Foreign direct investment in Central and Eastern European countries: a dynamic panel analysis
Introduction
This paper examines the determinants of foreign direct investment (FDI) into Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) during their transition towards a market economy. The last decade has seen a remarkable growth of European but also US outward direct investments in CEECs. This growth is often thought to be driven by the process of integration of CEECs into the European Union and the associated elimination of the barriers to FDI and by the acceleration of the transition process in those economies. However, the CEECs are far from homogeneous and both the level and growth of FDI differ across countries. While the Central European countries, i.e., Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovak Republic, and Slovenia, have attracted substantial foreign capital, the South Eastern European countries, i.e., Bulgaria and Romania, lag far behind. We argue that this discrepancy cannot be explained fully by traditional FDI determinants because transition-specific factors play an important role in the investment decision of a multinational company in so far as they reflect the actual state of the transition process, the overall policy stance, or even future prospects.
To focus on the transition process, we supplement the traditional determinants, e.g., market potential and trade costs, derived from endowment-based theories of the multinational firm with transition-specific factors, e.g., the level and method of privatization. By using both traditional and transition-specific variables, we extend the work of Lansbury et al., 1996, Holland and Pain, 1998; these authors focus on the business environment and the privatization process as primary determinants of FDI in CEECs. The impacts of these variables are estimated within a dynamic panel data framework using an appropriate generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation technique.1 By employing a dynamic panel data approach, we incorporate all available information in the cross section and time series dimensions and also distinguish between the short-run and long-term evolution of FDI in CEECs. Only a few studies of FDI have used panel data at all, and these estimated static models only (Bevan and Estrin, 2000). By stressing the dynamic nature of FDI, we make the analysis of FDI in Eastern Europe more realistic.
The structure of this paper is as follows. Section 2 contains some relevant stylized facts to motivate the subsequent analysis and a review of the theoretical literature, from which we derive factors having a potential impact on FDI in Eastern Europe. The econometric specification and estimation strategy are presented in Section 3. Section 4 reports and discusses the empirical results, while Section 5 concludes with a policy discussion and some suggestions for extensions.
Section snippets
Some stylized facts and a literature review
Table 1 shows the evolution of FDI inflows as a share of GDP into several regions of the world.2 The transition to market economies in Central and Eastern European countries has been accompanied by a surge of FDI inflows. CEECs attracted more FDI than the low-income countries from 1993 onward and outperformed lower-middle-income countries in 1999, which may have been affected by the Asian
Empirical specification
Based on the theoretical literature, we identify a set of traditional determinants of FDI, namely, market size, trade costs, plant and firm specific costs, and relative factor endowments. A second set of explanatory variables introduces transition-specific determinants, namely, the share of private businesses, the method of privatization, and the risk associated with each host country, that may influence the decision to invest in CEECs. The motivation for our choice of variables follows; the
Estimation results
To examine the impact of adding more explanatory variables and also to assess the robustness of our model, we use five empirical specifications in Table 4 to estimate short-term effects and in Table 5 to estimate long-term effects. The baseline specifications, namely (S1) and (S2), are designed to include the effects of the traditional determinants for FDI inflows but exclude the determinants specific to the CEE host countries. The only difference between (S1) and (S2) is that we use the skill
Concluding remarks
In a dynamic panel model, we identify the factors that encourage and impede FDI flows from OECD countries to seven transition countries in Central and Eastern Europe. Both traditional variables suggested by theory and transition-specific variables have significant and plausible effects on FDI. Among the traditional variables, we find a robust and positive impact of market potential on FDI. However, market access explains only partly the motivation of multinationals that invest in CEECs.
Acknowledgements
This paper has benefited substantially from the comments of Johannes Bröcker, Claudia Buch, Gerd Hansen, Jörn Kleinert, Horst Raff, two unknown referees and, in particular, the Editor. We also wish to thank the seminar participants at Kiel and the ETSG meeting 2002 for their helpful comments. We are of course responsible for any remaining errors.
References (48)
- et al.
Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models
Journal of Econometrics
(1998) - et al.
The impact of agenda 2000's structural policy reform on FDI in the EU
Journal of Policy Modeling
(2001) - et al.
Foreign direct investment in Europe: Is there redirection from the south to the east
Journal of Comparative Economics
(2003) Transformational recession: the main causes
Journal of Comparative Economics
(1994)- et al.
Multinational firms and the new trade theory
Journal of International Economics
(1998) - et al.
The theory of endowment, intra-industry, and multinational trade
Journal of International Economics
(2000) - et al.
Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations
Review of Economic Studies
(1991) Econometric Analysis of Panel Data
(2001)- et al.
Foreign direct investment in Central European manufacturing
The comparative advantage of educated workers in implementing new technology
Review of Economics and Statistics
Privatization in Central and Eastern Europe
Privatization in Central and Eastern Europe
An empirical assessment of the proximity-concentration trade-off between multinational sales and trade
American Economic Review
Trade reorientation and recovery in transition economies
Oxford Review of Economic Policy
European export and outward foreign direct investment: a dynamic panel approach
Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv
International outsourcing and the skill-specific wage bill in Eastern Europe
World Economy
Statistical Annex of European Economy
Cited by (225)
The effects of resource rents and elections on human capital investment in Colombia
2024, Resources PolicyGreenfield foreign direct investment: Social learning drives persistence
2022, Journal of International Money and FinanceDrivers of genuine FDI inflows in advanced economies
2022, Quarterly Review of Economics and FinanceThe welfare effects of FDI: A quantitative analysis
2022, Journal of Comparative EconomicsCitation Excerpt :As a result, these four countries have accumulated a relatively large amount of FDI — so much so that the important presence of foreign firms has become a topic of policy discussion in these economies. Many other current or former transition economies have not been as successful at attracting large amounts of FDI (Carstensen and Toubal, 2004), so the question arises as to whether they should actively seek to follow the V4 in doing so. Foreign direct investment is often considered to be a positive contributor to a country’s welfare.
When reality diverges from expectations… Industry 4.0, FDI and post-transition economy
2022, Technology in SocietyCitation Excerpt :Hence, our article addresses the gap in the literature on the junction of these two key factors: FDI and Industry 4.0. Studies on the FDI location in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) focus on the factors typical for a country or a business sector [40–51]. The accession to the European Union (EU) facilitated FDI inflows, and the integration manifested itself in intense capital streams to new EU countries: be it Poland [52–56], Hungary [45,57,58], Romania [59], East Germany [60], or the Czech Republic [56].
Firms and wage inequality in Central and Eastern Europe
2021, Journal of Comparative Economics