Fdi human capital and education in developing countries defining a research methodology
Download
1 / 15

FDI, Human Capital and Education in Developing Countries: Defining a Research Methodology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 90 Views
  • Uploaded on

FDI, Human Capital and Education in Developing Countries: Defining a Research Methodology. Ki Fukasaku Paris, 1 4 December 2001. What type of FDI?. Natural resource extraction Manufacturing Services (telecom, power, transport, etc) Green-field M&As Privatisation.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'FDI, Human Capital and Education in Developing Countries: Defining a Research Methodology' - luthando-morin


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Fdi human capital and education in developing countries defining a research methodology

FDI, Human Capital and Education in Developing Countries: Defining a Research Methodology

Ki Fukasaku Paris, 14 December 2001


Fdi human capital and education in developing countries defining a research methodology

What type of FDI? Defining a Research Methodology

  • Natural resource extraction

  • Manufacturing

  • Services (telecom, power, transport, etc)

  • Green-field

  • M&As

  • Privatisation


Factors affecting fdi inflows
Factors affecting FDI inflows Defining a Research Methodology

  • Fundamentals

  • Local thresholds

    • skills, technological capability, capital markets etc.

  • Host-government policies

    • incentive-based measures, rules-based measures (e.g. RTAs)

    • general vs. sector-specific policies



Net fdi source and recipient countries billion three year average 1998 2000
Net FDI Source and Recipient Countries States, 1986 and 2000($Billion, three year average 1998-2000)


Net fdi source and recipient countries billion three year average 1991 1993
Net FDI Source and Recipient Countries States, 1986 and 2000($Billion, three year average 1991-1993)


Benefits of fdi for host countries
Benefits of FDI for Host Countries States, 1986 and 2000

  • FDI brings financial resources for domestic capital formation.

  • FDI increases production, employment and trade, quantitatively and qualitatively.

  • FDI transfers technologies, hard and soft.


Technological spillovers
Technological Spillovers States, 1986 and 2000

  • Intra-firm (from parents to foreign affiliates)

  • Intra-industry (from FAs to local firms in the same industry)

  • Inter-industry (vertical linkages)

  • Labour turnover (“training ground”)


Fdi and technology transfer 1
FDI and technology transfer (1) States, 1986 and 2000

  • Intra-firm technology transfer: the host-country conditions matter (e.g. income level, past experience on industrialisation - Urata-Kawai 2000)

  • Efficiency gains from technological spillovers to local firms would not occur automatically.

  • Competition matters in local markets (Okamoto, 1999)


Fdi and technology transfer 2
FDI and technology transfer (2) States, 1986 and 2000

  • Blomström-Persson (1983, Mexico 1970)

  • Haddad-Harrison (1993, Morocco 1985-89)

  • Blomström-Sjöholm (1998, Indonesia 1991)

  • Kokko et al. (1996/2001, Uruguay 1988)

  • Aitken-Harrison (1999, Venezuela 1976-89)

  • Djankov-Hoekman(1999, Czech, 1992-96)

  • Haskel et al. (2001, UK 1973-92)


Fdi and technology transfer 3
FDI and technology transfer (3) States, 1986 and 2000

  • Both relative and absolute technological capabilities - Perez (1998, Italy 1989-91)

    Foreign presence affects positively the productivity growth of domestic firms in specialist and scale-intensive sectors (e.g. chemical, machinery, metal, automobile), but not in science-based sectors (e.g. pharmaceutical, IT/electronic).


Host government policies 1
Host-government policies (1) States, 1986 and 2000

  • The importance of host-government policies for attracting FDI and reaping full benefits associated with FDI is clear.

  • Motives of foreign investors and host-country “fundamentals’

  • Costs of investment incentives


Host government policies 2
Host-government policies (2) States, 1986 and 2000

  • A comparative survey of FDI regimes in Asia and Latin America

  • Legal and policy framework for FDI appears to be more open in Latin America than in Asia.

  • Wide differences across countries in Asia in terms of control at the entry phase and negative lists as well as the approach to IPRs


Main conclusions 1
Main conclusions (1) States, 1986 and 2000

  • Host-government policies matter.

  • More discussion is needed as to how policies work (or do not work).

  • Traditional incentive-based measures are costly for developing countries facing severe resource constraints.


Main conclusions 2
Main conclusions (2) States, 1986 and 2000

  • The establishment of a multilateral framework of rules on FDI helps increase the collective welfare of host countries (prisoners’ dilemma).

  • A regional approach to taking more constructive, rules-based policies to FDI: EU, NAFTA, MERCOSUR, FTAA, ASEAN Investment Area, APEC.