View More View Less
  • 1 Corvinus University of Budapest Department of World Economy Budapest Hungary
Restricted access

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.

  • Aitken, B. J., Harrison, A. E. (1999): Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela. The American Economic Review 89(3): 605–618.

    Harrison A. E. , 'Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela ' (1999 ) 89 The American Economic Review : 605 -618.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Allard, C. (2009): Competitiveness in Central-Europe: What Has Happened Since EU Accession? IMF Working Paper 9121.

  • Blalock, G. — Gertler, P. J. (2008): Welfare Gains from Foreign Direct Investment through Technology Transfer to Local Suppliers. Journal of International Economics 74: 402–421.

    Gertler P. J. , 'Welfare Gains from Foreign Direct Investment through Technology Transfer to Local Suppliers ' (2008 ) 74 Journal of International Economics : 402 -421.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Blomström, M. — Kokko, A. (2003): The Economics of Foreign Direct Investment Incentives. In: Herrmann, H. — Lipsey, R. E. (eds): Foreign Direct Investment in the Real and Financial Sector of Industrial Countries. Springer.

  • Blomström, M. — Globerman, S. — Kokko, A. (1999): The Determinants of Host Country Spillovers from Foreign Direct Investment: Review and Synthesis of the Literature. EIJS Working Paper No. 76.

  • Cohen, S. D. (2007): Multinational Corporations and Foreign Direct Investment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Cohen S. D. , '', in Multinational Corporations and Foreign Direct Investment , (2007 ) -.

  • Damijan, J. P. — Knell, M. — Majcen, B. — Rojec, M. (2003): Technology Transfer through FDI in Top-10 Transition Countries: How Important are Direct Effects, Horizontal and Vertical Spillovers? William Davidson Institute Working Paper No. 549.

  • Djankov, S. — Hoekman, B. (2000): Foreign Investment and Productivity Growth in Czech Enterprises. World Bank Economic Review 14(1): 49–64.

    Hoekman B. , 'Foreign Investment and Productivity Growth in Czech Enterprises ' (2000 ) 14 World Bank Economic Review : 49 -64.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Görg, H. — Greenaway, D. (2003): Much Ado About Nothing? Do Domestic Firms Really Benefit from Foreign Direct Investment? IZA Discussion Paper No. 944.

  • Heston, A. — Summers, R. — Aten, B. (2011): Penn World Table Version 7.0. Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania. http://pwt.econ.upenn.edu/

  • Javorcik, B. S. (2004): Does Foreign Direct Investment Increase the Productivity of Domestic Firms? In Search of Spillovers through Backward Linkages. American Economic Review 94(3): 605–627.

    Javorcik B. S. , 'Does Foreign Direct Investment Increase the Productivity of Domestic Firms? In Search of Spillovers through Backward Linkages ' (2004 ) 94 American Economic Review : 605 -627.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Javorcik, B. S. (2008): Can Survey Evidence Shed Light on Spillovers from Foreign Direct Investment? World Bank Research Observer 23(2): 139–159.

    Javorcik B. S. , 'Can Survey Evidence Shed Light on Spillovers from Foreign Direct Investment? ' (2008 ) 23 World Bank Research Observer : 139 -159.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Javorcik, B. S. — Spatareanu, M. (2008): To Share or not to Share: Does Local Participation Matter for Spillovers from Foreign Direct Investment? Journal of Development Economics 85(1–2): 194–217.

    Spatareanu M. , 'To Share or not to Share: Does Local Participation Matter for Spillovers from Foreign Direct Investment? ' (2008 ) 85 Journal of Development Economics : 194 -217.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Kokko, A. (1994): Technology, Market Characteristics, and Spillovers. Journal of Development Economics 43(2): 279–293.

    Kokko A. , 'Technology, Market Characteristics, and Spillovers ' (1994 ) 43 Journal of Development Economics : 279 -293.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Kolasa, M. (2007): How Does FDI Inflow Affect Productivity of Domestic Firms? The Role of Horizontal and Vertical Spillovers, Absorptive Capacity and Competition. National Bank of Poland Working Paper No. 42.

  • Konings, J. (2001): The effects of foreign direct investment on domestic firms. Evidence from firm-level panel data in emerging economies. Economics of Transition 9(3): 619–633.

    Konings J. , 'The effects of foreign direct investment on domestic firms. Evidence from firm-level panel data in emerging economies ' (2001 ) 9 Economics of Transition : 619 -633.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Melitz, M. J. — Ottaviano, G. I. P. (2008): Market Size, Trade, and Productivity. Review of Economic Studies 75: 295–316.

    Ottaviano G. I. P. , 'Market Size, Trade, and Productivity ' (2008 ) 75 Review of Economic Studies : 295 -316.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Melyn, W. — Moesen, W. W. (1991): Towards a Synthetic Indicator of Macroeconomic Performance: Unequal Weighting when Limited Information is Available. Public Economic Research Paper 17, CES, KU Leuven.

    Moesen W. W. , '', in Towards a Synthetic Indicator of Macroeconomic Performance: Unequal Weighting when Limited Information is Available , (1991 ) -.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Nicoletti, G. — Scarpetta, S. — Boylaud, O. (2000): Summary Indicators of Product Market Regulation with an Extension to Employment Protection Legislation. OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 226.

  • OECD (2008): Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators. Methodology and User Guide. Paris: OECD.

    '', in Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators. Methodology and User Guide , (2008 ) -.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Rodrik, D. (1999): The New Global Economy and Developing Countries: Making Openness Work. Overseas Development Council Policy Essay 24.

  • Saaty, R. W. (1987): The Analytic Hierarchy Process: What it is and how it is Used, Mathematical Modelling 9: 161–176.

    Saaty R. W. , 'The Analytic Hierarchy Process: What it is and how it is Used ' (1987 ) 9 Mathematical Modelling : 161 -176.

    • Search Google Scholar
  • Sachs, J. D. — Warner, A. M. (1995): Natural Resource Abundance and Economic Growth. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 5398.

  • Schoors, K. — van der Tol, B. (2001): The Productivity Effect of Foreign Ownership on Domestic Firms in Hungary. University of Gent Working Paper 2002/157.