FDI在發(fā)展中國(guó)家的決定因素分析外文翻譯

中文 3568 字 畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯 外文題目 ： Analyses of FDI determinants in developing countries 出 處： 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. 譯文： FDI 在發(fā)展中國(guó)家的決定因素分析 Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Ersoy 摘 要 目的：本文的目的是調(diào)查 FDI 在發(fā)展中國(guó)家的決定因素。 方法：本文基于 24 個(gè)發(fā)展中國(guó)家 1983 至 2005 年期間面板數(shù)據(jù)研究了外國(guó)直接投資的決定因素對(duì) FDI 引入的影響程度。 結(jié)果：外國(guó)直接投資與其決定因素的相互作用對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家的經(jīng)濟(jì)進(jìn)步具有強(qiáng)烈的正面影響，而對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值和通貨膨脹則產(chǎn)生負(fù)面影響。外國(guó)直接投資的最重要的決定因素是通訊變量。 一、 介紹 為了 發(fā)展 一個(gè)國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì) 體系， 貿(mào)易歷來(lái)是聯(lián)系各國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)的 主要機(jī)制 ， 外國(guó)直接投資是一個(gè)聯(lián)系 兩國(guó) 經(jīng)濟(jì) 的 類似機(jī)制 ， 因此，這兩種機(jī)制相輔相成。外國(guó)直接投資的影響取決于它是否是 開(kāi)展旨在 獲得自然資源 的投資活動(dòng) ， 是否選擇消費(fèi)者 市場(chǎng)還是 意 在通過(guò)投資活動(dòng)擴(kuò)大區(qū)域性比較優(yōu)勢(shì) ， 或者 旨在 獲得 其他戰(zhàn)略資產(chǎn) 如：研發(fā)能力的提高 。大多數(shù)發(fā)展中國(guó)家缺乏技術(shù)能力 ， 外國(guó)直接投資促進(jìn)技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移 ，并且縮小了 發(fā)展中國(guó)家 與 發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家之間的技術(shù)差距， 實(shí)際 上外國(guó)直接投資 的 外部溢出效應(yīng) 被認(rèn)為 是現(xiàn)代技術(shù)傳播的最重要渠道。 外國(guó)直接投資對(duì)東道國(guó) 的 經(jīng)濟(jì) 有很多 其他的影響。它影響著收入 、 產(chǎn)量 、 價(jià)格 、就業(yè) 、 經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)， 以及發(fā)展和普 及所在國(guó)的福利 。它也可能是導(dǎo)致了國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的最重要因素之一。因此，外國(guó)直接投資 國(guó)際間 流動(dòng)的大量增加是過(guò)去 20 年世界經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的最明顯標(biāo)志之一。因此，我們可以得出結(jié)論：外國(guó)直接投資是發(fā)展中國(guó)家的經(jīng)濟(jì)成功增長(zhǎng)的關(guān)鍵因素，因?yàn)榻?jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的本質(zhì)是快速，有效地轉(zhuǎn)移和通過(guò)跨越國(guó)界的 “ 最佳做法 ”的采用 。 另一方面 ,一般來(lái)說(shuō) ,外國(guó)投資者也受到了三 組要素的影響： （ 1）、 項(xiàng)目的盈利能力 ； （ 2）、附屬公司從事的一些經(jīng)營(yíng)活動(dòng)， 可以 很容易的 被整合到投資者全球戰(zhàn)略 的操作； （ 3）、東道國(guó)對(duì)環(huán)境的支持力度。 為了確定外國(guó)直接投資的 決定因素已經(jīng)進(jìn)行了大量的研究， 但沒(méi)有 達(dá)成 共識(shí) ，在某種意義上說(shuō)，沒(méi)有一套被廣泛接受解釋變量，可以被看作是“真正的”外國(guó)直接投資的決定因素。 FDI 研究所得的結(jié)果通常都比較敏感，這表明結(jié)果缺乏穩(wěn)健性。 例如 ，勞動(dòng)力成本 、 貿(mào)易壁壘、貿(mào)易平衡、匯率和稅收 這些因素都對(duì) FDI 產(chǎn)生消極與積極雙方面的影響。 Chakrabarti(2001)認(rèn)為 “ FDI 與具有爭(zhēng)議的各個(gè)變量 (即，稅收，工資，開(kāi)放，匯率很多，關(guān)稅，增長(zhǎng)和貿(mào)易平衡 )間的關(guān)系對(duì)一些信息的變動(dòng) 是高度敏感 的”。 重要的問(wèn)題是 “ 為什么公司 要 在海外 進(jìn)行 投資 ？”杜寧（ 1993） ，他通過(guò)整合前人提出的理論發(fā)展了自己的觀點(diǎn) ,因?yàn)楝F(xiàn)有的解釋不能完全的證明 FDI 的存在。 根據(jù)杜寧的理論， 國(guó)際生產(chǎn) 是所有權(quán)、國(guó)際化、本土化的優(yōu)勢(shì)等一系列影響的結(jié)果 。 后者是最重要的 ：投資者是基于哪些因素才選擇一個(gè)地區(qū)開(kāi)展項(xiàng)目計(jì)劃 。這些包括的影響當(dāng)?shù)赜行缘耐度胍蛩?： 自然資源、市場(chǎng)規(guī)模 、 地理 位置、經(jīng)濟(jì)體位置 、文化和政治環(huán)境 、要素 價(jià)格 、 運(yùn)輸成本與政府經(jīng)濟(jì)政策 （ 貿(mào)易政策、產(chǎn)業(yè)政策 、 預(yù)算政策、稅收政策 ) 等。 本研究的主要目是確定 在全球框架下 外國(guó)直接投資 的資本流向發(fā)展中國(guó)家 的主要影響 因素 。外國(guó)直接投資流動(dòng)是全球化現(xiàn)象的 主要?jiǎng)恿χ?，因此外?guó)直接投資的決定因素，將有助于國(guó)家的政治發(fā)展進(jìn)程。 二、 FDI 的影響因素 :理論與證據(jù) 過(guò)去幾十年 間， 外國(guó)直接投資 已經(jīng)成為發(fā)展中國(guó)家一種傳播技術(shù)與促進(jìn)發(fā)展的有效途徑， 這種觀點(diǎn) 與五、六十年代學(xué)術(shù)、政治領(lǐng)域普遍接收的信仰形成了 鮮明 的 對(duì) 比 ，根據(jù) 這些觀點(diǎn) 外國(guó)直接投資對(duì)欠發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的經(jīng)濟(jì)表現(xiàn)是有害的。 理論性的 討論 揭示了二十世紀(jì)后半葉的一些發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)體已經(jīng)在全新增長(zhǎng)理論指導(dǎo)下開(kāi)發(fā)出一種新視角。因此，在這個(gè)新的框架內(nèi)建立的模型為研究外國(guó)直接投資與 GDP增長(zhǎng)率的相關(guān)性而刻畫了一個(gè)有趣的背景（ Calvo and Robles， 2003）。 在新古典增長(zhǎng)模型的技術(shù)進(jìn)步和勞動(dòng)增長(zhǎng) 前提下 ，外來(lái)直接投資僅僅增加了投資率，導(dǎo)致了人均收入的增長(zhǎng)過(guò)渡性增加，但并沒(méi)有長(zhǎng)期增長(zhǎng)的影響。在 20世紀(jì) 80年代的新增長(zhǎng)理論 內(nèi)生性 技術(shù)進(jìn)步 ， 外國(guó)直接投資一直被認(rèn)為 可以通過(guò)技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移與溢出效應(yīng)而 在東道國(guó) 產(chǎn)生 永久 的 增長(zhǎng) 效應(yīng)。我在討論 FDI對(duì)東道國(guó)的影響 ，這可以從最近的 研究中看出來(lái)（ De Mello， 1997， 1999； Fan， 2002； Lim， 2001）。 根據(jù)新古典增長(zhǎng)理論模型， 外國(guó)直接投資不影響長(zhǎng)期增長(zhǎng)率。如果我們了解一下 模型的假設(shè)，我們就會(huì)發(fā) 現(xiàn)這是可以理解的，這些假設(shè)是：不變的規(guī)模經(jīng)濟(jì)，持續(xù)的邊際產(chǎn)出的降低，完全競(jìng)爭(zhēng)市場(chǎng) （ Sass， 2003） ，積極的投入品的替代彈性。在新古典模型的框架下，外國(guó)直接投資對(duì)產(chǎn)量增長(zhǎng)速度的影響由于實(shí)物資本收益遞減的存在而受到了限制 （ Solow， 1956） 。因此外商直接投資只是對(duì)人均產(chǎn)出水平產(chǎn)生了一定的影響，而并沒(méi)有影響其增長(zhǎng)率，換言之，從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看這是無(wú)法改變產(chǎn)出增長(zhǎng)率的 （ Calvo and Robles， 2003） 。 因此 ,內(nèi)生增長(zhǎng)理論表明 外國(guó)直接投 資在增長(zhǎng)過(guò)程中有一個(gè)被新認(rèn)知的潛在的作用（ Bende-Nabende and Ford， 1998） 。 在此背景下的新經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)理論認(rèn)為 ， 外國(guó)直接投資可能不僅影響了人均產(chǎn)出水平，而且也影響其增長(zhǎng)率 。這 些文獻(xiàn)假設(shè) 可能解釋 了 為什么外國(guó)直接投資在主辦國(guó)家提高人均收入的增長(zhǎng)率 （ Calvo and Robles， 2003） 。然而 ， 內(nèi)生增長(zhǎng)理論 ，忽略 了完全競(jìng)爭(zhēng)市場(chǎng)結(jié)構(gòu)假設(shè)下 ,給 FDI 在經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響方面留了更大的空間 。在這個(gè)理論框架 下， 投資 ， 包括 外國(guó)直接投資，通過(guò)研發(fā)與其他人力資本 影響 所在國(guó) 的發(fā)展速度。即使投資回報(bào)率下降 ,外商直接投資 會(huì)通過(guò)外部性影響經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展 。 外國(guó)直接投資取代國(guó)內(nèi)儲(chǔ)蓄 （ Papanek， 1973； Cohen， 1993； Reinhart and Talvi，199