Spillovers from foreign direct investment in Central and Eastern Europe:an index for measuring a country’s potential to benefit from technology spillovers

In the paper, we construct a composite indicator to estimate the potential of four Central and Eastern European countries (the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) to benefit from productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment (FDI) in the manufacturing sector. Such transfers of technology are one of the main benefits of FDI for the host country, and should also be one of the main determinants of FDI incentives offered to investing multinationals by governments, but they are difficult to assess ex ante. For our composite index, we use six components to proxy the main channels and determinants of these spillovers. We have tried several weighting and aggregation methods, and we consider our results robust. According to the analysis of our results, between 2003 and 2007 all four countries were able to increase their potential to benefit from such spillovers, although there are large differences between them. The Czech Republic clearly has the most potential to benefit from productivity spillovers, while Poland has the least. The relative positions of Hungary and Slovakia depend to some extent on the exact weighting and aggregation method of the individual components of the index, but the differences are not large. These conclusions have important implications both the investment strategies of multinationals and government FDI policies.

Institutions and firm ownership structure:evidence from Central and Eastern Europe

FDI plays a key role in development, particularly in resource-constrained transition economies of Central and Eastern Europe with relatively low savings rates. Gains from technology transfer play a critical role in motivating FDI, yet potential for it may be hampered by a large technology gap between the source and host country. While the extent of this gap has traditionally been attributed to education, skills and capital intensity, recent literature has also emphasized the possible role of institutional environment in this respect. Despite tremendous interest among policy-makers and academics to understand the factors attracting FDI (Bevan and Estrin, 2000; Globerman and Shapiro, 2003) our knowledge about the effects of institutions on the location choice and ownership structure of foreign firms remains limited. This paper attempts to fill this gap in the literature by examining the link between institutions and foreign ownership structures. To the best of our knowledge, Javorcik (2004) is the only papers, which use firm-level data to analyse the role of institutional quality on an outward investor’s entry mode in transition countries. Our paper extends Javorcik (2004) in a number of ways: (a) rather than a cross-section, we use panel data for the period 1997-2006; (b) rather than a binary variable, we use the percentage foreign ownership as continuous variable; (c) we consider multi-dimensional institutional variables, such as corruption, intellectual property rights protection and government stability. We also use factor analysis to generate a composite index of institutional quality and see how stronger institutional environment could affect foreign ownership; (d) we explore how the distance between institutional environment in source and host countries affect foreign ownership in a host country. The firm-level data used includes both domestic and foreign firms for the period 1997-2006 and is drawn from ORBIS, a commercially available dataset provided by Bureau van Dijk. In order to examine the link between institutions and foreign ownership structures, we estimate four log-linear ownership equations/specifications augmented by institutional and other control variables. We find evidence that the decision of a foreign firm to either locate its subsidiary or acquire an existing domestic firm depends not only on factor cost differences but also on differences in institutional environment between the host and source countries.

Financial liberalization and stock market volatility:the case of Indonesia

This article examines the relationship between financial liberalization and stock market volatility in Indonesia. By looking at the time series properties of the Jakarta Composite Index (JCI) we identify breaks in stock market volatility which coincide with the timing of major policy events. Our main findings are (i) a significant decrease in volatility after the 'official' opening of the stock market to foreign participation; (ii) a significant increase in volatility in the year before market opening following reforms that eased entry requirements and the issuance of brokerage licenses and (iii) a significant increase in volatility at the time of the Asian crisis followed by a significant decrease in the second and sixth years after the crisis.

Stock price and volume effects associated with changes in the composition of the FTSE Bursa Malaysian KLCI

We examine the stock price and volume effects associated with changes in the composition of the FTSE Bursa Malaysia Kuala Lumpur Composite Index (KLCI), over the time period of 2005–2012. We find evidence to support the price pressure hypothesis for both additions to and deletions from the KLCI. This is because significant stock price and trading volume effects in the pre index revision period are entirely reversed after the announcement of the news. Our empirical findings can be explained by the market microstructure literature. Significant changes in liquidity cause trading volume and stock prices to reverse back to their original level before the index revisions took place.

Benchmarking the knowledge competitiveness of the globe's high performing regions:a review of the World Knowledge Competitiveness Index

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyze the way in which the knowledge competitiveness of regions is measured and further introduces the World Knowledge Competitiveness Index (WKCI) benchmarking tool. Design/methodology/approach – The methodology consists of an econometric analysis of key indicators relating to the concept of knowledge competitiveness for 125 regions from across the globe consisting of 55 representatives from North America, 45 from Europe and 25 from Asia and Oceania. Findings – The key to winning the super competitive race in the knowledge-based economy is investment in the future: research and development, and education and training. It is found that the majority of the high-performing regional economies in the USA have a knowledge competitive edge over their counterparts in Europe and Asia. Research limitations/implications – To an extent, the research is limited by the availability of comparable indicators and metrics at the regional level that extend across the globe. Whilst comparative data are often accessible at the national level, regional data sources remain underdeveloped. Practical implications – The WKCI has become internationally recognized as an important instrument for economic development policymakers and regional investment promotion agents as they create and refine their strategies and targets. In particular, it has provided a benchmark that allows regions to compare their knowledge competitiveness with other regions for around the world and not only their own nation or continent. Originality/value – The WKCI is the first composite and relative measure of the knowledge competitiveness of the globe's best performing regions.

World knowledge competitiveness index 2002:benchmarking the globes high-performing regions

The World Knowledge Competitiveness Index 2002 is the first composite and relative measure of the knowledge economies of the globe's best performing regions. It represents an integrated and overall benchmark of the knowledge capacity, capability and sustainability of each region and the extent to which this knowledge is translated into economic value and transferred into the wealth of the citizens of each region. This publication has over 50 pages and covers the following sections: The Economics of Knowledge Competitiveness The Rankings - World Knowledge Competitiveness Index Human Capital Components Knowledge Capital Components Regional Economy Outputs Knowledge Sustainability Components Driving Knowledge-Based Growth