Foreign manufacturing, regional agglomeration and technical efficiency in UK industries: a stochastic production frontier approach

The paper examines howfar foreign manufacturing investment in UK industries, together with the spatial agglomeration of those industries, affect technical efficiency. The paper links research on the estimation of technical efficiency,with those literatures demonstrating the economies associated with foreign direct investment and spatial agglomeration. The methodology involves estimation of a stochastic production frontier with random components associated with industry technical inefficiency, and a standard error. The paper also explores whether the degree of foreign involvement has a greater impact on technical efficiency where the domestic industry sector is characterized by comparatively high productivity and spatial agglomeration. The policy implications of the analysis are discussed.

FDI and the labour market: a review of the evidence and policy implications

This paper presents a series of results concerning the labour-market impact of inward foreign direct investment (FDI) in the UK. The paper demonstrates that one of the crucial impacts of FDI is to increase wage inequality and the use of relatively more skilled labour in the domestic firms. This result is found to be a combination of two effects. First, the entry by a multinational enterprise (MNE) increases the demand for skilled workers in an industry or region, thus increasing wage inequality. Second, technology spillovers occur from foreign to domestic firms. As a result of these spillovers, relative demand for skilled workers increases in the domestic firms, further contributing to aggregate wage inequality and skill upgrading. The paper also considers how FDI impacts upon skill shares by productivity differentials between foreign and domestic firms. Finally, the policy implications of this are discussed, from the perspective of regional development, and the likely effectiveness of attracting FDI to reduce structural unemployment.

Finance and firm export in China

Using a rich panel data set, we provide a rigorous analysis of the relationship between access to external finance, foreign direct investment and the exports of private enterprises in China. We conclude that, in order to foster the exports of indigenous enterprises, the elimination of financial discrimination against private firms is likely to be a more effective policy tool than the reliance on spillovers from multinational firms. © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

International and intranational technological spillovers and productivity growth in China

Technological spillovers from foreign direct investment (FDI) have been regarded as a major source of technical progress and productivity growth. This paper explores the role of international and intranational technological spillovers from FDI in technical change, efficiency improvement, and total factor productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing firms using a recent Chinese manufacturing firm-level panel data set over the 2001–05 period. International industry-specific research and development (R&D) stock is linked to the Chinese firm-level data, international R&D spillovers from FDI and intranational technological spillovers of R&D activities by foreign invested firms in China are examined as well. Policy implications are discussed.

Evaluating the additionality of public sector assistance to Irish firms: a question of ownership?

This article presents an innovative approach to estimating the additionality of financial assistance awarded to firms by an Irish regional development agency. The 'self assessment approach' is used to derive estimates of deadweight and displacement for firms in the Shannon region of Ireland. Irish studies have derived high estimates of deadweight by international standards. In light of this, and the fact that successive Irish governments have placed emphasis on Foreign Direct Investment as an engine for growth, the primary objective here is to address the question of whether the type of firm ownership matters with respect to resulting deadweight and/or displacement estimates. The latter question is addressed using logistic regression analysis to test whether, ceteris paribus, firm ownership is a key-determining factor for estimates of deadweight and/or displacement. The results show that ownership does not matter in the case of deadweight, but regarding displacement there are differences between indigenous and foreign-owned firms albeit at very low levels. More precisely, as expected, indigenously owned firms are more likely to lead to higher estimates of displacement.

Privatisation and sustainable competitive advantage in the emerging economies of Central Europe

Extant research on the impact of privatization in the Central Europe (CE) region has focused on improvements in efficiency and the nature of cost-based advantages. This study argues that the development of a vibrant privatized sector requires attention to the broader resource configurations of domestic enterprises. Empirical research was conducted on a large sample of firms in Poland, Hungary and Slovenia. Foreign investment was found to significantly impact on resource accumulation with implications for the development of strategic capabilities and competitive advantage. Foreign direct investment is an effective vehicle for the transfer of financial resources, reputation and new brands but not organizational capabilities. In terms of practice, this study demonstrates the important role of outside investment in the development of a firm's resource base (Frydman et al. 1999). Companies can gain a competitive advantage in their domestic markets through gaining access to the resources of foreign investors.

Linking FDI motivation and host economy productivity effects:conceptual and empirical analysis

We develop a taxonomy that relates foreign direct investment (FDI) motivation (technology- and cost-based) to its anticipated effects on host countries domestic productivity. We then empirically examine the effects of FDI into the United Kingdom on domestic productivity, and find that different types of FDI have markedly different productivity spillover effects, which are consistent with the conceptual analysis. The UK gains substantially only from inward FDI motivated by a strong technology-based ownership advantage. As theory predicts, inward FDI motivated by technology-sourcing considerations leads to no productivity spillovers.

Who gains from whom? Spillovers, competition and technology sourcing in the foreign-owned sector of UK manufacturing

There is a growing literature explaining foreign direct investment flows in terms of 'technology sourcing', whereby multinational firms invest in certain locations not to exploit their firm-specific assets in the host environment, but to access technology that is generated by host country firms. However, it is far from clear whether the literature has found significant evidence of such activity beyond a few isolated examples. This paper extends this work by allowing for the possibility of multinational enterprises (MNEs) sourcing technology not only from host country firms but also from each other within a host economy. The paper demonstrates that MNEs in the UK do indeed appropriate spillovers both from indigenous firms and from other foreign investors, but that there are also significant competition effects that act to reduce productivity in certain industries. The paper also explores which countries' affiliates gain most from technology sourcing in the UK, and which generate the greatest spillovers within the foreign-owned sector. © Scottish Economic Society 2005.

From national innovation systems to national innovation capacity:internationalisation and technology transfer perspectives

The last decade or so has witnessed the emergence of the national innovation system (NIS) phenomenon. Since then, many scholars have investigated NIS and its implementation in different countries. However, there are very few investigations into the relationship between the NIS of a country and its national innovation capacity. This paper aims to make a contribution in this area by examining the link that currently exists between these two topics. Whilst examining this relationship, we also explore internationalisation and technology transfer, being cognate areas that have been investigated during the same period. This follows our assertion that the link between NIS and national innovation capacity is the mechanism of internationalisation and technology transfer. The NIS approach was introduced in the late 1980s (see Freeman, 1987; Dosi et al., 1988) and further elaborated later (see Lundvall, 1992; Nelson, 1993; Edquist, 1997). In essence, a country?s NIS is a historically grown subsystem of the entire national economy consisting of organisations and institutions which play a major role in the innovative activity in the country. In the NIS approach, interactions within organisations as well as the interplay between organisations and institutions are of central importance. The NIS approach has been used to reveal the structure of the innovation processes and the main actors involved in them in industrialised and emerging countries. Although the national focus remains strong, it has been accompanied by studies seeking to analyse the notion of systems of innovation at an international level and at a sub-national scale (Archibugi et al., 1999). Dosi in the edition of Archibugi et al. (1999) argues that the general background of the discussion of national systems is the observation of non-random distributions across countries of: corporate capabilities; organisational forms; strategies; and ultimately revealed performances, in terms of production efficiency and inputs productivities, rates of innovation, rates of adoption/diffusion of innovation themselves, dynamics of market shares on the world markets, growth of income and employment. They also mention that there are several approaches to NIS. Nelson (1993) focuses upon the specificities of national institutions and policies supporting directly or indirectly innovation, diffusion and skills accumulation. Patel and Pavitt (1991) have stressed the links between the national patterns of technological accumulation and the competencies and innovative strategies of a few major national companies. Amable et al (1997) and Soskice (1993) and Zysman (1994) focus on the specifics of national institutions including, for example, the forms of organization, financial and labour markets, training institutions, forms of state intervention in the economy etc. However, the most common reference is by Lundvall (1992) who argues that the focus on the national level is associated with the fact that national economies vary according to their production system and their institutional framework and these differences are in turn strengthened by different historical experiences, language and culture. On the other hand, the national innovation capability consists of abilities to create and carry new technological possibilities through to economic practice. The term covers a wide range of activities from capability to invent to capability to innovate and to capability to improve existing technology beyond the original design parameters (Kim, 1997). The term innovation is often associated by many with technological change at international frontiers. However, technological capability is not the same as innovation capability. Technological capability refers to assimilation, use, adaptation, and change to existing technologies. It also enables the creation of new technologies and development of new products and processes in response to changing economic environments. It denotes operational command over knowledge (Kim, 1997). It is manifested not merely by the knowledge possessed, but, more important, by the uses to which that knowledge can be put and by the proficiency with which it is applied in the activities of investment and production and in the creation of new knowledge (Westphal et al., 1985). Therefore, the analytical framework that is used in this paper is based on the way a country derives from its NIS a national innovation capacity. There are two perspectives that are identified on this way. These are internationalisation and technology transfer. Even though NIS is not directly related to national innovation capacity, to achieve national innovation capacity from NIS, the country should have the ability for technology transfer. Technology transfer is a link between these two phenomena. On the other hand, internationalisation can be either the input or the output of the relationship between NIS and national innovation capability. If a company is investing in a country because of its national innovation capacity, this can be regarded as an input to the relationship between NIS and national innovation capacity. If this company is investigating the national innovation capacity of a country then, for its internationalisation, the national innovation capacity should be important, which in turn means this company is active in innovation and innovation is also an important success factor. The interrelationship between the investment of the company and the NIS of the country (assuming that the country is competent and competitive in technology transfer) will generate and improve that country?s national innovation capacity. This is the output of internationalisation from the relationship between NIS and national innovation capacity. When companies are evaluating whether to internationalise, they investigate certain factors in the countries in which they are considering to invest. The ability to transfer technology is dependent on ability to adopt a new technology and also on the learning derived from this technology. If countries wish to attract innovation related investment they need to show their ability to have a NIS and also the capability to transfer technology. Without the technology transfer capability, the NIS is not functioning. Therefore, companies that internationalise will investigate the factors common to NIS, technology transfer, and their business needs. Through this paper we will demonstrate this link though its mechanisms. Our research will be through extensive literature review and identifying relevant aspects of previous research carried out by the authors. It will investigate certain factors of different countries that are successful in attracting innovation related foreign direct investment. Through these, we will point out the factors that are important for the link and mechanisms of NIS and national innovation capability.

Technology transfer to China:a study of strategy in 20 EU industrial companies

Foreign direct investment has been important in China's economic development since the early 1980s. In recent years, the volume of inward FDI into China, according to some estimates, has been second only to that into the USA. The Chinese government has emphasised the need for FDI to be coupled with the transfer of more advanced technologies to China. For foreign companies, technology transfer raises the risk of losing their technology based competitive advantage to potential competitor firms. This risk may be exacerbated by insufficient legal protection of intellectual property rights in China. After briefly reviewing the development of Chinese official policy on technology transfer, this paper considers the strategy adopted by EU companies regarding the transfer of technology; in particular in advanced technology sectors. The research on which the paper is based included an analysis of information gathered from 20 leading EU companies with investments in China and operating in high-technology sectors. Information was gathered from senior company managers based in both China and Europe during the second half of 1998. The main findings include a measure of reluctance on the part of EU companies to transfer their core technologies to China and to base R&D capability there. At the same time, the companies appear aware that this policy may be unsustainable in the longer-term in the face of Chinese official policy and a desire to expand their operations in China. While they attempt to protect their existing technological knowledge, most of them accept that there will be technology "leakage" and therefore the most effective strategy is to maintain their technological lead through R&D.

Capital markets and the market structure of foreign investments

Contrary to the long-received theory of FDI, interest rates or rates of return can motivate foreign direct investment (FDI) in concert with the benefits of direct ownership. Thus, access to investor capital and capital markets is a vital component of the multinational’s competitive market structure. Moreover, multinationals can use their superior financial capacity as a competitive advantage in exploiting FDI opportunities in dynamic markets. They can also mitigate higher levels of foreign business risks under dynamic conditions by shifting more financial risk to creditors in the host economy. Furthermore, the investor’s expectation of foreign business risk necessarily commands a risk premium for exposing their equity to foreign market risk. Multinationals can modify the profit maximization strategy of their foreign subsidiaries to maximize growth or profits to generate this risk premium. In this context, we investigate how foreign subsidiaries manage their capital funding, business risk, and profit strategies with a diverse sample of 8,000 matched parents and foreign subsidiary accounts from multiple industries in 38 countries.We find that interest rates, asset prices, and expectations in capital markets have a significant effect on the capital movements of foreign subsidiaries. We also find that foreign subsidiaries mitigate their exposure to foreign business risk by modifying their capital structure and debt maturity. Further, we show how the operating strategy of foreign subsidiaries affects their preference for growth or profit maximization. We further show that superior shareholder value, which is a vital link for access to capital for funding foreign expansion in open market economies, is achieved through maintaining stability in the rate of growth and good asset utilization.

FDI, trade and growth, a causal link?

. FDI, Trade and Growth, a Causal Link? (RP0710) Prof Nigel DRIFFIELD Dr Rakesh BISSOONDEEAL Mayang Pramadhani Non-technical Summary This paper explores the relationship between imports, exports, foreign direct investment and growth. For some time there has been a good deal of debate whether trade and foreign direct investment) FDI are substitutes and complements, with the existing literature generating some rather contradictory findings. We show, for Indonesia that inward FDI and both imports and exports are complementary, and further that FDI causes an increase in trade. This is of particular interest for a country such as Indonesia, that has attracted a high proportion of export-orientated inward investment. This, theoretically at least is associated with an increase in imports, in the form of capital goods and components, but a reduction in imports. We show that the previous literature that fails to find such a relationship does so because both trade and FDI are associated with growth, and previous work ignores these growth effects when seeking to isolate the relationship between trade and FDI.

Technology flows, outsourcing and productivity:an analysis of UK trade and FDI

By engaging in trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) with foreign partners, a country can access the R&D and related knowledge stocks of other countries (by accident or by design) and so benefit from those stocks of knowledge at a cost lower than that which would be incurred by developing the knowledge internally. This should lead to beneficial ‘spillover’ effects on the productivity of domestic firms. However, the literature on technology spillovers from trade and FDI is ambiguous in its findings. This may in part be because of the assumption in much of the work that trade and FDI flows are homogeneous in their determinants and thus in their effects. We develop a taxonomy of trade and FDI determinants based on R&D intensity and unit labour cost differentials, and test for the presence of spillovers from inward investment and imports on an extensive sample of UK manufacturing plants. We find that both trade and FDI have measurable spillover effects, but the size of these effects varies depending on the technological and labour cost differentials between the UK and its trading partners. There is therefore an identifiable link between the determinants and effects of trade and FDI which the previous literature has not explored. We also find that absorptive capacity matters for spillovers from FDI, but not from trade. Overall, these findings suggest that the productivity effects of FDI are largely restricted to plants with high absorptive capacity, while the productivity effects of imports occur largely among higher-technology plants regardless of their absorptive capacity.

Wage inequality and the role of multinationals:evidence from UK panel data

Despite the increased attention on the impacts of globalisation, there has been little empirical investigation into the impact of multinational firms on the domestic labour market and in particular wage inequality, this is in spite of a rapid increase in foreign direct investment (FDI) at around the same time of rising inequality. Using UK panel data, this paper tests whether inward flows of FDI have contributed to increasing wage inequality. Even after controlling for the two most common explanations of wage inequality, technology and trade, we find that FDI has a significant effect upon wage inequality, with the overall impact of FDI explaining on average 11% of wage inequality. © 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Openness and economic growth

The themes of this thesis are that international trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) are closely related and that they have varying impacts on economic growth in countries at different stages of development. The thesis consists of three empirical studies. The first one examines the causal relationship between FDI and trade in China. The empirical study is based on a panel of bilateral data for China and 19 home countries/regions over the period 1984-98. The specific feature of the study is that econometric techniques designed specially for panel data are applied to test for unit roots and causality. The results indicate a virtuous procedure of development for China. The growth of China’s imports causes growth in inward FDI from a home country/region, which in turn causes the growth of exports from China to the home country/region. The growth of exports causes the growth of imports. This virtuous procedure is the result of China’s policy of opening to the outside world. China has been encouraging export-oriented FDI and reducing trade barriers. Such policy instruments should be further encouraged in order to enhance economic growth. In the second study, an extended gravity model is constructed to identify the main causes of recent trade growth in OECD countries. The specific features include (a) the explicit introduction of R&D and FDI as two important explanatory variables into an augmented gravity equation; (b) the adoption of a panel data approach, and (c) the careful treatment of endogeneity. The main findings are that the levels and similarities of market size, domestic R&D stock and inward FDI stock are positively related to the volume of bilateral trade, while the geographical distance, exchange rate and relative factor endowments, has a negative impact. These findings lend support to new trade, FDI and economic growth theories. The third study evaluates the impact of openness on growth in different country groups. This research distinguishes itself from many existing studies in three aspects: first, both trade and FDI are included in the measurement of openness. Second, countries are divided' into three groups according to their development stages to compare the roles of FDI and trade in different groups. Third, the possible problems of endogeneity and multicollinearity of FDI and trade are carefully dealt with in a panel data setting. The main findings are that FDI and trade are both beneficial to a country's development. However, trade has positive effects on growth in all country groups but FDI has positive effects on growth only in the country groups which have had moderate development. The findings suggest FDI and trade may affect growth under different conditions.