMANANDA ARYA D.A.V. COLLEGE
OF COMMERCE AND SCIENCE,
BHANDUP (E).
SUBMITTED TO,
UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI
ACADEMIC YEAR
2012-2013
PROJECT GUIDENCE BY
PROF. SRIDHARAN SIR
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
2/91
DECLARATION
I, Mr. CHAUDHARY CHIRAG NARESH (Seat No. ) of
R.A.DAV College of Science & Commerce of TYBMS [Semester V] hereby
declare that I have completed my project, titled AN OVERVIEW OF FDI in
the Academic Year 2012-2013. The information submitted herein is true and
original to the best of my knowledge.
Signature of Student
[CHIRAG CHAUDHARY]
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
3/91
UTTARI BHARTI SABHAS,
RAMANANDA ARYA D. A. V. COLLEGE
OF COMMERCE AND SCIENCE,
BHANDUP (E)
CERTIFICATE
OF
PROJECT WORK
This is to certify that
Mr. CHIRAG NARESH CHAUDHARY ofT.Y.B.M.S. Semester V
(Roll No - 352) has undertaken & completed the project work titled AN
OVERVIEW OF FDI during the academic year 2012-13 under the guidance of
Prof. SRIDHARAN SIR submitted in SEPTEMBER, 2012 to this college in
fulfillment of the curriculum ofBACHELOR OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES,
UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI.
This is a bona fide project work & the information presented is True & original tothe best of our knowledge & belief.
PROJECT GUIDE
(SRIDHARAN SIR)
COURSECOORDINATOR
(CHANDRAKALASHRIVASTAVA)
PRINCIPAL
(DR AJAY BHAMARE)
EXTERNALEXAMINER
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
4/91
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
With profound sense of gratitude and regard, I express my sincere thanks to my
project guide Mr. SRIDHARAN SIRfor his valuable guidance and the
confidence he instilled in me, that helped me in the successful completion of this
project report. Without his help, this project would have been a distant affair.
His thorough understanding of the subject and professional guidance was indeed of
immense help to me.
This project helped me a lot in getting more knowledge and experience in the
field of Finance. This project has been very informative and interesting.
Signature of Student
[CHIRAG NARESH CHAUDHARY]
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
5/91
An Overview of FDIAnalysis of different perspectives of FDI
By: Chirag Chaudhary
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
6/91
Index
1. Introduction to FDI .....................................................................................................................1
1.1. What is Foreign Direct Investment (FDI?) .............................................................................1
1.2. Composition........................................................................................................................3
1.3. Determinants ......................................................................................................................4
1.4. Classification of Foreign Direct Investments .........................................................................4
1.5. Classification by Motivation ................................................................................................4
2. Current Global Scenario and Trends ............................................................................................8
2.1. Global Overview ..................................................................................................................8
2.2. Sector Highlights ............................................................................................................... 10
2.3. Regional Highlights ............................................................................................................ 11
2.4. Expansions: A Growing Part of FDI ..................................................................................... 20
3. Contribution of FDI towards development ................................................................................. 23
3.1. Trends .............................................................................................................................. 24
3.2. FDI and Growth ................................................................................................................. 25
3.3. FDI and environmental and social concerns ........................................................................ 36
3.4. Net Contribution of FDI to Developments .......................................................................... 38
4. Political Considerations ............................................................................................................ 41
4.1. Literature Review .............................................................................................................. 43
4.2. Discouragement by Political Risk to FDI.............................................................................. 44
5. Social Considerations ................................................................................................................ 56
6. Challenges ................................................................................................................................ 66
6.1. Host country policy measures ............................................................................................ 68
6.2. Home country policy measures .......................................................................................... 72
6.3. The right to regulate .......................................................................................................... 74
7. Corporate Social Responsibility and FDI ..................................................................................... 78
7.1. Legal limitations on corporate accountability ..................................................................... 78
7.2. Power imbalances ............................................................................................................. 79
7.3. FDI liberalization ............................................................................................................... 80
8. Conclusion ........................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
9. Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 84
10. Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 85
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
7/91
An Overview of FDI
1. Introduction to FDIForeign Direct Investment (FDI) from the viewpoint of the Balance of Payments
and the International Investment Position (IIP) share a same conceptual
framework given by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The Balance of
Payments is a statistical statement that systematically summarizes, for a specific
time span, the economic transactions of an Economy with the rest of the world
(transactions between residents and non-residents) and the IIP compiles for a
specific date, such as the end of a year, the value of the stock of each financial
asset and liability as defined in the standard components of the Balance ofPayments.
1.1. What is Foreign Direct Investment (FDI?)According to the IMF and OECD definitions, direct investment reflects the aim of
obtaining a lasting interest by a resident entity of one economy (direct investor) in
an enterprise that is resident in another economy (the direct investment
enterprise). The lasting interest implies the existence of a long-term
relationship between the direct investor and the direct investment enterprise anda significant degree of influence on the management of the latter.
Direct investment involves both the initial transaction establishing the
relationship between the investor and the enterprise and all subsequent capital
transactions between them and among affiliated enterprises4, both incorporated
and unincorporated. It should be noted that capital transactions which do not
give rise to any settlement, e.g. an interchange of shares among affiliated
companies, must also be recorded in the Balance of Payments and in the IIP.
The fifth Edition of the IMFs Balance of Payment Manual definesthe owner of
10% or more of a companys capital as a direct investor. This guideline is not a
fast rule, as It acknowledges that smaller percentage may entail a controlling
interest in the company (and, conversely, that a share of more than 10% may not
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
8/91
An Overview of FDI
signify control). But the IMF recommends using this percentage as the basic
dividing line between direct investment and portfolio investment in the form of
shareholdings. From this moment, any further capital transactions between these
two companies should be recorded as a direct investment. When a non-resident
holds less than10% of the shares of an enterprise as portfolio investment, and
subsequently acquires additional shares resulting in a direct investment (10% of
more), only the purchase of additional shares is recorded as direct investment in
the Balance of Payments. The holdings that were acquired previously should not
be reclassified from portfolio to direct investment in the Balance of Payments but
the total holdings should be reclassified in the IIP.
Concerning the terms direct investor and direct investment enterprise, the IMF
and the OECD define them as follows. A direct investor may be an individual, an
incorporated or unincorporated private or public enterprise, a government, a
group of related individuals, or a group of related incorporated and/or
unincorporated enterprises which have a direct investment enterprise, operating
in a country other than the country of residence of the direct investor. A direct
investment enterprise is an incorporated or unincorporated enterprise in which a
foreign investor owns 10% or more of the ordinary shares or voting power of an
incorporated enterprise or the equivalent of an unincorporated enterprise.Direct investment enterprises may be subsidiaries, associates or branches. A
subsidiary is an incorporated enterprise in which the foreign investor controls
directly or indirectly (through another subsidiary) more than 50% of the
shareholders voting power. An associate is an enterprise where the direct
investor and its subsidiaries control between 10% and 50% of the voting shares. A
branch is a wholly or jointly owned unincorporated enterprise.
It should be noted that the choice between setting up either asubsidiary/associate or a branch in a foreign country is dependent, among other
factors, upon the existing regulations in the host country (and sometimes in its
own country, too). National regulations are often more restrictive for subsidiaries
than for branches but this is not always the case.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
9/91
An Overview of FDI
To establish the basic concepts related to FDI, following points should benoted:
When a firm controls (or have a strong say in) another firm located abroad,e.g. by owing more than 0% of its equity, the former is said "parent enterprise"
(or "investor") and the latter "foreign affiliate".
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is the financial investment giving rise andsustaining over time the investor's significant degree of influence on the
management of the affiliate.
The initial investment can be the purchase of an existing firm (by acquisition orby merger, the so-called "M&A") as well as the foundation of a new legal
entity who usually - but not necessarily - makes a green-field real investment
(e.g. building a factory) in the foreign country [1]. In a broader definition, FDI consists of the acquisition or creation of assets (e.g.
firm equity, land, houses, oil-drilling rigs) undertaken by foreigners. If in these
enterprises they are not alone but act together with local firms and/or
governments, one talk of "joint ventures".
A country outflows of FDI means that it is "exporting money" to "buy" or"build" foreign productive capacity, whose ownership will remain in the first
country's hands.
For a country, attracting an inflow of FDI strengthen the connection to worldtrade networks and finance its development path. However, unilateral massive
FDI to a country can make it dependent on the external pressure that foreign
owners might exert on it.
Since it is through FDI that a firm becomes a multinational, one could say thatit's the FDI process that generates MNC (multinational companies). The
reverse is also true: firms that are already multinational generate the majority
of FDI flows.
1.2. CompositionFDI has three components:
Equity capital;
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
10/91
An Overview of FDI
reinvested earnings, the investor's share of earning not distributed asdividends by affiliates, in proportion to its share in the equity (say for instance
50% in a certain joint venture);
Intra-company loans, when the investor borrows funds to the affiliate, usuallywithout the intention of asking the money back.
1.3. DeterminantsAt investor's level, a firm can decide to make a foreign investment because of
many factors, including:
Upstream integration, by purchasing a provider, whose input will now be soldcheaper (or exclusively) to it or be differentiated along particular features;
Horizontal integration, by purchasing a firm making the same product, toexpand its production, reduces costs, improving logistics;
Downstream integration, by purchasing a firm using or distributing itsproducts, to get higher value added along the chain and to aggressively push
distribution;
Diversification, by purchasing a firm doing somewhat different activities thanthe purchaser, to seize new opportunities.
1.4. Classification of Foreign Direct InvestmentsThere is no single definition that applies to all types of FDI, and TNCs certainly do
not label their activities in this way. Instead, it is principally the academic
community that has set out to define the varieties of FDI. One view breaks foreign
investment into four distinct types: resource seeking, market seeking, efficiency
seeking, and strategic asset seeking. Having a clear understanding of the
investor's motivation helps you to target more effectively particular varieties of
investors for your location.
1.5. Classification by MotivationResource seeking
FDI in natural resources (minerals, raw materials, and agricultural products)
FDI seeking low-cost or specialized labor
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
11/91
An Overview of FDI
Market Seeking
FDI into markets previously served by exports, or into closed markets protected
by high import
FDI by supplier companies following their customers overseas
FDI that aims to adapt products to local tastes and needs, and to use localresources
Efficiency seeking
Rationalized or integrated operations leading to cross-border product or process
specialization
Strategic asset seeking
Acquisitions and alliances to promote long-term corporate objectives
Most FDI in developing and transition economies is resource seeking. This type of
investment aims to exploit a country's comparative advantage. For instance,
countries rich in primary materials, such as oil or minerals, will attract companies
seeking to develop these resources. Low-cost or specialized labor is two other
factors that attract resource-seeking FDI. Resource-seeking FDI is generally used
to produce goods for export.
In contrast, market-seeking investment is aimed at reaching local or regional
markets, often including neighboring countries. Companies making this type of
investment typically manufacture a wide variety of household consumer products
or other types of industrial goods in response to actual or future demand for their
products. In some cases, market-seeking FDI occurs as supplier companies follow
their customers overseas. For example, an auto components manufacturer may
follow a car producer. Market-seeking investment is often defensive and is used
by companies to try to circumvent real or threatened import barriers. A liberal
trade regime is essential if the investor wishes to serve neighboring or overseas
markets.
Efficiency-seeking FDI frequently occurs as a follow-on form of investment. A TNC
may make a number of resource- or market-seeking investments, and over time,
it may decide to consolidate these operations on a product or process basis.
Companies are able to do this, however, only if cross-border markets are open
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
12/91
An Overview of FDI
and well developed. As a result, this form of FDI is most common in regionally
integrated markets, most notably in Europe and Asia.
TNCs also may undertake smaller-scale product rationalization among a few
neighboring countries. This type of investment is illustrated by Nestl's North
African and Middle Eastern affiliates. Each affiliate produces a specialized product
for the regional market. Each affiliate also imports other products from sister
affiliates in neighboring countries. Taken together, the region has access to a full
spectrum of products, but each affiliate is responsible for the production of only a
small segment.
Strategic asset-seeking FDI occurs when companies undertake investments,
acquisitions or alliances to promote their long-term strategic objectives. For
example, a TNC may form a strategic alliance with a company based in another
country to jointly undertake mutually beneficial R&D. Strategic asset-seeking FDI
is common in industrialized countries.
By contrast to the classification according to the institutional sector, the OECD
Benchmark definition favors an industrial breakdown, which includes nine
economic sectors. The OECD specifically recommends, for the purpose of thisclassification, that FDI carried out via a resident holding company be classified
according to the industrial sector to which the parent company belongs. Under
this criterion, when the parent company is a bank, FDI transactions carried out by
a non-banking holding company would be attributed to the Banks
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
13/91
An Overview of FDI
Institutional sector (IMF) Economic or industry sector (OECD)
Monetary Authority Agriculture, hunting, forestry and
fishing
Banks Mining and quarryingGeneral Government Manufacturing
Other Resident Sector Electricity, gas and water
Construction
Wholesale and retail trade and
restaurants
Transport, storage and communications
Financing, real estate and business
services
Community, social and personal
services
The topics touched upon above, will be discussed in detail in coming chapters.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
14/91
An Overview of FDI
2. Current Global Scenario and TrendsThe year 2011 was a challenging one for the global FDI market. Natural disastersin Asia-Pacific and economic and political instability in Europe, north Africa and
the Middle East led many companies to put on hold their FDI plans, leading to a
sharp decline in FDI in many countries. North America, with brighter economic
prospects and a shale rush, achieved solid FDI growth. Likewise, companies
continued to be attracted to the investment opportunities in Africa and Latin
America, with 20%-plus growth in FDI in each region. Brazil was again the star
performer, with a 38% increase in FDI projects.
Renewable energy was the fastest growing sector for FDI in 2011, despite the
challenges facing the sector which are discussed in our sector focus. Renewable
energy became the leading sector for capital investment in Europe in 2011, and
was the second largest sector in North America.
The following data uncovers how expansions are becoming a much more
important element of the FDI market. In recent times, almost one in five FDI
projects was an expansion project, and the data further shows that expansions
are particularly important for extraction, manufacturing, and front- and back-
office projects.
2.1. Global Overview(Source: Financial Times)
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
15/91
An Overview of FDI
Against the backdrop of another tumultuous year for the world economy, foreign
investors have remained cautiously optimistic with slow but solid growth in FDI.
The number of FDI projects increased by 5.6% in 2011, faster than the 3%increase in 2010. In total FDI Markets recorded 13,718 FDI projects in 2011. After
declining by 14.5% in 2010, the estimated capital investment associated with FDI
projects grew by 1.2% in 2011 to $860bn, indicating the beginning of a recovery in
more capital-intensive sectors. The same pattern was seen in employment, with
estimated direct job creation from FDI increasing by 2.5% in 2011 to 2.27 million,
following a 3.5% decline in 2010.
Despite the political upheaval in North Africa, Africa as a whole was the growth
hotspot in 2011, with a 24% increase in FDI projects recorded. In contrast, Europe
was the only region to experience a decline in the number of FDI projects in 2011.
With Europe holding back recovery, the FDI market still has some way to go to
reach the pre-recession peak of 15,489 FDI projects.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
16/91
An Overview of FDI1
A big winner for FDI in 2011 was Brazil and its neighbors in Latin America. A long-
touted success story, Brazil has been steadily attracting more FDI projects since
2007. Last year was a record year for FDI projects in Brazil, and capital investment
also grew by 48%. However, as a source country for FDI, Brazil still accounts for
less than 1% of global FDI projects and 0.5% of global capital invested.
Brazils neighbors are also benefiting from the growing interest in the region:
Argentina Colombia and Uruguay each achieved growth in FDI project numbers in
2011. Overall, the number of FDI projects in Latin America grew by 22% in 2011,
just behind the 24% growth in Africa, and accounted for 10% of global FDI
projects.
India and China also had a strong performance in 2011, achieving an increase in
capital investment of 15% and 3%, respectively, as well as an increase in project
numbers.
Russia experienced a small decrease in FDI project numbers and capital
investment, although outward FDI projects from Russia grew marginally by 3%.
Ranked sixth in the world as a source of FDI, Canada is growing rapidly in
importance as a global investor, establishing 41.9% more projects overseas in
2011 than in 2010. Capital investment from Canadian companies overseas greweven more, by an estimated 59.4% in 2011. Australian companies also ramped up
their investment overseas, establishing 20.5% more FDI projects in 2011 than in
2010, with a 52.8% growth in job creation overseas compared to 2010.
2.2. Sector HighlightsThe top five sectors in terms of project numbers all experienced growth in 2011.
Software and IT remained the leading sector for global FDI projects, with a very
strong 18% increase in project numbers. The top three sectors, which also include
business and financial services, accounted for 34.7% of global FDI projects in
2011.
Metals were the leading sector worldwide when ranked by capital investment,
with an estimated $111.65bn of FDI in 2011. Metals replaced the coal, oil and
natural gas sector in the number one spot a position it had maintained since FDI
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
17/91
An Overview of FDI1
Markets began tracking FDI in 2003. The number of FDI projects in the metals
sector grew by 17.8% in 2011. Renewable energy was one of the fastest growing
sectors in 2011, with the number of FDI projects increasing by 20% and with
capital investment increasing by 40.7%. Renewable energy was the third largest
sector for capital investment, after metals and coal, oil and natural gas.
The automotive sector also had a good year in 2011, with FDI project numbers
growing by 12.8%. Capital investment associated with these projects reached an
estimated $63bn in 2011 and job creation accounted for 13% of the global total.
China, India and the US attracted more than 38% of these projects. The real
estate sector continued to stagnate, with an 11.5% decline in FDI project numbers
in 2011, ranking 15th its weakest performance since 2005. Capital investment
and jobs also continued to fall in the sector in 2011.
Why the market did not recover in 2012?
The global economy experienced four major shocks in 2011, which had a negative
impact on corporate investment plans. First, the Arab Spring created high levels of
political uncertainty and investment risk in several countries in North Africa and
subsequently the Middle East.
Second, the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster in Japan had a major
impact on the Japanese economy and global supply chains.Third, the massive flooding in Thailand, a leading country for FDI, forced many
companies to postpone their investment plans in the country and also disrupted
global supply chains. Fourth, the European debt crisis added to global risk and
uncertainty and reduced economic growth in Europe to near zero. The outcome
of these four shocks can be clearly seen in FDI statistics for 2011. FDI Markets
recorded a 29% decline in the number of FDI projects investing in Egypt, a 25%
decline in Japan, a 35% decline in Thailand and a 22% decline in projects investing
in Italy. With production and supply chains severely damaged domestically, Japanand Thailand-based companies accelerated their outward FDI overseas with
growth in outward FDI projects in 2011 of 6% and 45%, respectively.
2.3. Regional HighlightsAsia Pacific
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
18/91
An Overview of FDI1
FDI projects into Asia Pacific:
China, India and Singapore attracted 57% of FDI projects in Asia- Pacific in 2011.
India was the strongest performing country with a 21% growth in FDI projects in
2011, following just 1% growth in 2010. The impact of the natural disasters in
Japan and Thailand is clearly evident in the sharp decline in FDI in both countries.
Hong Kong had a strong year, with its number of projects growing by 6%, after a
21% drop in 2010.
In terms of the size of projects, Indonesia, Pakistan and South Korea and each
recorded growth in capital investment in 2011 of more than 70% after securing
large-scale investment projects. Examples include Cyprus-based Solvay Group
announcing a $3bn nickel smelting plant in Indonesia, and United Arab Emirates
based Al Ghurair Group announcing plans to develop a $700m oil refinery inPakistan. The top-performing country for attracting new jobs was China, which
saw just over 340,000 jobs created as a result of inward FDI.
FDI Projects out of Asia Pacific
Analyzing FDI overseas, Japan, India and China accounted for more than 60% of
FDI projects from Asia-Pacific countries in 2011. Japan remained the dominant
outward investor, establishing more FDI projects overseas than India and China
combined. Japans position is even more important when the size of projects isconsidered, with Japanese companies creating nearly 300,000 jobs overseas; 40%
of total overseas job creation generated by Asia-Pacific countries.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
19/91
An Overview of FDI1
Of the major investing countries, Hong Kong and Australia recorded the fastestgrowth in outward FDI projects, with percentage growth rates of 23% and 21%,
respectively. In Thailand, flooding over the monsoon season seems to have
encouraged domestic companies to invest overseas. In terms of capital
investment overseas, Indian, Hong Kong and Vietnamese companies each
increased their outward FDI by more than 70% in 2011.
This map shows % change from 2011
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
20/91
An Overview of FDI1
Capital investment by sector in 2011:
Metals and minerals was the largest sector for FDI, with an estimated $46bn of
capital investment tracked by FDI Markets in Asia-Pacific in 2011. With a 54%
decline in capital investment in coal, oil and natural gas, the sector moved down
into second place. In contrast, FDI in renewable energy grew rapidly, with a 59%
in project numbers and 77% increase in jobs creation in the sector in 2011. In
total, an estimated $6.93bn of FDI was announced in Asia-Pacifics renewable
energy sector in 2011. Software and IT services, while not appearing in the top
sectors in terms of capital investment, had a strong year in terms of project
numbers, with a 27% increase, and in job creation with nearly 60,000 new
software and IT services jobs created by FDI in the region in 2011.
Europe
FDI projects into Europe:
The number of FDI projects in Europe declined by 3% in 2011, with a mixed
performance across countries. The UK experienced solid growth in FDI, reinforcing
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
21/91
An Overview of FDI1
its position as the leading FDI location in Europe. As well as a 13% increase in
recorded FDI project numbers, capital investment in the UK increased by 48% and
FDI job creation by 33%. However, in terms of total job creation, FDI in Russia
generated the highest number of new jobs, with 89,047 jobs created in 2011
compared to 66,817 in the UK. This was despite a decline in FDI in Russia in 2011.
A selection of small and medium-sized economies in Europe performed strongly.
Ireland, the Netherlands, Serbia and Romania all achieved a significant growth in
inward FDI. While the Netherlands was the best performer, with 29% growth in
FDI projects in 2011, estimated job creation from FDI in the Netherlands actually
fell by 13% as the average project size declined. In contrast, job creation in Ireland
grew by 13% and capital investment by 78%. Positioned outside the top 10,
Belgium was among the countries that experienced a contrast, with a 43% decline
in the number of recorded FDI projects in 2011.
FDI Projects Out of Europe:This map shows % change from 2011
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
22/91
An Overview of FDI1
In terms of investment overseas, the UK retained its position as the leading
European investor measured by the number of FDI projects established overseas
in 2011, closely followed by Germany. German companies, however, created a
higher number of jobs overseas, with 180,830 created by German companies in
2011 and 155,987 by UK companies. The number of FDI projects overseas from
France and Russia increased slightly in 2011. FDI from Spain created 19% fewer
jobs and 28% lower capital investment than in 2010. Ireland and Denmark also
saw growth in the number of outward FDI projects by 20% and 21%, respectively.
Capital investment made by Danish companies overseas increased from an
estimated $3.4bn in 2010 to nearly $8bn in 2011. Major Danish investors included
Grundfos, a manufacturer of pipes and pumps, investing in a 50m manufacturing
facility in Serbia, and Lego announcing plans to boost capacity at its Nyiregyhaza
plant in Hungary with an investment of $94m.
The largest sector for FDI in Europe in 2011 was renewable energy. Capital
investment in renewable energy almost doubled in 2011, reaching an estimated
$40bn and accounting for one-third of estimated capital investment in Europe. In
contrast, capital investment in the coal, oil and natural gas sector fell by 36%, with
estimated investment of $13bn. The transport equipment sector also saw a large
decline in FDI in 2011 with a 25% drop in capital investment.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
23/91
An Overview of FDI1
North America
FDI projects into North America:
Four states/provinces attracted 33 % of FDI into North America in 2011. California
was the leading state for FDI in North America, attracting 12% of inward FDI
projects in 2011, followed by New York (8%), Ontario (7%) and Texas (6%). The
fastest growing of the top 15 states/provinces for FDI in 2011 were Alberta, New
Jersey, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
FDI projects out of North America:
While California was the leading state in North America for outward FDI, with 629
projects in 2011, of the top 15 outward investors; Ontario recorded the fastest
growth in outward FDI in 2011, with a 50% growth in project numbers. Quebec
also saw a substantial increase in outward FDI with a 33% increase in FDI projects
in 2011. Washington, Georgia, Florida, Texas and New Jersey also all saw strong
growth in outward FDI.
Capital investment by sector in 2011:
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
24/91
An Overview of FDI1
Coal, oil and natural gas and renewable energy were the top two sectors for FDI in
2011, accounting for 34% of capital investment in North America. The ranking is
reversed from 2010, when renewable energy was the leading sector followed by
coal, oiling natural gas. Focus on investment opportunities in shale gas and oil is
the main factor behind the change in ranking, which saw the sector increase its
capital investment in North America by nearly 300% in 2011.
Middle East and Africa
FDI projects into Middle East and Africa:
The number of FDI projects in the Middle East and Africa (MEA) region grew by
16% in 2011. Capital investment was down slightly by 1% and job creation up by
3%. The top 10 countries for FDI attracted 64% of projects and capital investment,
and 54% of jobs created. The United Arab Emirates attracted the highest number
of projects, while Saudi Arabia attracted the most capital investment, which grew
by 40% in 2011 to just over $14bn. However, this is still far below the $42bn in
capital investment recorded in Saudi Arabia in 2008. South Africa was the best
performing country in the region in 2011, with a 57% increase in project numbers,
87% growth in capital investment, and a 28% rise in jobs created, making it the
leading country in the region for job creation. The political turmoil of 2011 led to
some dramatic changes in the volume of FDI in the countrys most affected by the
Arab Spring uprisings. The number of FDI projects in Libya and Yemen declined by80%, in Egypt by 29%, in Syria by 26% and in Tunisia the number of FDI projects
fell by 14%.
FDI projects out of Middle East and Africa:
Companies from the MEA region invested in 10% more projects overseas in 2011
than 2010, accounting for 4% of global FDI projects. Despite the growth, the
number of overseas FDI projects from MEA companies was still only 71% of the
volume recorded in 2008. The growth in projects led to a small increase in capital
investment of 0.4% but a decline in the number of jobs created by 6%. UAE based
companies remained most active in FDI overseas, although the number of their
projects declined by 3% in 2011 and capital investment overseas declined by 43%.
This was largely due to continued decline in real estate FDI, with UAE companies
investing in 57% fewer real estate projects in 2011 than 2010. South African
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
25/91
An Overview of FDI1
companies were the second most active in investing, with a strong growth of 25%
more projects overseas, 93% more capital investment and 65% more job creation
in 2011.
Capital investment by sector in 2011:Given the vast natural resources of the MEA region, coal, oil and natural gas was
the leading sector for FDI, with an estimated $35bn capital investment in 2011.
However, capital investment growth declined by 17% during 2011. The second
leading sector in 2011 was the metals and minerals sector, with $27bn of
investment, a 67% increase on 2010.
In terms of project numbers, financial and business services were the top sector,
accounting for 33% of all projects recorded in the MEA region, with growth of 3%
in 2011. In terms of jobs created, metals and minerals was the leading sector with
an estimated 57,000 jobs created and with very strong jobs growth of 38% in
2011. The sector accounted for more than one-quarter of all jobs created by FDI
in the MEA region in 2011.
The fastest growing sector for FDI in the region was the food, beverages and
tobacco sector, with a 49% increase in FDI project numbers, a 140% increase in
jobs created, and a 200% increase in capital investment.
The weakest performing sector in 2011 was again the real estate, hotels and
tourism sector, with a 36% decline in FDI projects and 40% decline in capital
investment in 2011.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
26/91
An Overview of FDI2
2.4. Expansions: A Growing Part of FDIGlobal trends in expansions:
When making an investment decision to develop its operations through organic
growth, a company has two main choices: set up a new operation or expand an
existing one. Over the period 2004-08, expansions declined in importance from
17% of capital investment in 2004 to just 11% in 2008. This was a period of rapidgrowth in the FDI market, with many companies establishing their first operations
in fast-growing emerging markets. Emerging market companies were also rapidly
expanding and building their global footprints. As a result, expansions became
relatively less important in global FDI. Since 2008, the start of the global economic
crisis, the reverse trend has been seen with expansions becoming more important
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
27/91
An Overview of FDI2
for global FDI. In 2011, expansions accounted for 23% of global capital investment
from FDI. In the period of global economic crisis, investors have shown a much
stronger preference for expanding existing operations than at any time since FDI
Markets began collating FDI data in 2003. Expanding existing operations has been
seen as a lower-risk and lower-cost FDI strategy than establishing a new presence.
Role of expansions for different FDI project types:
Expansions were most important for extraction projects, which are very capital-
intensive projects requiring substantial re-investment over a period of many years
for most projects. Expansions were also very important for manufacturing
projects, with 39% of projects in 2011 being expansions. Manufacturing
expansions accounted for 10% of all global FDI projects in 2011. Expansions were
also of high importance for front and back offices, indicating that many
companies have already established their regional or global back- and front-office
operations, with future investment decisions often involving expansion of existing
operations. The business functions where expansions are least important are
construction, electricity, and sales, marketing and support; where up to 95% of
FDI involves new investment projects.
Importance of expansions by country:
The role of expansions varies significantly across countries. Ireland has one of the
highest proportions of expansions, as does Hungary. Both countries act as
regional hubs for the manufacturing operations of global companies, which
typically results in a higher proportion of expansions in FDI. Countries with a long
track record in attracting FDI, or with a high level of foreign acquisitions, also
resulted in a higher share of expansions. Expansions in the US, the UK, Mexico
and Canada accounted for around one-quarter of FDI projects. Countries which
are relatively new to FDI and which are rapidly growing tended to have a smallshare of expansions in FDI. Indonesia, Turkey, Russia and Kenya all have below-
average levels of expansions in FDI. Low-tax and entry point economies, including
Switzerland, UAE, Singapore and Hong Kong, also had a very low proportion of
expansion in FDI, most likely due to their attractiveness for new companies due to
low tax.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
28/91
An Overview of FDI2
To summarize, the shift of FDI to emerging markets continued to gather pace in
2011, with Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean recording the fastest
growth in inward FDI. From a global perspective, FDI is largely market-seeking,
which explains why the economic regions with the best economic growth
prospects are attracting a larger share of global FDI. This trend is amplified by
resource-seeking FDI, with Africa, Latin America and resource-rich countries in
Asia attracting more investment.
As the case of North America shows, the shift in FDI to economic growth poles
and resource-rich countries does not necessarily result in less FDI in the advanced
economies; FDI in North America continued to grow in 2011. However, without
strong economic growth or natural resources (such as vast shale oil and gas
reserves in North America), there are fewer investment opportunities, leading toa decline in FDI. With limited natural resources, Europe is unlikely to achieve
growth in FDI without solid economic growth.
The FDI forecasting unit at FDI Intelligence is predicting 4.4% growth in global FDI
in 2012 as its positive scenario. This assumes that there are no major economic
and political crises (for example, a Greek default), that Europe does not fall into
recession, and that Chinas economic growth does not slow down below 7.5%. If
any of these events take place, then our revised forecast for 2012 is a 1% to 2%growth in FDI. If multiple events take place, then the FDI market is likely to decline
in 2012.
In the context of market uncertainty and, at best, slow growth in FDI in 2012, the
focus on renewable energy and expansions are of particular importance.
Renewable energy has become one the largest and fastest growing sectors for
FDI. With the right government policies, environmental conditions and industry
competitiveness, there continues to be very strong opportunities to attract FDI in
this sector. With rapid take-up of cloud-based services, social media and mobile
devices, we also expect strong growth of FDI in data centers in 2012, in particular
green data centers, which utilize renewable energy for their power requirements.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
29/91
An Overview of FDI2
3. Contribution of FDI towards developmentForeign direct investment (FDI) is an integral part of an open and effective
international economic system and a major catalyst to development. Yet, thebenefits of FDI do not accrue automatically and evenly across countries, sectors
and local communities. National policies and the international investment
architecture matter for attracting FDI to a larger number of developing countries
and for reaping the full benefits of FDI for development. The challenges primarily
address host countries, which need to establish a transparent, broad and effective
enabling policy environment for investment and to build the human and
institutional capacities to implement them.
With most FDI flows originating from OECD countries, developed countries can
contribute to advancing this agenda. They can facilitate developing countries
access to international markets and technology, and ensure policy coherence for
development more generally; use overseas development assistance (ODA) to
leverage public/private investment projects; encourage non-OECD countries to
integrate further into rules-based international frameworks for investment;
actively promote the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, together
with other elements of the OECD Declaration on International Investment; andshare with non-members the OECD peer review-based approach to building
investment capacity.
Developing countries, emerging economies and countries in transition have come
increasingly to see FDI as a source of economic development and modernization,
income growth and employment. Countries have liberalized their FDI regimes and
pursued other policies to attract investment. They have addressed the issue of
how best to pursue domestic policies to maximize the benefits of foreign
presence in the domestic economy. The study Foreign Direct Investment for
Development attempts primarily to shed light on the second issue, by focusing on
the overall effect of FDI on macroeconomic growth and other welfare-enhancing
processes, and on the channels through which these benefits take effect.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
30/91
An Overview of FDI2
The overall benefits of FDI for developing country economies are well
documented. Given the appropriate host-country policies and a basic level of
development, a preponderance of studies shows that FDI triggers technology
spillovers, assists human capital formation, contributes to international trade
integration, helps create a more competitive business environment and enhances
enterprise development. All of these contribute to higher economic growth,
which is the most potent tool for alleviating poverty in developing countries.
Moreover, beyond the strictly economic benefits, FDI may help improve
environmental and social conditions in the host country by, for example,
transferring cleaner technologies and leading to more socially responsible
corporate policies
3.1. TrendsThe magnitude of FDI flows continued to set records through the last decade,
before falling back in 2001. In 2000, world total inflows reached 1.3 trillion US
dollars (USD) or four times the levels of five years earlier. More than 80% of the
recipients of these inflows, and more than 90% of the initiators of the outflows,
were located in developed countries.
The limited share of FDI that goes to developing countries is spread very
unevenly, with two-thirds of total FDI flows from OECD members to non-OECD
countries going to Asia and Latin America. Within regions there are some strong
concentrations on a few countries, such as China and Singapore in the case of
Asia. Even so, FDI inflows represent significant sums for many developing
countries, several of them recording levels of FDI, relative to the size of the
domestic economy, that overshadow the largest OECD economies . Moreover, the
flow of FDI to developing countries worldwide currently overshadows official
development assistance by a wide margin, further highlighting the need to
address the use of FDI as a tool for economic development.
OECD FDI Outflows by Region
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
31/91
An Overview of FDI2
In recent years, an increasingly large share of FDI flows has been through mergers
and acquisitions (M&A). This partly reflects a flurry of transatlantic corporate
takeovers, and partly the large-scale privatization programs that were
implemented throughout much of the world in the 1990s. In developing
countries, however, Greenfield investment has remained the predominant mode
of entry for direct investors, followed by foreign companies participation in
privatizations.
3.2. FDI and GrowthBeyond the initial macroeconomic stimulus from the actual investment, FDI
influences growth by raising total factor productivity and, more generally, the
efficiency of resource use in the recipient economy. This works through three
channels: the linkages between FDI and foreign trade flows, the spillovers and
other externalities vis--vis the host country business sector, and the direct
impact on structural factors in the host economy.
Most empirical studies conclude that FDI contributes to both factor productivity
and income growth in host countries, beyond what domestic investment normally
would trigger. It is more difficult, however, to assess the magnitude of this
impact, not least because large FDI inflows to developing countries often concur
with unusually high growth rates triggered by unrelated factors. Whether, as
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
32/91
An Overview of FDI2
sometimes asserted, the positive effects of FDI are mitigated by a partial
crowding out of domestic investment is far from clear. Some researchers have
found evidence of crowding out, while others conclude that FDI may actually
serve to increase domestic investment. Regardless, even where crowding out
does take place, the net effect generally remains beneficial, not least as the
replacement tends to result in the release of scarce domestic funds for other
investment purposes.
In the least developed economies, FDI seems to have a somewhat smaller effect
on growth, which has been attributed to the presence of threshold
externalities. Apparently, developing countries need to have reached a certain
level of development in education, technology, infrastructure and health before
being able to benefit from a foreign presence in their markets. Imperfect andunderdeveloped financial markets may also prevent a country from reaping the
full benefits of FDI. Weak financial intermediation hits domestic enterprises much
harder than it does multinational enterprises (MNEs). In some cases it may lead to
a scarcity of financial resources that precludes them from seizing the business
opportunities arising from the foreign presence. Foreign investors participation in
physical infrastructure and in the financial sectors (subject to adequate regulatory
frameworks) can help on these two grounds.
a. Trade and InvestmentWhile the empirical evidence of FDIs effects on host-country foreign trade
differs significantly across countries and economic sectors, a consensus is
nevertheless emerging that the FDI-trade linkage must be seen in a broader
context than the direct impact of investment on imports and exports. The
main trade-related benefit of FDI for developing countries lies in its long-
term contribution to integrating the host economy more closely into the
world economy in a process likely to include higher imports as well asexports. In other words, trade and investment are increasingly recognized
as mutually reinforcing channels for cross-border activities. However, host-
country authorities need to consider the short and medium-term impacts
of FDI on foreign trade as well, particularly when faced with current-
account pressures, and they sometimes have to face the question of
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
33/91
An Overview of FDI2
whether some of the foreign-owned enterprises transactions with their
mother companies could diminish foreign reserves.
As countries develop and approach industrialized nation status, inward FDI
contributes to their further integration into the global economy by
engendering and boosting foreign trade flows (the link between openness
to trade and investment is illustrated by figure below). Apparently, several
factors are at play. They include the development and strengthening of
international networks of related enterprises and an increasing importance
of foreign subsidiaries in MNEs strategies for distribution, sales and
marketing. In both cases, this leads to an important policy conclusion,
namely that a developing countrys ability to attract FDI is influenced
significantly by the entrants subsequent access to engage in importing and
exporting activities. This, in turn, implies that would-be host countries
should consider a policy of openness to international trade as central in
their strategies to benefit from FDI, and that, by restricting imports from
developing countries, home countries effectively curtail these countries
ability to attract foreign direct investment. Host countries could consider a
strategy of attracting FDI through raising the size of the relevant market by
pursuing policies of regional trade liberalization and integration.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
34/91
An Overview of FDI2
Host countries ability to use FDI as a means to increase exports in the short
and medium term depends on the context. The clearest examples of FDI
boosting exports are found where inward investment helps host countries
that had been financially constrained make use either of their resource
endowment (e.g. foreign investment in mineral extraction) or their
geographical location (e.g. investment in some transition economies).
Targeted measures to harness the benefits of FDI for integrating host
economies more closely into international trade flows, notably by
establishing export-processing zones (EPZs), have attracted increasing
attention. In many cases they have contributed to a rising of imports as well
as exports of developing countries. However, it is not clear whether the
benefits to the domestic economy justify drawbacks such as the cost to the
public purse of maintaining EPZs or the risks of creating an uneven playing
field between domestic and foreign enterprises and of triggering
international bidding wars.
Recent studies do not support the presumption that lesser developed
countries may use inward FDI as a substitute for imports. Rather, FDI tends
to lead to an upsurge in imports, which is often gradually reduced as local
companies acquire the skills to serve as subcontractors to the entrantMNEs.
b. Technology TransfersEconomic literature identifies technology transfers as perhaps the most
important channel through which foreign corporate presence may produce
positive externalities in the host developing economy. MNEs are the
developed worlds most important source of corporate research and
development (R&D) activity, and they generally possess a higher level of
technology than is available in developing countries, so they have thepotential to generate considerable technological spillovers. However,
whether and to what extent MNEs facilitate such spillovers varies according
to context and sectors.
Technology transfer and diffusion work via four interrelated channels:
vertical linkages with suppliers or purchasers in the host countries;
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
35/91
An Overview of FDI2
horizontal linkages with competing or complementary companies in the
same industry; migration of skilled labor; and the internationalization of
R&D. The evidence of positive spillovers is strongest and most consistent in
the case of vertical linkages, in particular, the backward linkages with
local suppliers in developing countries. MNEs generally are found to
provide technical assistance, training and other information to raise the
quality of the suppliers products. Many MNEs assist local suppliers in
purchasing raw materials and intermediate goods and in modernizing or
upgrading production facilities.
Reliable empirical evidence on horizontal spillovers is hard to obtain,
because the entry of an MNE into a less developed economy affects the
local market structure in ways for which researchers cannot easily control.
The relatively few studies on the horizontal dimension of spillovers have
found mixed results. One reason for this could be efforts by foreign
enterprises to avoid a spillover of knowhow to their immediate
competition. Some recent evidence appears to indicate that horizontal
spillovers are more important between enterprises operating in unrelated
sectors.
A proviso relates to the relevance of the technologies transferred. For
technology transfer to generate externalities, the technologies need to berelevant to the host-country business sector beyond the company that
receives them first. The technological level of the host countrys business
sector is of great importance. Evidence suggests that for FDI to have a more
positive impact than domestic investment on productivity, the technology
gap between domestic enterprises and foreign investors must be relatively
limited. Where important differences prevail, or where the absolute
technological level in the host country is low, local enterprises are unlikely
to be able to absorb foreign technologies transferred via MNEs.c. Human Capital Enhancement
The major impact of FDI on human capital in developing countries appears
to be indirect, occurring not principally through the efforts of MNEs, but
rather from government policies seeking to attract FDI via enhanced human
capital. Once individuals are employed by MNE subsidiaries, their human
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
36/91
An Overview of FDI3
capital may be enhanced further through training and on-the-job learning.
Those subsidiaries may also have a positive influence on human capital
enhancement in other enterprises with which they develop links, including
suppliers. Such enhancement can have further effects as that labor moves
to other firms and as some employees become entrepreneurs. Thus, the
issue of human capital development is intimately related with other,
broader development issues.
Investment in general education and other generic human capital is of the
utmost importance in creating an enabling environment for FDI. Achieving a
certain minimum level of educational attainment is paramount to a
countrys ability both to attract FDI and to maximize the human capital
spillovers from foreign enterprise presence. The minimum level differs
between industries and according to other characteristics of the host
countrys enabling environment; education in itself is unlikely to make a
country attractive to foreign direct investors. However, where a significant
knowledge gap is allowed to persist between foreign entry and the rest of
the host economy, no significant spillovers are likely.
Among the other important elements of the enabling environment are the
host countrys labor market standards. By taking steps against
discrimination and abuse, the authorities bolster employees opportunitiesto upgrade their human capital, and strengthen their incentives for doing
so. Also, a labor market where participants have access to a certain degree
of security and social acceptance lends itself more readily to the flexibility
that is a key to the success of economic strategies based on human capital.
It provides an environment in which MNEs based in OECD countries can
more easily operate, applying their home country standards and
contributing to human capital development. One strategy to further this
goal is a wider adherence to the OECD Declaration on InternationalInvestment and Multinational Enterprises, which would further the
acceptance of the principles laid down in the Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises.
While the benefits of MNE presence for human capital enhancement are
commonly accepted, it is equally clear that their magnitude is significantly
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
37/91
An Overview of FDI3
smaller than that of general (public) education. The beneficial effects of
training provided by FDI can supplement, but not replace, a generic
increase in skill levels. The presence of MNEs may, however, provide a
useful demonstration effect, as the demand for skilled labor by these
enterprises provides host-country authorities with an early indication of
what skills are in demand. The challenge for the authorities is to meet this
demand in a timely manner while providing education that is of such
general usefulness that it does not implicitly favor specific enterprises.
Empirical and anecdotal evidence indicates that, while considerable
national and sectors discrepancies persist, MNEs tend to provide more
training and other upgrading of human capital than do domestic
enterprises. However, evidence that the human capital thus created spills
over to the rest of the host economy is much weaker. Policies to enhance
labor-market flexibility and encourage entrepreneurship, among other
strategies, could help buttress such spillovers.
Human capital levels and spillovers are closely interrelated with technology
transfers. In particular, technologically advanced sectors and host countries
are more likely to see human capital spillovers and, conversely, economies
with a high human capital component lend themselves more easily to
technology spillovers. The implication of this is that efforts to reap thebenefits of technology and human capital spillovers could gain
effectiveness when policies of technological and educational improvement
are undertaken conjointly.
d. CompetitionFDI and the presence of MNEs may exert a significant influence on
competition in host-country markets. However, since there is no commonly
accepted way of measuring the degree of competition in a given market,
few firm conclusions may be drawn from empirical evidence. The presenceof foreign enterprises may greatly assist economic development by spurring
domestic competition and thereby leading eventually to higher
productivity, lower prices and more efficient resource allocation.
Conversely, the entry of MNEs also tends to raise the levels of
concentration in host-country markets, which can hurt competition. This
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
38/91
An Overview of FDI3
risk is exacerbated by any of several factors: if the host country constitutes
a separate geographic market, the barriers to entry are high, the host
country is small, the entrant has an important international market
position, or the host-country competition law framework is weak or weakly
enforced.
Market concentration worldwide has increased significantly since the early
1990s due to a wave of mergers and acquisitions that has reshaped the
global corporate landscape. At the same time, a surge in the number of
strategic alliances has changed the way in which formally independent
corporate entities interact. Alliances are generally thought to limit direct
competition while generating efficiency gains, but evidence of this is not
firmly established. There has also been a wave of privatizations that has
attracted considerable foreign direct investment (mainly in developing and
emerging countries), and this, too, could have important effects on
competition.
Empirical studies suggest that the effect of FDI on host-country
concentration is, if anything, stronger in developing countries than in more
mature economies. This could raise the concern that MNE entry into less-
developed countries can be anti-competitive. Moreover, while ample
evidence shows MNE entry raising productivity levels among host-countryincumbents in developed countries, the evidence from developing
countries is weaker. Where such spill- overs are found, the magnitude and
dispersion of their effects are linked positively to prevailing levels of
competition.
However, the direct impact of rising concentration on competition, if any,
appears to vary by sector and host country. There are relatively few
industries where global concentration has reached levels causing real
concern for competition, especially if relevant markets are global in scope.In addition, high levels of concentration in properly defined markets may
not result in reduced competition if barriers to entry and exit are low or
buyers are in a good position to protect themselves from higher prices.
While it is economically desirable that strongly performing foreign
competitors be allowed to replace less productive domestic enterprises,
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
39/91
An Overview of FDI3
policies to safeguard a healthy degree of competition must be in place.
Arguably the best way of achieving this is by expanding the relevant
market by increasing the host economys openness to international trade.
In addition, efficiency-enhancing national competition laws and
enforcement agencies are advisable to minimize the anti-competitive
effects of weaker firms exiting the market. When mergers are being
reviewed and when possible abuses of dominance cases are being
assessed, the accent should be on protecting competition rather than
competitors. Modern competition policy focuses on efficiency and
protecting consumers; any other approach may lead to competition policy
being reduced to an industrial policy that may fail to deliver long term
benefits to consumers.
e. Enterprise DevelopmentFDI has the potential significantly to spur enterprise development in host
countries. The direct impact on the targeted enterprise includes the
achievement of synergies within the acquiring MNE, efforts to raise
efficiency and reduce costs in the targeted enterprise, and the
development of new activities. In addition, efficiency gains may occur in
unrelated enterprises through demonstration effects and other spillovers
akin to those that lead to technology and human capital spillovers.Available evidence points to a significant improvement in economic
efficiency in enterprises acquired by MNEs, albeit to degrees that vary by
country and sector. The strongest evidence of improvement is found in
industries with economies of scale. Here, the submersion of an individual
enterprise into a larger corporate entity generally gives rise to important
efficiency gains.
Foreign-orchestrated takeovers lead to changes in management and
corporate governance. MNEs generally impose their own company policies,internal reporting systems and principles of information disclosure on
acquired enterprises (although cases of learning from subsidiaries have also
been seen), and a number of foreign managers normally come with the
takeover. Insofar as foreign corporate practices are superior to the ones
prevailing in the host economy, this may boost corporate efficiency,
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
40/91
An Overview of FDI3
empirical studies have found. However, to the extent that country specific
competences are an asset for managers in subsidiaries, MNEs need to strive
toward an optimal mix of local and foreign management.
An important special case relates to foreign participation in the
privatization of government-owned enterprises. Experiences, many of them
from the transition economies in East and Central Europe, have been
largely positive; participation by MNEs in privatizations has consistently
improved the efficiency of the acquired enterprises. Some political
controversies have, however, occurred because the efficiency gains were
often associated with sizeable near term job losses. Moreover, the value of
FDI in connection with privatization in transition economies could partly
reflect the fact that few domestic strategic investors have access to
sufficient finance. In those few cases where domestic private investors
were brought into previously publicly owned enterprises, important
efficiency gains resulted.
The privatization of utilities is often particularly sensitive, as these
enterprises often enjoy monopolistic market power, at least within
segments of the local economy. The first-best privatization strategy is
arguably to link privatization with an opening of markets to greater
competition. But where the privatized entity remains largelyunreconstructed prior to privatization, local authorities often resort to
attracting foreign investors by promising them protection from competition
for a designated period. In this case there is a heightened need for strong,
independent domestic regulatory oversight.
Overall, the picture of the effects of FDI on enterprise restructuring that we
can derive from recent experience may be too positive, because investors
will have picked their targets among enterprises with a potential for
achieving efficiency gains. However, from a policy perspective, this makeslittle difference, as long as foreign investors differ from domestic investors
in their ability or willingness to improve efficiency or realize new business
opportunities. Authorities aiming to improve the economic efficiency of
their domestic business sectors have incentives to encourage FDI as a
vehicle for enterprise restructuring.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
41/91
An Overview of FDI3
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
42/91
An Overview of FDI3
3.3. FDI and environmental and social concernsFDI has the potential to bring social and environmental benefits to host
economies through the dissemination of good practices and technologies within
MNEs, and through their subsequent spillovers to domestic enterprises. There is arisk, however, that foreign-owned enterprises could use FDI to export
production no longer approved in their home countries. In this case, and
especially where host-country authorities are keen to attract FDI, there would be
a risk of a lowering or a freezing of regulatory standards. In fact, there is little
empirical evidence to support the risk scenario.
The direct environmental impact of FDI is generally positive, at least where host-
country environmental policies are adequate. There are, however, examples to
the contrary, especially in particular industries and sectors. Most importantly, to
reap the full environmental benefits of inward FDI, adequate local capacities are
needed, as regards environmental practices and the broader technological
capabilities of host-country enterprises.
The technologies that are transferred to developing countries in connection with
foreign direct investment tend to be more modern, and environmentally
cleaner, than what is locally available. Moreover, positive externalities have
been observed where local imitation, employment turnover and supply-chain
requirements led to more general environmental improvements in the host
economy. There have been some instances, however, of MNEs moving equipment
deemed environmentally unsuitable in the home country to their affiliates in
developing countries.
The use of such inferior technology will usually not be in the better interest of a
company; this demonstrates the sort of environmental risk associated with FDI.
Empirical studies have found little support for the assertion that policy makers
efforts to attract FDI may lead to pollution havens or a race to the bottom.
The possibility of a regulatory chill, however, is harder to refute forth lack of a
counterfactual scenario. Apparently, the cost of environmental compliance is so
limited (and the cost to a firms reputation of being seen to try to avoid them so
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
43/91
An Overview of FDI3
great) that most MNEs allocate production to developing countries regardless of
these countries environmental regulations. The evidence supporting this
argument seems to depend on the wealth and the degree of environmental
concern in the MNEs other countries of operation.
Empirical evidence of the social consequences of FDI is far from abundant.
Overall, however, it supports the notion that foreign investment may help reduce
poverty and improve social conditions. The general effects of FDI on growth are
essential. Studies have found that higher incomes in developing countries
generally benefit the poorest segments of the population proportionately. The
beneficial effects of FDI on poverty reduction are potentially stronger when FDI is
employed as a tool to develop labor-intensive industries and where it is
anchored in the adherence of MNEs to national labor law and internationallyaccepted labor standards.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
44/91
An Overview of FDI3
There is little evidence that foreign corporate presence in developing countries
leads to a general deterioration of basic social values, such as core labor
standards. On the contrary, empirical studies have found a positive relationship
between FDI and workers rights. Low labor standards may, in some cases, even
act as a deterrent to FDI, due to investors concerns about their reputation
elsewhere in the world and their fears of social unrest in the host country.
Problems may, however, arise in specific contexts. For example, the non-trivial
role that EPZs play in many developing countries could, some have argued, raise
concerns regarding the respect for basic social values.
3.4. Net Contribution of FDI to DevelopmentsThe main policy conclusion that can be drawn from the study is that the economic
benefits of FDI are real, but they do not accrue automatically. To reap the
maximum benefits from foreign corporate presence a healthy enabling
environment for business is paramount, which encourages domestic as well as
foreign investment, provides incentives for innovation and improvements of skills
and contributes to a competitive corporate climate. The net benefits from FDI do
not accrue automatically, and their magnitude differs according to host country
and context. The factors that hold back the full benefits of FDI in some developing
countries include the level of general education and health, the technologicallevel of host-country enterprises, insufficient openness to trade, and weak
competition and inadequate regulatory frameworks. Conversely, a level of
technological, educational and infrastructure achievement in a developing
country does, other things being equal, equip it better to benefit from a foreign
presence in its markets.
Yet even countries at levels of economic development that do not lend
themselves to positive externalities from foreign presence may benefit from
inward FDI through the limited access to international funding. By easing financial
restraint, FDI enables host countries to achieve the higher growth rates that
generally emanate from a faster pace of gross fixed capital formation. The
eventual economic effect of FDI on economies with little other recourse to
finance depends crucially on the policies pursued by host-country authorities.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
45/91
An Overview of FDI3
These sectors composition of an economy can also make a difference. While the
service sectors of many developing countries may be underdeveloped and hence
unable to attract large inflows of FDI, extractive industries in countries with
abundant natural resources can be developed beneficially with the aid of foreign
investors.
In addition to the potential drawbacks of inward FDI mentioned earlier, some
micro-oriented problems could arise. For instance, while the overall impact of FDI
on enterprise development and productivity is almost always positive, it generally
also brings distributional changes and a need for industrial restructuring in the
host economy. Changes give rise to adjustment costs and are resisted by social
groups that do not expect to be among the beneficiaries. Structural rigidities in
the host economy exacerbate such costs, not least where labor markets are tooslow to provide new opportunities for individuals touched by restructuring.
Overall, the costs are best mitigated when appropriate practices are pursued
toward flexibility, coupled with macroeconomic stability and the implementation
of adequate legal and regulatory frameworks. While the responsibility for this lies
largely with host-country authorities, home countries, MNEs and international
forums also have important roles to play.
In cases where domestic legal, competition and environmental frameworks areweak or weakly enforced, the presence of financially strong foreign enterprises
may not be sufficient to assist economic development although there are
examples (notably in finance) where the entry of MNEs based in OECD member
countries has contributed to an upgrading of industry standards. Where economic
and legal structures create a healthy environment for business, the entry of
strong foreign corporate contenders tends to stimulate the host-country business
sector, whether through competition, vertical linkages or demonstration effects.
FDI can be said to act as a catalyst for underlying strengths and weaknesses in thehost countries corporate environments, possibly exacerbating the problems in
no governance zones, while eliciting the advantages in countries with a more
benign business climate and better governance. This reinforces the point made
above about the need for host (and home) countries to work to improve
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
46/91
An Overview of FDI4
regulatory and legal frameworks and other elements that help enable the
business sector.
Finally, FDI like official development aid cannot be the main source for solving
poor countries development problems. With average inward FDI stocksrepresenting around 15 % of gross domestic capital formation in developing
countries, foreign investment acts as a valuable supplement to domestically
provided fixed capital rather than a primary source of finance. Countries
incapable of raising funds for investment locally are unlikely beneficiaries of FDI.
Likewise, while FDI may contribute significantly to human capital formation, the
transfer of state-of-the-art technologies, enterprise restructuring and increased
competition, it is the host country authorities that must undertake basic efforts to
raise education levels, invest in infrastructure and improve the health of domesticbusiness sectors. Domestic subsidiaries of MNEs have the potential to supplement
such efforts, and foreign or international agencies may assist, for example
through measures to build capacity. But the benign effects of FDI remain
contingent upon timely and appropriate policy action by the relevant national
authorities.
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
47/91
An Overview of FDI4
4. Political ConsiderationsDo political risks discourage Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in both developing
and developed economies in a similar manner? In this chapter, we examinewhether and in what manner political risks affect FDI and compare its different
effects in developing and developed economies. Using the 12 category Political
Risk Index compiled by the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG), we find the
following: First, political risk is a significant determinant of FDI in both
industrialized and developing nations. Second, not all aspects of political risk
affect FDI stocks in industrialized and developing countries in the same way.
When we compare the effects of different political risk component, we find that
since the 9/11 attacks, political risks have become more important and significant
determinants of FDI flows, especially in industrialized nations.
Do political risks discourage Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in both developing
and developed economies in a similar manner? Which particular aspect of
political riskspolitical, societal, and economic risks at the domestic level and
international problemsaffect FDI flows and stocks more significantly in
developing and developed countries? Already fierce competition for FDI among
nations has become more intense due to the recent global economic downturn.Many economic determinants of FDI a large domestic market , sustainable
growth , sufficient economic and infrastructure development or high natural
resources endowmentare beyond the control of government. Stable political and
policy environments are also attractive investment determinants. Host countries
can turn domestic economies into more attractive investment environments by
reducing political risk and promoting stable and liberal policy to attract more
foreign investment, although these are long-term changes. Thus, the goal of this
paper is to provide a microscopic look at the effect of individual political riskcomponents on FDI in both developed and developing markets. This, we believe,
will provide a blueprint for long-term policy directions to shape a friendlier and
favorable investment environment: what works and what doesnt when it comes
to attracting FDI. Our paper will inform policy makers on which particular aspect
of political risk has significant effect on attracting FDI and provide an outline on
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
48/91
An Overview of FDI4
the long-term political and institutional development favorable for attracting
more foreign investors.
As the literature on the determinants of FDI informs, political and institutional risk
is one of the major concerns for foreign investors, especially in developingnations. Some political risks, e.g., a resurgence of resource nationalism and
unfavorable annulment or change of the terms of foreign investment, continue to
pose a great challenge to foreign investors in developing markets. In addition,
recent high profile and massive casualty terrorist attacks not only stress the
prevalence of political violence and the importance of political risk as a challenge
to foreign investors, but also highlight that even developed countries are not
immune to political risk and violence. A question, thus, arises, how does political
risk affect FDI flows in developed nations in the face of such a volatile politicalenvironment? How does a high profile incident of political violence affect how
political risk shapes FDI flows and stocks?
Let us examine whether and in what manner political risk affects FDI and compare
its different effects in developing and developed economies. We also examine
how political risk affects FDI since the 9/11 attacks, especially in developed
nations, as we deem that the 9/11 attacks marked a watershed moment. The
attacks were catastrophic events that shaped not only world politics but also theglobal economy dramatically. They had devastating effects on global FDI flows
and stocks shortly after, although Enders et al. (2006) do not find any significant
lasting effects of the 9/11 attacks on the global economy. Thus, we divide our
analysis into before and after the 9/11 and compare the effects of political risk
between these two different periods. We find the following: First, political risk is a
significant determinant of FDI in both industrialized and developing nations.
Second, not all aspects of political risk affect FDI stocks in industrialized and
developing countries in the same way. A host economy with good democraticaccountability (DEMO) and a good investment profile (INVT) can attract
significantly more FDI in both industrialized and developing countries. On one
hand, other political risk components, such as ethnic tensions (ETHC) and military
in politics (MLTY), significantly impact FDI in industrialized countries, but they do
not have significant effects on FDI in developing nations. On the other hand, in
7/27/2019 An Overview of FDI
49/91
An Overview of FDI4
developing nations, markets with better law and order (Law), low religious
tension (RLGN), and more stable government (GORN) tend to attract more FDI.
Third, since the 9/11 attacks, political risks have become more important and
significant determinants of FDI flows, especially in industrialized nations. Since the
9/11 attacks, democratic accountability (DEMO), investment profile (INVM), and
military in politics (MLTY) have significant positive effects on FDI, while ethnic
tensions (ETHC) has a significant negative effect on FDI stocks.
Considerations to political risk to FDI are threefold: first, we investigate and
compare the effects of political risks by using a larger and more comprehensive
sample than previous studies, and our analysis includes both developing and
developed nations over the period of 1984-2003; second, we investigate how
high-profile and catastrophic terrorist attacks, especially the 9/11 attacks in theUS, shape the importance of political risk as a determinant of FDI in industrialized
countries afterwards; third, we use a more complete and comprehensive measure
of political risk to better understand how each aspect of political risk affects FDI
stocks in both developing and developed nations. We use a 12 category Political
Risk Index compiled by the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG) to investigate
the individual effect of each political risk component on FDI in both developing
and industrialized countries.
4.1. Literature ReviewFDI is a driving force behind the economic growth of a host economy and the
rapid economic globalization of the global economy1: To a hosting economy, FDI
is an engine of employment, technological progress, productivity improvements
and ultimately econo
Top Related