FDI对制造业部门内资企业市场与发展影响的比较分析——基于宁波数据的检验

文章利用我国吸引FDI较为发达典型的宁波地区1998年～2007年间制造业部门中的数据,比较分析了FDI对宁波制造业部门内资企业市场和发展的综合影响。实证结果表明,FDI在一定程度上排挤内资企业的生产活动,造成激烈的市场竞争;但激烈的市场竞争也促使内资企业的技术进步和可持续性发展,"以竞争换技术"效果比较明显。同时,在权衡FDI对市场和发展影响的整体利益基础之上,文章提出若干对策建议。     

行业增长因素与我国FDI行业内溢出效应

本文利用2000年至2002年我国制造业320个四位码细分行业的数据,采用经验研究的方法,系统地探讨了行业增长特征对FDI在我国产生行业内溢出效应的影响。检验结果表明,行业增长特征确实是影响我国FDI行业内溢出效应的重要因素;进而,行业增长特征对两种FDI行业内溢出效应的影响因内资企业的国际市场倾向性的不同而不同。此外,研究进一步提示我们关注我国出口水平较高的行业中可能发生的FDI挤出效应。     

FDI技术溢出与内资企业生产效率的关系

文章围绕外国直接投资(FDI)技术溢出(FDI参与程度)、内资企业生产效率以及技术差距等因素进行了分析。文章认为,在汽车行业中,FDI参与程度与技术差距对内资企业生产效率具有不利影响。前者是因为在内资企业生产效率提升的过程中,FDI参与程度的挤出效应发挥了主导作用;而后者则是因为内资企业应该通过吸收与自身技术差距较小的技术以提升其生产效率。FDI的来源对内资企业生产能力的形成也具有显著影响。行业竞争强度对于内资企业生产能力发展同时具有直接影响与调节作用。     

FDI对我国制造业就业结构的影响

本文使用1999-2007年我国制造业的面板数据分析外商直接投资（FDI）对我国制造业行业间和行业内就业结构变化的影响。在FDI的影响下,行业间就业结构呈低端化,但是行业内就业结构得到优化。FDI通过促进劳动密集型行业的就业增长带动了制造业的就业增加,同时劳动密集型行业劳动力从内资流向外资的情况也较严重,即FDI主要通过增加自身的就业而非内资的就业带动了我国就业数量的增长。行业内就业结构来看,技术密集型行业就业结构得到优化的结果比劳动密集型行业要明显。其中竞争效应促进了内资就业结构的升级,但存在高技能劳动力从内资企业流向外资企业的情况。总体上增加就业和提升就业结构的因素在于内资投资的增加。     

FDI对我国制造业部门内资企业技术外溢效应的实证分析——以宁波为例

文章以宁波地区为视角,通过Feder(1982)模型和宁波地区1998年至2007年间的有关数据,实证分析了FDI对我国,尤其是宁波地区制造业部门内资企业技术外溢效应的方向、力度以及传导机制。结果表明,FDI对宁波制造业部门中的内资企业产生了微弱的负向竞争效应,对内资企业的生产和发展带来了一定的冲击压力。基于分析结果,文章深刻剖析了其中存在的实际问题和具体原因,从而提出相应的对策建议,对于宁波制定今后的外资政策具有非常重要的现实意义。     

我国利用FDI质量的实证研究——基于FDI企业出口外部性的视角

FDI企业出口外部性即时内资企业出口的影响是衡量东道国利用FDI质量的重要内容,运用回归分析和panel data模型研究FDI企业对内资企业出口数量、结构和竞争力的影响,结果表明:我国在FDI企业出口影响内资企业出口数量方面的FDI利用质量高,而在FDI企业出口影响内资企业出口结构和竞争力方面的FDI利用质量低.     

FDI对我国电子信息产品制造业国际竞争力影响研究

基于FDI对我国电子信息产品制造业生产要素、需求状况、相关产业状况和竞争状况产生影响的理论分析,获得八个解释变量;选取显示性比较优势为被解释变量;利用1998至2008各年统计数据,实证分析FDI对我国电子信息产品制造业国际竞争力的影响。结果表明：内资研发投入、内资的产业集中度、外资资本投入、国内对电子信息产品制造业需求量、我国半导体硅单晶生产额、外资企业销售量占产业销售总量这六个变量显著影响我国该行业国际竞争力,内资资本密集度和外资人力资本强度没有通过显著性检验。     

外商直接投资对我国制造业自主创新投入的影响

本文利用2003—2007年我国28个制造行业的面板数据,检验了外商直接投资（FDI）参与度、FDI研发强度以及科技人员比重等因素对内资制造业自主创新投入的影响。结果表明上述三个因素对全部内资制造业的自主创新投入的影响并不显著。将制造业划分为高技术行业和一般行业,外资参与度对内资高技术行业研发强度的抑制程度要小于一般行业。外资研发强度对内资高技术行业研发强度的影响显著为负,对一般行业亦产生消极影响,但不显著。外资科技人员比重明显促进了高技术行业的自主创新投入,对低技术行业的研发支出强度产生负面影响,但统计上也不显著。上述结论意味着外资参与对内资自主创新投入的影响较为间接,需要关注直接影响内资自主创新投入的外资研发强度和外资科技人员比重等因素。内资企业要主动提高自主创新投入,形成自主创新能力,缩小和外资的技术差距。     

FDI在中国的分布、市场份额与享受的税收优惠

本文通过对第一次全国经济普查数据的分析发现,到2004年底,FDI企业在制造业产品的国内市场上已占到18%的份额,在制造业的资本形成中约占17%的比重,在中国制造业的劳动市场上已占到19%的比重.FDI企业的出口率在36%(港澳台资)与42%(外资企业)之间,其产品出口已占到中国制造业总出口的64%,这说明FDI是我国与世界市场联系的主要纽带.FDI在资本利润率方面普遍比中国内资企业有效率,这得益于FDI相对低的工资率与中国的出口退税政策.数据已经显示,中国低廉的劳动力成本与长达10年之久的出口退税政策,已经导致了FDI企业较内资企业更低的相对工资率与在绝对水平上明显低的实际增值税率.     

FDI的水平与垂直溢出效应——以长三角二省一市为例

利用2000—2007年长三角地区两省一市27个制造业细分行业的面板数据,实证检验了FDI对内资企业的水平溢出、后向溢出和前向溢出效应,分别就FDI对长三角地区整体和江苏、浙江和上海不同地理单元的27个制造业整体及不同类型组(高、中、低技术产业组)的溢出效应进行实证检验。结果显示,长三角地区、江苏、浙江和上海的FDI都对内资企业具有正的后向溢出效应和负的前向溢出效应,江苏和浙江的FDI的水平溢出效应为正,上海的FDI的水平溢出效应为负。     

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.     

Brotherhood of competition: Foreign Direct Investment and domestic mergers

We examine the effects of mergers on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), and on shaping national policies regarding FDI. In this work we develop a partial equilibrium model of an oligopolistic industry in which a number of domestic and foreign firms compete in the market for a homogeneous good in a host country. It is assumed that the number of foreign firms is endogenous and can be affected by the government policy in the host country. The government sets the policy (subsidies) to maximise social welfare. We allow domestic mergers. Our main results suggest that when the host country government imposes discriminatory lump-sum subsidy in favor of foreign firms, a merger of domestic firms will increase the number of FDI if the subsidy level is exogenous. With an endogenous level of subsidy, a merger of domestic firms will decrease (increase) the welfare if the domestic firms are more (less) efficient.     

The impact of foreign direct investment on innovation at domestic firms: Evidence from the deregulation of foreign investment in China

This paper studies the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on innovation by domestic firms in China. A difference-in-difference estimation strategy yields causal evidence by exploiting China's deregulation of FDI in 2002. Analysis of a matched firm–patent data set from 1998 to 2007 shows that both the quantity and quality of innovation by domestic firms benefited from the presence of FDI. Emphasizing the importance of knowledge spillover from FDI in similar technology domains, the authors examine the role of horizontal FDI and FDI in technologically close industries—those sharing similar technology domains. Findings show that the latter generates much more substantial positive spillover than the former. The paper also shows that knowledge spillover from FDI in similar technology domains is not driven by input–output linkages. In addition, the spillover effect is stronger in cities with higher human capital stock and firms with higher absorptive capacity.     

FDI对中国经济发展影响的实证分析与政策建议

FDI对中国经济发展的影响主要表现为:(1)外商投资企业劳动力的就业增量对于经济增长的负效应要小于其他类型企业的就业增量对经济增长的负效应;(2)FDI规模扩大对就业具有直接的创造效应,但对其他类型企业的就业具有一定的负面效应;(3)外商投资企业的出口与世界经济增长和我国的经济增长具有很强的相关性,但与FDI只有较弱的相关性;(4)FDI对于内资企业模仿和学习先进技术具有明显的溢出效应,但对内资企业自主创新能力的提高的溢出效应不大。     

Origin of FDI and Intra‐Industry Domestic Spillovers: The Case of Greek and European FDI in Bulgaria

This paper uses firm‐level data to assess the horizontal impact of foreign firm ownership on domestic productivity in Bulgaria. We identify a theoretical tradeoff between technological distance (of domestic versus foreign firms) and internalization capacity (of spillovers) and examine the extent to which this is reflected in the impact on the domestic economy of different types and origins of FDI. Emphasis is placed upon the effects of Greek FDI, which is known to be of a distinctively “regional” character. We find that Greek FDI produces significantly larger positive spillovers, which appear more suitable for the Bulgarian context of transition and economic restructuring. We also unveil some notable “hysteresis” and “technology bias” effects for FDI spillovers of all origins, as well as some country‐specific ownership‐structure and threshold effects.     

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)     

Microeconomic consequences and macroeconomic causes of foreign direct investment in southern African economies

The authors use a new data set on firms in 13 countries of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and comparators from other regions to identify the benefits and determinants of FDI in this region. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) has facilitated local development in the SADC. Foreign-owned firms perform better than domestic firms, are larger, and locate in richer and better-governed countries and in countries with more competitive financial intermediaries. They are also more likely to export than domestic firms and evidence suggests that they might have positive spillover effects on domestic firms. Based on a standard empirical model, the SADC is attracting the inward FDI per capita that the region's level of income would predict. But this means that there are less capital inflows per capita to the region than there are to wealthier parts of the developing world. Moreover, the SADC is attracting less FDI than comparators for reasons that are possibly more fundamental than current income, namely, countries’ past growth record, demographic structure and the quality of physical infrastructure. Interestingly, inward FDI is less sensitive to variation in income within the SADC than in other parts of the world, but is more responsive to changes in country's openness to trade.     

Multinational Firms and Strategic FDI Subsidies

A simple three‐stage game model of an international Cournot duopoly, consisting of domestic and foreign multinational firms, is exploited to examine strategic FDI subsidies. While in the first stage the governments decide the optimal FDI subsidies, the firms endogenously choose their FDI levels (or subsidiary plant sizes) in the second stage and their output–export levels in the third stage. Thus, this paper finds that while the outflow and inflow FDI subsidies have different effects on firms’ FDI choices, the FDI subsidies are used as tools for the implementation of strategic policies and that the optimal FDI subsidies vary, depending on whether the governments assess labor employment.     

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.     

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.