INTERNATIONALIZATION STRATEGIES IN OLIGOPOLY WITH HETEROGENEOUS FIRMS

This paper examines the foreign direct investment (FDI) versus exports decision of foreign oligopolistic firms under cost heterogeneity. An additional motivation for firms to invest abroad is the technological sourcing via spillovers, which flow from the host more efficient firm to foreign less advantaged firms. For intermediate values of the set‐up costs associated with FDI entry, it is shown that foreign firms choose opposite entry strategies. An equilibrium where the less efficient foreign firm exports whereas the more efficient invests is more likely to happen when foreign firms become more heterogeneous, the larger the trade costs and not too big oligopolistic profitability. Interestingly, the opposite may also be an equilibrium thus finding that the more efficient firm does not choose to invest, a result that emphasizes the relevance of the strategic setting under consideration. The latter result identifies a market failure since welfare in the host market is higher when both firms undertake FDI; a finding that calls attention to how appropriate are host government policies towards internationalization strategies.     

Asymmetric Demand Information and Foreign Direct Investment*

We examine the FDI versus exports decision of firms competing in an oligopolistic (quantity‐setting) market under demand uncertainty and asymmetric information. Compared to a firm that chooses to export, a firm that chooses to set up a plant in the host market has superior information about local market demand. In addition to the well‐known tension between the fixed set‐up costs of investment, the additional variable costs of exports and oligopoly sizes, the incentive to invest abroad is explained by the strategic learning effect. FDI may be observed even if trade costs are zero. The analysis is robust to price competition and to the possibility that a foreign firm can engage in both FDI and exports.     

Disentangling barriers to internationalization

Abstract. Recent literature on multinational firms has focused on low productivity as a barrier to the internationalization of firms. But labour market frictions or financial constraints may also hamper internationalization. In order to assess the importance of these barriers, we present new empirical evidence on the extensive and intensive margin of exports and foreign direct investment (FDI) based on micro‐level data of German firms. First, we find a positive impact of firm size and productivity on firms’ international activities. Second, labour market frictions can constitute barriers to foreign activities. Third, self‐reported financial constraints have no impact on firms’ internationalization decisions. JEL classification: F23, G2     

TARIFF JUMPING FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT DECISION IN A QUALITY‐DIFFERENTIATED MARKET

Using a product differentiation model, this paper discusses the issue of transnational firms evading tariffs and investing directly in a host country (through foreign direct investment (FDI)). Where product quality is differentiated between foreign and host country firms and assuming a firm's quality requirement is a long‐term strategy and is not affected by a foreign firm's trade decision, we obtain the following findings. First, whether or not a host country firm produces high or low quality products, raising the quality requirement for foreign products will increase the possibility of a foreign firm choosing FDI instead of exporting a product to the host country. Second, raising the quality requirement for domestic products will lower the possibility of foreign firms choosing FDI without regard to the product's quality. Finally, given a competitor in the host country, in FDI, a foreign high‐quality product‐producing firm has an advantage over a low‐quality product‐producing firm. We also find that even when firms' quality decisions are affected by a foreign firm's trade decision, most of the above results will still hold.     

Domestic R&D,Foreign Direct Investment and Welfare

This paper provides a new rationale to examine the two‐way relationship between domestic research and development (R&D) and foreign direct investment (FDI), as well as their impacts on domestic welfare. Our analysis is based on the strategic interaction in cost‐reducing investment decisions between domestic firms and a foreign firm, which is different from the common factors that are discussed in the literature such as spillovers and technology sourcing. Our results are as follows. We show that domestic R&D investment may either increase or decrease the foreign firm's FDI incentives. Further, depending on the marginal cost of domestic firms, domestic R&D incentives can always increase regardless of the effects of domestic R&D investment on the foreign firm's FDI decision. Finally, we find that domestic welfare improves under domestic cost reduction if the slope of the marginal cost of domestic R&D investment is sufficiently small.     

THE IMPACT OF TRADE AND FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT POLICIES ON TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION AND SOURCING OF CHINESE FIRMS

How do trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) policies impact the decisions of firms in technology adoption (process vs. product innovations) and sourcing (internal vs. external and foreign vs. domestic)? We use a sample of Chinese firms to address this question. China's trade and FDI policies lead to different forms of internationalization: ordinary exports, processing exports, majority FDI, and minority FDI. We find that both exporting and FDI stimulate process innovation; ordinary exports, processing exports, and FDI have strong, weak, and no effects on stimulating product innovation, respectively. Exporting firms source technologies both internally through R&D and externally from foreign and domestic sources. FDI firms have a lower tendency of internal technology development and domestic technology sourcing, but a much higher tendency of foreign technology sourcing than exporting firms. (JEL F13, F23, O32)     

Technological Constraints,Firm Heterogeneity,and Location Choice of Multinational Enterprises

This paper aims to examine the relationship between the location choices of multinational enterprises and their productivity considering the North–South differences in regard to technological constraints. We find that home firms with the highest level of productivity choose to undertake foreign direct investment (FDI) in the developed countries and they choose to export to, rather than do FDI in, developing countries. This result explains why not many high tech industries exist in developing countries. Using Japanese firm level data, we also confirm that Japanese high tech firms tend to undertake FDI in developed countries, but hesitate to invest in developing countries empirically.     

THE IMPACT OF EXPORTING AND FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT ON PRODUCT INNOVATION: EVIDENCE FROM CHINESE MANUFACTURERS

To understand the drivers of product innovation at the firm level, I compare the effects of foreign direct investment (FDI) and exporting on product innovation using a rich firm‐level database of manufacturing and industrial enterprises. The article focuses on product innovation, as it is vital to economic development. Estimates from linear regressions and propensity score matching tests show that learning‐by‐exporting is a stronger predictor of product innovation. Firms that receive foreign investment also tend to engage in more product innovation, but not at the same level as the firms that export. Additional tests confirm that as they start and stop exporting, firms change their patterns of investment in the drivers of product innovation—fixed capital and research. (JEL D22, F14, F23, L25, O31)     

R&D and foreign direct investment with asymmetric spillovers

This paper analyzes how firms’ R&D investment decisions are affected by asymmetries in knowledge transmission, considering different sources of asymmetry such as unequal know-how management capabilities and spillovers localization within an international oligopoly. We show that a better ability to manage knowledge flows incentivizes the firm to invest more in R&D. By introducing geographically bounded spillovers, we also find that one-way foreign direct investment (FDI) stimulates the multinational enterprise to raise its own R&D and that an FDI equilibrium is more likely to occur. Finally, spillovers localization leading to two-way FDI is welfare improving when compared with non-localized spillovers.     

Foreign Capital,Spillovers and Export Performance in Emerging Economies: Evidence from Indian IT Firms

The role of foreign capital inflow, foreign direct investment (FDI) and foreign portfolio investment (FPI), on export behavior of both recipients and non‐recipient competing firms in the same sector often guides economic development policy. By using panel data of Indian IT firms over 2000–2006, we show that FDI reduces the sunk costs of entering foreign markets and therefore positively effects both the decision to export and the export propensity of recipient firms. Foreign portfolio investment has no effect on the decision to export, but it does marginally increase the volume of exports. Further, these positive FDI and FPI recipient effects do not spill‐over to non‐recipients.     

Regional Blocs and Foreign Direct Investment

The paper examines the impact of the emergence of regional blocs on the patterns of interbloc and intrabloc trade when firms have the option to engage in foreign direct investment (FDI). For exogenously given external tariffs, when firms have the option to engage in FDI, all interbloc trade may cease—complete trade diversion that is replaced by interbloc FDI investment creation. In such an event the volume of world trade declines but this is more than offset by the increase in world output due to direct investment. The paper also investigates the optimal tariff that a trading bloc levies on imports from nonmember countries. The tariffs are restricted by the option to engage in two‐way direct investment; hence, the regional blocs are hampered from mutually harming one another through an escalation in the tariff war. Finally, the formation of two regional blocs enhances the welfare of all countries.     

Vertical foreign direct investment: Make,buy, and sell

According to conventional wisdom, multinational enterprises (MNEs) undertake vertical FDI to take advantage of cross‐border factor cost differences and source inputs from abroad at better terms. However, recent empirical studies document many instances in which intrafirm trade between parent firms and their vertically related foreign affiliates is absent. We provide theoretical support for these findings, demonstrating that a firm can engage in vertical FDI to exploit its intangible assets in another country and improve its input sourcing terms domestically by enhancing its cross‐threat. Furthermore, we show that the welfare implications of vertical FDI on the home and host country are neither always positive nor aligned.     

Commercial Policy and Foreign Ownership

Foreign multinationals often not only export but also control local firms through FDI. This paper examines the various effects of trade and industrial policies when exports and FDI coexist. We focus on the case in which a foreign firm has full control of a local firm through partial ownership. Cross‐border ownership on the basis of both financial interests and corporate control leads to horizontal market linkages through which tariffs and production subsidies may harm locally owned firms but benefit the foreign firm. Foreign ownership regulation benefits locally owned firms. These results could have strong policy implications for developing countries that attract an increasing share of world FDI.     

Regional foreign direct investment and technology spillover: evidence across different clusters in India

This paper examines whether there exist productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment (FDI) to domestic firms at the regional level, using firm-level panel dataset covering 22 manufacturing industries in India from 2000 to 2012. In order to estimate the productivity spillovers from FDI at the regional level, we select 10 industrial clusters across 4 regions in India. In estimating productivity, we control for a possible simultaneity bias by using semi-parametric estimation techniques. We find that local firms benefit from horizontal and vertical FDI, but the benefits from the latter are found to be substantially stronger. The absorptive capacity of domestic firms is highly relevant to harvest the spilled technology from foreign-owned firms. Furthermore, we find that domestic firms belonging to high-technology industries benefit more from FDI at the regional level. We also find that market concentration is a crucial conduit for firm innovation, technological upgradation, and having a direct effect on local firm total factor productivity.     

Technology Sourcing and Strategic Foreign Direct Investment

Empirical evidence suggests that technological spillovers are limited by distance. The present paper investigates the implications of this observation for the investment decisions of a technologically leading and lagging firm, located in different countries. Technological spillovers may induce “technology sourcing” foreign direct investment by the less advanced firm, as it seeks to upgrade its technology. Our main result, however, is that there may be strong incentives for the leading firm to undertake strategic investment abroad in order to prevent technology sourcing by the lagging firm. We analyze how trade costs, the technology gap between firms, technological spillovers, and the ability of a firm to transfer technology between plants affect the two firms’ entry decisions.     

FDI spillovers in new EU member states

Using an unbalanced panel of firm‐level data in Bulgaria, Poland and Romania, we examine the impact of foreign firms on domestic firms’ productivity. In particular, we try to answer the following research questions: (1) Are there any spillover effects of foreign direct investments (FDI), and if so, are they positive or negative? (2) Are spillover effects more likely to occur within or across sectors? (3) Are the existence, the direction and the magnitude of spillovers conditioned by sector and firm‐specific characteristics? Our findings show that FDI spillovers exist both within and across sectors. The former arise when foreign firms operate in labour‐intensive sectors, while the latter occur when foreign firms operate in high‐tech sectors. Moreover, we find that domestic firm size conditions the exploitation of FDI spillovers even after controlling for absorptive capacity. We also detect a great deal of heterogeneity across countries consistent with the technology gap hypothesis.     

The Determinants of Firm Performance and Bribery: Evidence from Manufacturing Firms in Nigeria

This paper uses ordinary least squares with firm effects and Probit regression models to investigate the determinants of firm performance and the likelihood of firms to pay bribes. Results for the manufacturing firms in Nigeria show that skilled workforce, exports, foreign ownership and capital investment influence firm performance. Conversely, poor electricity delivery and difficulty obtaining finance impede firm performance. Total sales and time spent dealing with government regulations increase the likelihood of firms to pay bribes. Surprisingly, foreign firms are as much likely to pay bribes as domestic firms. Policy implications from the findings are important considering that the manufacturing sector assumes an important role in the Lewis theory of economic development.     

ARE THERE PRODUCTIVITY SPILLOVERS FROM FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT IN CHINA?

We review previous literature on productivity spillovers of foreign direct investment (FDI) in China and conduct our own analysis using a firm‐level data set from a World Bank survey. We find that the evidence of FDI spillovers on the productivity of Chinese domestic firms is mixed, with many positive results largely due to aggregation bias or failure to control for endogeneity of FDI. Attempting over 6000 specifications that take into account forward and backward linkages, we fail to find evidence of systematic positive productivity spillovers from FDI in China.     

Corporate financial soundness and its impact on firm performance: implications for corporate debt restructuring in Slovenia

This article studies the extent of corporate leverage and range of excessive debt of Slovenian firms during the recent financial crisis. Half of all firms (of those with some non-zero debt and at least one employee) are found to face an unsustainable debt-to-EBITDA leverage ratio beyond 4, accounting for almost 80% of total outstanding debt. Moreover, a good quarter of all firms experience debt-to-EBITDA ratios exceeding 10 and hold almost half of total aggregate net debt. We then examine how this financial distress affects firm performance in terms of productivity, employment, exports, investment and survival. We find that, while less important during the good times (pre-recession period), lack of firms’ financial soundness during the period of financial distress becomes a critical factor constraining firm performance. The extent of financial leverage and ability to service the outstanding debt are shown to inhibit firms’ productivity growth as well as the dynamics of exports, employment and investment. Micro and small firms are found to suffer relatively more than larger firms from high leverage in terms of export and employment performance during the recession period.     

Export Spillovers of FDI on China's Domestic Firms

This paper examines the horizontal and vertical export spillovers of foreign direct investment (FDI) on China's manufacturing domestic firms by using firm‐level census data over the period of 2000–03. Based on a Heckman two‐step procedure combining first differencing and instrumental variable regression techniques, it is found that FDI has had a positive impact on the export value of domestic firms mainly through backward technology spillovers and a positive impact on the export‐to‐sales ratio of domestic firms through horizontal export‐related information spillovers. After decomposing FDI by different market orientation and domestic firms by different ownership, the paper finds that the positive impact on domestic firms' export values is mainly from the nonexporting and the exporting foreign‐invested enterprises while the positive impact on domestic firms' export‐to‐sales ratios is mainly from the high‐exporting foreign‐invested enterprises. Both types of export spillovers are mainly diffused to domestic non‐state‐owned enterprises.