In the course of the 1980s, Turkey came to recognize the need to change its attitude towards foreign investment, assigning a significant role to direct foreign investment. Hence, after the 1980s, there was a significant increase in the number of foreign firms operating in Turkey and the inf low of foreign capital to Turkey. Although the importance of foreign direct investment in the Turkish economy has been increasing, a variety of questions are far from being resolved. The important obstacle is that the available data do not let us analyze the extent and performance of foreign firms. In this study a considerable effort was made in collecting new data from foreign firms operating in the Turkish manufacturing industry. The main purpose of this study is to analyze and evaluate the economic effects of direct foreign investment on Turkish manufacturing. At the centre of our analysis has been the role of foreign firms in industrial concentration, technological choice and trade behaviour. In the first chapter we outline the main issues to be analyzed in this study and explain the method of collecting and processing data from foreign firms operating in the Turkish manufacturing industry. The second chapter discusses the theories and empirical evidence concerning the determinants of foreign direct investment. We also analyse the industrial distribution of direct foreign investment in Turkish manufacturing. In the third chapter we undertake an overview to the historical background of foreign firms and the legislation covering foreign investment in Turkey. At the beginning of the following three main chapters we analyze the performance of foreign firms in terms of those basic issues in the literature, according to the market imperfection approach, and later on we investigate the performance of foreign firms in Turkish manufacturing using our own data, supplemented by public sources of information.

No description available.

The aim of this research is to understand how corruption affects the attraction of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Studies of corruption and its relationship with FDI have yielded mixed results; some have found that corruption deters FDI others have found no relation between the two factors, while others have found a positive one. In order to further the knowledge of how corruption affects FDI this study argues that it is not only the level of corruption what might affect FDI but also the distance between host and home countries. This study presents two sections, the first one concentrates on a macroeconomic level analysis of corruption and how it affects FDI to Latin America. The second section analyses how corruption affects the decision-making process of allocating FDI to a highly corrupt host country at the firm-level. After controlling for institutional and transaction cost variables, results show that corruption distance has an asymmetrical impact. Host countries enjoying “positive” corruption distance compared with home countries as sources of FDI experience no significant increases or reductions in levels of inward FDI. However, “negative” corruption distance suffered by host countries is associated with significantly lower levels of inward FDI. Conversely, firms from home countries with high corruption are undeterred by high corruption in host countries. This study also analysed how corruption affected foreign investors at the firm level. To do so, this study researched the decision making process of allocating FDI into a highly corrupt host country. The results of the analysis show that corruption amongst bureaucrats, judges, and members of the government elite do not seem to have an impact on the decision making process of allocating FDI in the country because foreign investors are aware of the problem. However, firms from more corrupt countries seem to have an advantage when operating in a highly corrupt foreign location because they may possess knowledge of how to cope with the arbitrariness dimension of corruption. High corruption levels in the host country seem to have an effect on the entry mode utilised by firms from countries with lower levels of corruption. Based on the results presented on this study, MNEs from less corrupt countries might opt to enter a highly corrupt host country via wholly owned subsidiaries (WOS) rather than joint ventures (JVs). This might be explained by the fact that these investors prefer to have more control over their firms’ operations in a highly corrupt country. Also, these managers need to protect their image and not to be associated with local partners that are perceived as corrupt. Finally, even though this study found evidence that all firms operating in Guatemala might participate in corrupt deals, those headquartered in highly corrupt countries are more willing to do so. This claim is based on the fact that firms from less corrupt countries might face stronger pressures from their headquarters to not engage in corrupt deals, whereas firms from more corrupt countries might not encounter such pressures.

This thesis investigates the impact that the corporate income tax rate has on inflows offoreign direct investment (FDI) in high-income OECD countries during the periods1998-2006. The thesis has a small focus on Sweden and how this country’s policies canaffect inward FDI. Moreover, the determinants of FDI are analyzed in order to build amodel that allows to see the influence that the statutory corporate income tax rate has onthese countries. OLS regressions are used to find the degree to which certain variables,specifically the corporate tax rate, have an impact of the dependent variable (i.e.aggregate inflows of FDI). The independent variables are: GDP, skilled labour, labourcosts, economic freedom as a proxy for trade openness and property rights,infrastructure, the corporate income tax rate, dummy variables to account for timeeffects and three dummy variables for continental location targeting whethergeographical location is of relevance of not.It is concluded that the corporate income tax rate does have a significant impact on FDIinflows in OECD members for the specified period. Additionally, economic freedom,gdp and geographical location are also found to be important variables that determinethe inflows of FDI. Other variables are found insignificant in almost all regressions.

Increased globalisation over the last two decades has led to strong growth of international business activity and FDI. Despite the considerable amount of research that has been undertaken to analyse the determinants and consequences of FDI, Australia represents a country with a substantial share of foreign ownership whose FDI experience has been largely overlooked in terms of a comprehensive economic analysis. Not only has Australia received a large amount of foreign investment so far, it is also competing for more FDI. Invest Australia, Australia’s national inward investment agency, is actively promoting Australia as a location for FDI, claiming that foreign investment has made a major contribution to Australia’s economic growth and living standards of all Australians. Instantly, two key issues arise. Firstly, assuming that FDI has positive effects, what causes the inflow of FDI, i.e. what are the determinants of FDI in Australia? Secondly, given the inflow of FDI, what is its actual effect on the Australian economy, i.e. what are the consequences of FDI in Australia? / In order to analyse those questions, new and previously unused data on FDI inflows in Australia were explored by applying time-series and panel-data analysis. The time period ranges from 1981 to 2002, with differing coverage for the individual samples. A further contribution of the thesis is the search for new FDI data, bringing together and analysing datasets provided by the ABS and other statistical agencies (from the US, the UK, Japan and Germany). A detailed description of Australian FDI data was given to gain a better understanding of the Australian FDI experience and because no such comprehensive summary has been available. / The first part of the analysis focused on the determinants of FDI. Determinants of FDI according to different theoretical models were discussed and tested using five types of datasets: aggregate quarterly data, country-specific annual data, industry-specific annual data, country- and industry-specific data (from the US, the UK, Japan and Germany and US) and US form-specific data. Australian FDI inflows were found to be driven by economic growth and market size, wages and labour supply (though the signs varied across models), trade and openness (though customs duties encouraged Japanese industry-specific FDI), interest rates, exchange rate appreciation, inflation rate (which had a unexpected positive effect) and the investing country’s overall FDI outflows. Corporate tax rates were only significant in the quarterly FDI model, but they had an unpredicted positive sign. Australian FDI was driven by longer term considerations and its determinants could not be fully explained by any single theory, but a variety of theoretical models. Furthermore investment decisions depend on factors such as investment origin, the industry in which the investment takes place and the form of the investment, making aggregation difficult. / The second part of the analysis focused on consequences of FDI. Consequences of FDI according to different theoretical models were discussed and tested using two types of datasets: aggregate quarterly data and industry-specific annual data. FDI inflows had positive effects on economic growth and domestic investment, supporting the Australian government’s view that FDI is a favourable source of capital. However, the claim that FDI is favourable for Australia’s balance of payments position could not be supported by this analysis. FDI led to a reduction in export growth and no direct effect on import growth, though the effect of FDI on GDP growth led to increased import growth. Furthermore, industry-specific FDI in Australia had significant effects on employment growth (negative) and labour productivity growth (positive), while FDI growth had significant effects on real wage growth (negative) and industry concentration (positive). However, effects may differ depending on the FDI form, and Australia should focus more on attracting beneficial FDI (such as export-oriented or import-substituting FDI) rather than FDI in general.

The thesis discusses the roles and trends of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the world and in the European Union. Refers to the changing trends in FDI in each peri-od, describes the size of volumes and dynamics of FDI, territorial and sectoral structure and finally deals with finding the influencing factors. The work is divided into four chapters. The first chapter is devoted to the theory of direct FDI, the second chapter describes the flows of FDI in the world and the third chapter in the scale of the European Union. The last chapter deals with flows of FDI in the world in 2012, including the outlook for the future in the medium term and current investment strategies of the European Union.

The reasons that motivate companies to invest abroad (foreign direct investment, or FDI) and also the risks associated with FDI and international business in general are discussed. Current global trends in FDI are covered with emphasis on general, territorial and sectoral trends as well as state policy influences. The impact of the current financial crisis on FDI is also examined. Practical examples are discussed to reinforce individual ideas and theories.

<p>Foreign Direct investment (FDI) has been recognized as a vital source of development for African countries, which are mainly capital importing countries. This has led to a quest for effective regulation of the activities of foreign investors in a country while considering the profit making goals of the investors as well. As there is a need to strike a balance between the need to regulate entry and activities of investors and reaping the immense benefits of FDI such as growth and development. The regulation of FDI thus becomes important. However, there is no universal multilateral agreement on Investment (MAI) that binds most states oft the world. What we have is attempts at regional levels to regulate Investment uniformly. This quest has led to debates with many developing countries (Africa Inclusive) resisting attempts to formulate a MAI. This paper will start with an introduction of the importance of FDI as well as the various attempts that have been made to regulate FID on a multilateral level. Then the paper will go on to examine two Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) Botswana-China BIT on Promotion and Protection of Investments 2000,Czech-Tunisia BIT for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investment 1997, and two Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) - Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 1990 and the investment provisions of the U.S &ndash / Morocco Free Trade Agreement 2004, to identify those trends that are common to these agreements that have been entered into by African countries. It will examine these provisions in line with the rights and obligations they create for the investors as well as the host countries.</p>

Foreign Direct investment (FDI) has been recognized as a vital source of development for African countries, which are mainly capital importing countries. This has led to a quest for effective regulation of the activities of foreign investors in a country while considering the profit making goals of the investors as well. As there is a need to strike a balance between the need to regulate entry and activities of investors and reaping the immense benefits of FDI such as growth and development. The regulation of FDI thus becomes important. However, there is no universal multilateral agreement on Investment (MAI) that binds most states oft the world. What we have is attempts at regional levels to regulate Investment uniformly. This quest has led to debates with many developing countries (Africa Inclusive) resisting attempts to formulate a MAI. This paper will start with an introduction of the importance of FDI as well as the various attempts that have been made to regulate FID on a multilateral level. Then the paper will go on to examine two Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) Botswana-China BIT on Promotion and Protection of Investments 2000,Czech-Tunisia BIT for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investment 1997, and two Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) - Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 1990 and the investment provisions of the U.S &ndash;Morocco Free Trade Agreement 2004, to identify those trends that are common to these agreements that have been entered into by African countries. It will examine these provisions in line with the rights and obligations they create for the investors as well as the host countries. / Magister Legum - LLM

<p>Foreign Direct investment (FDI) has been recognized as a vital source of development for African countries, which are mainly capital importing countries. This has led to a quest for effective regulation of the activities of foreign investors in a country while considering the profit making goals of the investors as well. As there is a need to strike a balance between the need to regulate entry and activities of investors and reaping the immense benefits of FDI such as growth and development. The regulation of FDI thus becomes important. However, there is no universal multilateral agreement on Investment (MAI) that binds most states oft the world. What we have is attempts at regional levels to regulate Investment uniformly. This quest has led to debates with many developing countries (Africa Inclusive) resisting attempts to formulate a MAI. This paper will start with an introduction of the importance of FDI as well as the various attempts that have been made to regulate FID on a multilateral level. Then the paper will go on to examine two Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) Botswana-China BIT on Promotion and Protection of Investments 2000,Czech-Tunisia BIT for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investment 1997, and two Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) - Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 1990 and the investment provisions of the U.S &ndash / Morocco Free Trade Agreement 2004, to identify those trends that are common to these agreements that have been entered into by African countries. It will examine these provisions in line with the rights and obligations they create for the investors as well as the host countries.</p>