Home >Documents >Outward Foreign Direct Investment from Emerging Economies ... Rasiah Rajah.pdf · PDF...

Outward Foreign Direct Investment from Emerging Economies ... Rasiah Rajah.pdf · PDF...

Date post:01-Mar-2019
Category:
View:218 times
Download:0 times
Share this document with a friend
Transcript:

Outward Foreign Direct Investment from Emerging Economies: Trends, Drivers and Firm-driven Home Government Policies Rajah Rasiah Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya

1. Introduction Outward foreign direct investment (OFDI) from the emerging economies rose from US$335billion in 1995 to US$1.4trillion in 2005 (UNCTAD, 2006, pp 103-104). The number of emerging economies with OFDI stocks exceeding US$5billion increased from 6 in 1990 to 27 in 2005. The technological capabilities and market share of some of the TNCs from the emerging economies has risen sharply e.g. Samsung has been the frontier firm in the production of the Dynamic Random Access Memories (DRAMs) and Mittal Steel has become the globes leading edge manufacturer of steel.1 The dramatic expansion of OFDI from the emerging economies has given enough ammunition for revisiting existing theoretical as well as policy constructs. Firstly, most theories of foreign direct investment explain flows of capital between developed economies, or from developed to developing economies to own assets across borders. The acquisition of firms from the developed countries by firms that originated from the developing economies has added a new dimension to the understanding of OFDI flows. In addition, OFDI has contributed significantly to the development of emerging economies TNCs revenues, technological capabilities and global market shares (see Monkiewicz, 1986; Hobday, 1997; Mirza, 2000; Sachwald, 2001; Mathews, 2002; UNCTAD, 2005). This paper, thus, examines emerging economy OFDI trends, drivers and home government policies that are complementary towards supporting the activities of TNCs from the emerging economies. Excluded from analysis in this paper are cross-border relationships between local firms and multinationals through licensing, outsourcing and trade links. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section two discusses the significance of OFDI from the emerging economies. Section three discusses the theoretical guide used to screen OFDI flows from the developed economies. Section four examines the drivers of OFDI from the emerging economies. Section five analyzes the policy implications for home countries. Section six presents the conclusions.

2. OFDI from Emerging Economies Albeit the numbers still favor heavily the developed economies, OFDI from the emerging economies have become increasingly important from the 1990s. Seven firms from the emerging economies were among the top 100 transnational corporations ranked by ownership of foreign asset stocks in 2006 (see Table 1). These firms occupied even higher rankings using the transnational index (TNI)2 and the foreign affiliate share score (FA)3: one ranked 11th in the TNI classification and three ranked 3rd, 4th and 11th in the FA classification.

1 Although this firm is registered in the United Kingdom its origin is India. 2 The TNI is estimated by normalizing the proxies ownership of foreign assets, and employment and sales generated abroad (see UNCTAD, 2006). 3 The FA rank is obtained by taking the percent share of affiliates located abroad (see UNCTAD, 2006).

2

Asian firms all from East and Southeast Asia accounted for 6 of the 7 largest of non-financial emerging economy TNCs owning financial assets abroad in 2006 (see Table 1). Hutchison Whampoa from Hong Kong occupied the highest position with 20th place among the top 100 overall in 2006. Both Hong Kong firms in the top 100 non-financial TNCs with foreign assets abroad were engaged in diversified activities. Korean TNCs in the list were engaged in electrical and electronics activities Samsung Electronics and LG Corporation. Malaysia and Singapore had one each engaged in petroleum (state owned Petronas) and telecommunications (state owned Singapore Telecommunications) respectively. TNCs from Hong Kong contributed most to the OFDI from the emerging economies owning US$689billion in assets abroad in 2006 (see Table 2). Russia, British Virgin Islands, Singapore, Taiwan, Brazil, China, Korea, South Africa and Cayman Islands were the remaining top 10 TNCs from the emerging economies. The geographical sources of origin of OFDI from the emerging economies have changed significantly over the last few decades. Latin America was the prime source in the 1980s contributing over 4 percent of global OFDI (see Figure 1). However, from over 8 percent of overall contribution over the period 1980-84 Latin Americas share has fallen dramatically thereafter while the contribution from Asia rose significantly from 1987 to overtake Latin America in 1990 and eventually reach its peak of 12.8 percent in 1997. The contribution from the transitional economies has also risen gradually but along with Africa the accounted for less than 2 percent of the global OFDI. A severe financial crisis in 1997-98 that derailed the East Asian Asians forcing Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and Philippines to seek a bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (see Rasiah, 2001) brought down the contribution of these economies in global OFDI to eventually 8.1 percent in 2003. GDP growth rates in Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia hit negative figures in 1998-99 while those of Taiwan and Singapore slowed down substantially. Nevertheless Asias share in global OFDI began to rise again from then on to reach 10.8 percent in 2006 (see Figure 1).

Table 1: Emerging Economy TNCs in the top 100 non-financial TNCs, 2006

FAa TNIb FAc Firm Nation Industry Assets Foreign Sales %

Foreign Employ% Foreign Affiliates

% Foreign

20 11 17 Hutchison Whampoa HK Diversified 61607 80.0 24721 79.5 165590 82.8 75 90.4 55 98 53 Petronas Malaysia Petroleum 26350 36.0 12995 29.3 4016 11.8 167 71.4 63 15 3 Cemex Sab De LV Mexico NMM 21793 82.4 12088 80.8 39630 75.2 535 96.6

82 36 4 Singapore Telecommunications Singapore Telecom. 18000 86.8 5556 70.3 8832 45.3 99 95.2

87 81 19 Samsung Electronics Korea E&E 17481 23.4 62100 78.6 27664 34.3 76 88.4 92 75 11 LG Corp Korea E&E 16609 32.8 38419 63.2 40689 51.5 42 91.3 98 33 21 Jardine Matheson HK Diversified 15770 85.5 8420 70.6 57895 52.6 91 85.8

Table 2: Outward FDI, Top 20 Emerging Economies, 1980-2006 (US$Millions)

Home Country 1980 1990 2000 2006 Rank(2006) South Africa 5 541 15 004 32 333 43 499 9 Argentina 5 970 6 057 19 276 24 047 14 Brazil 38 545 41 044 51 946 87 049 6 Chile 885 1 149 11 154 26 787 13 Colombia 136 402 2 989 9 960 20 Venezuela 23 1 221 7 676 11 559 19 Mexico 1 632 2 672 8 273 35 144 11 Panama 730 3 876 10 507 21 176 15 British Virgin Islands .. 875 67 132 123 512 3 Cayman Islands 72 648 20 788 40 395 10 United Arab Emirates - 2 14 1 938 11 830 18 China .. 4 455 27 768 73 330 7 Hong Kong 148 11 920 388 380 688 974 1 Korea 127 2 301 26 833 46 760 8 Taiwan 13 009 30 356 66 655 113 910 5 India 78 124 1 859 12 964 17 Indonesia 6 86 6 940 17 350 16 Malaysia 305 753 15 878 27 830 12 Singapore 623 7 808 56 766 117 580 4 Russia - - 20 141 156 824 2

Source: Extracted from http://www.unctad.org/sections/dite_dir/docs/wir2007_ outstock_en.xls

3.

Figure 1: Outward FDI from Emerging Economies, 1980-2006

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Year

Shar

e in

Glo

bal S

tock

(%)

Africa Latin America Asia Eastern Europe and Central Asia

3. Analytic Framework The most effective set of government policies should take account of the reasons driving the internationalization of economic activities. Put simply home governments should know why their businesses are relocating operations abroad before they can actually frame policies to assist them. On the positive side home governments promote OFDI to seek new opportunities to expand profits and market shares for their firms. On the negative side home governments are often concerned with its potential impact on domestic jobs, supply of capital and balance of payments. The typical macroeconomic assessments that investment advisors provide should just be the first step in the screening process for encouraging as OFDI is likely to face high political risks, transaction costs and inflation when driven by particular motives such as oil and gas: oil and gas rich Sudan, Angola, Chad and Nigeria are easily among the high risk economies. Nevertheless both home and host governments can play critical roles to reduce such risks so as to stimulate the appropriation of more synergies once the assets of foreign direct investors are already in operation. Hymer (1960) had provided some of the most convincing arguments explaining the growth of multinationals i.e. to take advantage of oligopolistic markets with redeployments to take stock of the relative benefits offered by host-sites. Lall and Streeten (1977) provided a detailed and incisive account of the rationale for relocation benefits and obstacles developing economies face from the activities of multinational corporations. Dunning (1978, 1981) provided arguably the most exhaustive theory to understand OFDI from home governments calling it the eclectic framework of ownership, location and internalization (OLI). Rugman and Jonathan (2008) then explained ownership advantages by differentiating country- and firm-specific a

Click here to load reader

Reader Image
Embed Size (px)
Recommended