fdi在發(fā)展中國家的決定因素分析外文翻譯

1、<p><b>　　中文3568字</b></p><p><b>　　畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯</b></p><p>　　外文題目： Analyses of FDI determinants in developing countries </p><p>　　出 處：

2、 Economics.2009(36):105-123. </p><p>　　作 者： Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Erso y </p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Analy

3、ses of FDI determinants in developing countries</p><p>　　Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Ersoy</p><p><b>　　ABSTRACT</b></p><p>　　Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to invest

4、igate the best determinants of foreign direct investment (FDI) in developing countries.</p><p>　　Design/methodology/approach: This paper investigates whether FDI determinants affect FDI based on both a panel

5、 of data (FMOLS-fully modified OLS) and cross-section SUR (seemingly unrelated regression) for 24 developing countries, over the period 1983-2005 for FMOLS and 1976-2005 for cross-section SUR.</p><p>　　Findi

6、ngs: The interaction of FDI with some FDI determinants have a strong positive effect on economic progress in developing countries, while the interaction of FDI with the total debt service/GDP and inflation have a negativ

7、e impact. The most important determinant of FDI is the communication variable. </p><p>　　1.Introduction</p><p>　　Trade has traditionally been the principal mechanism linking national economies i

8、n order to create an international economy. FDI is a similar mechanism linking national economies; therefore, these two mechanisms reinforce each other. The trade effects of FDI depend on whether it is undertaken to gain

9、 access to natural resources, to consumer markets or whether the FDI is aimed at exploiting locational comparative advantage or other strategic assets such as research and development capabilities. M</p><p>

10、　　FDI has innumerable other effects on the host country's economy. It influences the income, production, prices, employment, economic growth, development and general welfare of the recipient country. It is also proba

11、bly one of the most significant factors leading to the globalization of the international economy. Thus, the enormous increase in FDI flows across countries is one of the clearest signs of the globalization of the world

12、economy over the past 20 years (UNCTAD, 2006). Therefore, we can c</p><p>　　On the other hand, in general, foreign investors are influenced by three broad groups of factors:</p><p>　　The profita

13、bility of the projects.</p><p>　　The ease with which subsidiaries' operations can be integrated into investors' global strategies.</p><p>　　The overall quality of the host country's

14、enabling environment.</p><p>　　A large number of studies have been conducted to identify the determinants of FDI but no consensus has emerged, in the sense that there is no widely accepted set of explanatory

15、 variables that can be regarded as the “true” determinants of FDI. The results produced by studies of FDI are typically sensitive to these factors, indicating a lack of robustness. For example, factors such as labor cost

16、s, trade barriers, trade balance, exchange rate, R&D and tax have been found to have both negative and p</p><p>　　The important question is “Why do companies invest abroad?” Dunning (1993) developed his

17、theory by synthesizing the previously published theories, because existing explanations could not fully justify the existence of FDI. According to Dunning, international production is the result of a process affected by

18、ownership, internalization and localization advantages.</p><p>　　The latter is the most important: the factors based on which an investor selects a location for a project. These include the factors affecting

19、 the availability of local inputs such as natural resources, the size of the market, geographical location, the position of the economy, the cultural and political environment, factor prices, transport costs and certain

20、elements of the economic policy of the government (trade policy, industrial policy, budget policy, tax policy, etc.).</p><p>　　2.The determinants of FDI: theory and evidence</p><p>　　FDI has bee

21、n regarded in the last decades as an effective channel to transfer technology and foster growth in developing countries. This point of view vividly contrasts with the common belief that was accepted in some academic and

22、political spheres in the 1950s and 1960s, according to which FDI was harmful for the economic performance of less developed countries. The theoretical discussion that permeated part of the development economics of the se

23、cond half of the twentieth century has been appro</p><p>　　In the neoclassical growth model technological progress and labor growth are exogenous, inward FDI merely increases the investment rate, leading to

24、a transitional increase in per capita income growth but has no long-run growth effect (Hsiao and Hsiao, 2006). The new growth theory in the 1980s endogenizes technological progress and FDI has been considered to have per

25、manent growth effect in the host country through technology transfer and spillover. There is ongoing discussion on the impact of FDI</p><p>　　According to the neoclassical growth theory model, FDI does not a

26、ffect the long-term growth rate. This is understandable if we consider the assumptions of the model, namely: constant economies of scale, decreasing marginal products of inputs, positive substitution elasticity of inputs

27、 and perfect competition (Sass, 2003). Within the framework of the neo-classical models (Solow, 1956), the impact of FDI on the growth rate of output was constrained by the existence of diminishing returns in the ph</

28、p><p>　　As a consequence, of endogenous growth theory, FDI has a newly-perceived potential role in the growth process (Bende-Nabende and Ford, 1998). In the context of the New Theory of Economic Growth, however

29、, FDI may affect not only the level of output per capita but also its rate of growth. This literature has developed various hypotheses that explain why FDI may potentially enhance the growth rate of per capita income in

30、the host country (Calvo and Robles, 2003). However, the endogenous growth theo</p><p>　　Particularly, FDI displaces domestic savings (Papanek, 1973; Cohen, 1993; Reinhart and Talvi, 1998). In a seminal paper

31、, Papanek (1973) showed the significant negative impacts of different types of capital on national savings. Based on a sample of 85 developing countries, Papanek found that foreign capital displaced domestic savings. Spe

32、cifically, he showed that foreign aid, private investment and other capital crowded out national savings, and a reduction in domestic savings could lead to furth</p><p>　　Another determinant, tariffs, has a

33、positive effect on FDI if they are combined with the growth rate and openness, but they produce a negative effect when combined with wages. The real exchange rate produces a positive effect when it is combined with openn

34、ess, domestic investment and government consumption. When domestic investment is excluded, the effect becomes negative.</p><p>　　This supports the argument that an efficient environment that comes with more

35、openness to trade is likely to attract foreign firms. This conclusion is also supported by Asiedu (2002) and Edwards (1990). In this model, investment tax and wages have a negative impact on FDI, while infrastructure and

36、 market size have a significantly positive impact on FDI. Generally, only in the case of export oriented FDI, cheap labor in terms of lower wages works as an incentive (Wheeler and Mody, 1992). On the o</p><p&

37、gt;　　3.Data definition</p><p>　　The indicators tested in this study are selected on the basis of FDI theories and previous empirical literature. The indicators tested in the panel study and cross-section SUR

38、, are the FDI determinants for which the data have been found for developing countries for at least 30 years. Data sets related to a number of developing countries are sometimes discontinuous for some variables (i.e. not

39、 available for all 30 years). For that reason while defining the main determinants of FDI in this study, </p><p>　　4.Methodology</p><p>　　Panel data techniques has been used to estimate the FDI

40、equations because of their advantages over cross-section and time series in using all the information available, which are not detectable in pure cross-sections or in pure time series.</p><p>　　In this study

41、, the pool data (cross-section time series) has been created for 24 countries over 1975-2005 periods. T denotes the number of periods and N denotes the number of observations for each period. For making the evidence more

42、 reliable, five basic models were set up for analyses. After reliable estimators were derived from SUR and fully modified OLS (FMOLS) models, β convergence model was defined; countries that capture less FDI are convergin

43、g to countries capturing more FDI.</p><p>　　5.Conclusion</p><p>　　Competition among governments to attract FDI has grown significantly. Many countries have not only reduced or eliminated such re

44、strictions, but also moved toward encouraging FDI with tax and other incentives.</p><p>　　Appropriate domestic policies will help attract FDI and maximize its benefit, while at the same time removing obstacl

45、es to local businesses. Foreign enterprises, like domestic ones, pursue the good business environment rather than the special favors offered to induce the foreign enterprises to locate in the incentive offering regions,

46、transparency and accountability of governments and corporations are fundamental conditions for providing a trustworthy and effective framework for the social, envi</p><p>　　In the study the main determinants

47、 of FDI have been identified. It is possible for the countries to develop policies particular to their own economic structure by looking at the main FDI determinants. For example, when looking at the “Gross Capital Forma

48、tion” indicator in country X, we can conclude that this country can develop policies to encourage the import of investment goods instead of the import of consumption goods. Again country Y can improve intra trade policie

49、s by taking the “Openness”</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p><p>　　FDI在發(fā)展中國家的決定因素分析</p><p>　　Recep Kok,Bernur Acikgoz Ersoy</p><p><b>　　摘 要</b></p>

50、<p>　　目的：本文的目的是調(diào)查FDI在發(fā)展中國家的決定因素。</p><p>　　方法：本文基于24個發(fā)展中國家1983至2005年期間面板數(shù)據(jù)研究了外國直接投資的決定因素對FDI引入的影響程度。</p><p>　　結(jié)果：外國直接投資與其決定因素的相互作用對發(fā)展中國家的經(jīng)濟進步具有強烈的正面影響，而對國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值和通貨膨脹則產(chǎn)生負面影響。外國直接投資的最重要的決定因素是通

51、訊變量。</p><p><b>　　一、介紹</b></p><p>　　為了發(fā)展一個國際經(jīng)濟體系，貿(mào)易歷來是聯(lián)系各國經(jīng)濟的主要機制，外國直接投資是一個聯(lián)系兩國經(jīng)濟的類似機制，因此，這兩種機制相輔相成。外國直接投資的影響取決于它是否是開展旨在獲得自然資源的投資活動，是否選擇消費者市場還是意在通過投資活動擴大區(qū)域性比較優(yōu)勢，或者旨在獲得其他戰(zhàn)略資產(chǎn)如：研發(fā)能力的提高。

52、大多數(shù)發(fā)展中國家缺乏技術(shù)能力，外國直接投資促進技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移，并且縮小了發(fā)展中國家與發(fā)達國家之間的技術(shù)差距，實際上外國直接投資的外部溢出效應被認為是現(xiàn)代技術(shù)傳播的最重要渠道。</p><p>　　外國直接投資對東道國的經(jīng)濟有很多其他的影響。它影響著收入、產(chǎn)量、價格、就業(yè)、經(jīng)濟增長，以及發(fā)展和普及所在國的福利。它也可能是導致了國際經(jīng)濟全球化的最重要因素之一。因此，外國直接投資國際間流動的大量增加是過去20年世界經(jīng)濟全球化

53、的最明顯標志之一。因此，我們可以得出結(jié)論：外國直接投資是發(fā)展中國家的經(jīng)濟成功增長的關(guān)鍵因素，因為經(jīng)濟發(fā)展的本質(zhì)是快速，有效地轉(zhuǎn)移和通過跨越國界的“最佳做法”的采用。</p><p>　　另一方面,一般來說,外國投資者也受到了三組要素的影響：</p><p>　?。?）、項目的盈利能力；</p><p>　?。?）、附屬公司從事的一些經(jīng)營活動，可以很容易的被整合到投資

54、者全球戰(zhàn)略的操作；</p><p>　?。?）、東道國對環(huán)境的支持力度。</p><p>　　為了確定外國直接投資的決定因素已經(jīng)進行了大量的研究，但沒有達成共識，在某種意義上說，沒有一套被廣泛接受解釋變量，可以被看作是“真正的”外國直接投資的決定因素。FDI研究所得的結(jié)果通常都比較敏感，這表明結(jié)果缺乏穩(wěn)健性。例如，勞動力成本、貿(mào)易壁壘、貿(mào)易平衡、匯率和稅收這些因素都對FDI產(chǎn)生消極與積極雙

55、方面的影響。Chakrabarti(2001)認為“FDI與具有爭議的各個變量(即，稅收，工資，開放，匯率很多，關(guān)稅，增長和貿(mào)易平衡)間的關(guān)系對一些信息的變動是高度敏感的”。</p><p>　　重要的問題是“為什么公司要在海外進行投資？”杜寧（1993），他通過整合前人提出的理論發(fā)展了自己的觀點,因為現(xiàn)有的解釋不能完全的證明FDI的存在。根據(jù)杜寧的理論，國際生產(chǎn)是所有權(quán)、國際化、本土化的優(yōu)勢等一系列影響的結(jié)果。

56、</p><p>　　后者是最重要的：投資者是基于哪些因素才選擇一個地區(qū)開展項目計劃。這些包括的影響當?shù)赜行缘耐度胍蛩兀鹤匀毁Y源、市場規(guī)模、地理位置、經(jīng)濟體位置、文化和政治環(huán)境、要素價格、運輸成本與政府經(jīng)濟政策（貿(mào)易政策、產(chǎn)業(yè)政策、預算政策、稅收政策) 等。</p><p>　　本研究的主要目是確定在全球框架下外國直接投資的資本流向發(fā)展中國家的主要影響因素。外國直接投資流動是全球化現(xiàn)象的

57、主要動力之一，因此外國直接投資的決定因素，將有助于國家的政治發(fā)展進程。</p><p>　　二、FDI的影響因素:理論與證據(jù)</p><p>　　過去幾十年間，外國直接投資已經(jīng)成為發(fā)展中國家一種傳播技術(shù)與促進發(fā)展的有效途徑，這種觀點與五、六十年代學術(shù)、政治領(lǐng)域普遍接收的信仰形成了鮮明的對比，根據(jù)這些觀點外國直接投資對欠發(fā)達國家的經(jīng)濟表現(xiàn)是有害的。理論性的討論揭示了二十世紀后半葉的一些發(fā)展經(jīng)

58、濟體已經(jīng)在全新增長理論指導下開發(fā)出一種新視角。因此，在這個新的框架內(nèi)建立的模型為研究外國直接投資與GDP增長率的相關(guān)性而刻畫了一個有趣的背景（Calvo and Robles，2003）。</p><p>　　在新古典增長模型的技術(shù)進步和勞動增長前提下，外來直接投資僅僅增加了投資率，導致了人均收入的增長過渡性增加，但并沒有長期增長的影響。在20世紀80年代的新增長理論內(nèi)生性技術(shù)進步，外國直接投資一直被認為可以通過

59、技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移與溢出效應而在東道國產(chǎn)生永久的增長效應。我在討論FDI對東道國的影響，這可以從最近的研究中看出來（De Mello，1997，1999；Fan，2002；Lim，2001）。</p><p>　　根據(jù)新古典增長理論模型，外國直接投資不影響長期增長率。如果我們了解一下模型的假設(shè)，我們就會發(fā)現(xiàn)這是可以理解的，這些假設(shè)是：不變的規(guī)模經(jīng)濟，持續(xù)的邊際產(chǎn)出的降低，完全競爭市場（Sass，2003），積極的投入品的替

60、代彈性。在新古典模型的框架下，外國直接投資對產(chǎn)量增長速度的影響由于實物資本收益遞減的存在而受到了限制（Solow，1956）。因此外商直接投資只是對人均產(chǎn)出水平產(chǎn)生了一定的影響，而并沒有影響其增長率，換言之，從長遠來看這是無法改變產(chǎn)出增長率的（Calvo and Robles，2003）。</p><p>　　因此,內(nèi)生增長理論表明外國直接投資在增長過程中有一個被新認知的潛在的作用（Bende-Nabende a

61、nd Ford，1998）。在此背景下的新經(jīng)濟增長理論認為， 外國直接投資可能不僅影響了人均產(chǎn)出水平，而且也影響其增長率。這些文獻假設(shè)可能解釋了為什么外國直接投資在主辦國家提高人均收入的增長率（Calvo and Robles，2003）。然而，內(nèi)生增長理論，忽略了完全競爭市場結(jié)構(gòu)假設(shè)下,給FDI在經(jīng)濟增長的影響方面留了更大的空間。在這個理論框架下，投資，包括外國直接投資，通過研發(fā)與其他人力資本影響所在國的發(fā)展速度。即使投資回報率下降,

62、外商直接投資會通過外部性影響經(jīng)濟發(fā)展。</p><p>　　外國直接投資取代國內(nèi)儲蓄（Papanek，1973；Cohen，1993；Reinhart and Talvi，1998）。在一個具有開創(chuàng)性的論文中，Papanek （1973）表明，不同類型的資本對國民儲蓄存在著顯著的負面影響?；谝粋€由85個發(fā)展中國家構(gòu)成的樣本顯示，外國資本替代了國內(nèi)儲蓄。尤其是，他指出外國援助，私人投資，其他資本在排擠國內(nèi)儲蓄，以

63、及國內(nèi)儲蓄的減少可能會導致進一步增加對外資的依賴（Baharumshah and Thanoon，2006）。</p><p>　　關(guān)稅、增長速度、開放度三因素對FDI有積極的影響，但是工資水平會對其產(chǎn)生消極的影響；實際匯率，當與開放度、國內(nèi)投資、政府消費等結(jié)合在一起時，就會對FDI產(chǎn)生正面的影響；如果將國內(nèi)投資排除在外的話，其產(chǎn)生效果將是負面影響。</p><p>　　這支持了一種觀點，

64、即：有效率的高開放度的環(huán)境會吸引外商直接投資的進入。投資稅率與工資會對FDI產(chǎn)生負面的影響，然而基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施與市場規(guī)模對FDI產(chǎn)生積極的影響。一般來說，只有在FDI以出口為導向的情況下，廉價的勞動力才做為吸引FDI進入的獎勵（Wheeler and Mody，1992）。另一方面，Tomiura' （2003）研究指出FDI與研發(fā)之間的積極聯(lián)系非常緊密，即使公司某有進行FDI與研發(fā)。在這方面，Morck and Yeung（1991

65、）推測并證實了當一個擴張型企業(yè)擁有無形資產(chǎn)，例如優(yōu)越的生產(chǎn)和管理技能，市場營銷專業(yè)知識和消費者需求，F(xiàn)DI就會創(chuàng)造財富。</p><p><b>　　三、數(shù)據(jù)定義</b></p><p>　　本片論文中的測試指標是基于FDI理論與前面實證的基礎(chǔ)上選定的。那些通過面板研究與橫截面分析的指標，是FDI 的決定因素，這些決定因素的數(shù)據(jù)是從發(fā)展中國家找到的至少30年以上的。一

66、些發(fā)展中國家的某些變量的相關(guān)數(shù)據(jù)有時是不連續(xù)的（30年中有間斷）。出于該原因，當本研究中定義FDI的主要影響因素時，某些變量可以使用30年以上數(shù)據(jù)的24個發(fā)展中國家可以在發(fā)展中國家名單附錄中找到。因此，本篇研究中FDI主要影響因素的一些相關(guān)預測是在這種限制下獲得的，同時，UNCTAC以及以往文獻中提到的一些FDI決定因素的變量也被引用了過來。</p><p><b>　　四、方法</b>&l

67、t;/p><p>　　面板數(shù)據(jù)技術(shù)由于其在所有信息可獲性方面所表現(xiàn)出來的相對于橫截面數(shù)據(jù)及時序數(shù)列的優(yōu)勢而被用來檢驗FDI方程，這些信息在單純的橫截面技術(shù)或時序分析技術(shù)里都是不易被覺察的。</p><p>　　在這項研究中，我們建立了24個發(fā)展中國家的1975－2005期間的數(shù)據(jù)庫。T表示時期數(shù)，N表示每一時期的觀察值。為了使證據(jù)更加可信，我們建立了五個模型進行分析，通過SUR模型與完全修正過

68、的OLS模型而獲得的估計，β收斂模型被定義，吸引FDI較少的國家趨向于吸引FDI較多的國家。</p><p><b>　　五、結(jié)論</b></p><p>　　政府間為了吸引外商直接投資所存在著的競爭明顯增強了，許多國家不僅沒有減少或消除對FDI的限制，而且還提出了很多稅收方面的獎勵措施。</p><p>　　適當?shù)膰鴥?nèi)政策有助于吸引外商直接投

69、資并且會增加其收益，同時消除其與本地企業(yè)的障礙。國外企業(yè)同國內(nèi)企業(yè)一樣，追求的是一個好的商業(yè)環(huán)境，而不是選擇那種為了吸引外資的進入，政府提供透明度和問責制等特殊優(yōu)惠的地方，企業(yè)為社會、環(huán)境和居民的經(jīng)濟生活能夠建設(shè)一個可靠、有效的框架創(chuàng)造了條件。外商直接投資帶來了巨大的管理挑戰(zhàn)，這不僅是由于要保障外商的利益，更是為了國內(nèi)經(jīng)濟與社會利益的最大化。</p><p>　　在這項研究中，我們已經(jīng)確定了FDI的主要決定因素。

70、通過發(fā)現(xiàn)這些FDI的決定性因素，可以使一個國家制定一些改善自身經(jīng)濟結(jié)構(gòu)的政策。例如：當我們了解了X國的總資本形成指標，我們就可以得出這樣的結(jié)論，這個國家可以通過制定相關(guān)的政策來鼓勵投資品的進口以代替其消費品的進口；國家Y可以通過引入開放度指標來改善其國內(nèi)貿(mào)易政策；或者，Z國可以通過審視其外債規(guī)模，從而改善有生產(chǎn)領(lǐng)域反映出來的一些資源利用相關(guān)政策，以彌補其外債帶來的負面影響。所以，F(xiàn)DI在一個國家發(fā)展中所扮演的角色既可以通過每一個決定性因