Many countries compete against one another in attracting foreign investors by offering ever more generous incentive packages and justifying their actions with the productivity gains that are expected to accrue to domestic producers from knowledge externalities generated by foreign affiliates. Despite this being hugely important to public policy choices, there is little conclusive evidence indicating that domestic firms benefit from foreign presence in their sector. It is possible, though, that researchers have been looking for foreign direct investment (FDI) spillovers in the wrong place. Multinationals have an incentive to prevent information leakage that would enhance the performance of their local competitors in the same industry but at the same time may want to transfer knowledge to their local suppliers in other sectors. Spillovers from FDI may be, therefore, more likely to take place through backward linkages - that is, contacts between domestic suppliers of intermediate inputs and their multinational clients - and thus would not have been captured by the earlier literature. This paper focuses on the understudied issue of FDI spillovers through backward linkages and goes beyond existing studies by shedding some light on factors driving this phenomenon. It also improves over existing literature by addressing several econometric problems that may have biased the results of earlier research. Based on a firm-level panel data set from Lithuania, the estimation results are consistent with the existence of productivity spillovers. They suggest that a 10 percent increase in the foreign presence in downstream sectors is associated with 0.38 percent rise in output of each domestic firm in the supplying industry. The data indicate that these spillovers are not restricted geographically, since local firms seem to benefit from the operation of downstream foreign affiliates on their own, as well as in other regions. The results further show that greater productivity benefits are associated with domestic-market, rather than export-oriented, foreign affiliates. But no difference is detected between the effects of fully-owned foreign firms and those with joint domestic and foreign ownership. The findings of a positive correlation between productivity growth of domestic firms and the increase in multinational presence in downstream sectors should not, however, be interpreted as a call for subsidizing FDI. These results are consistent with the existence of knowledge spillovers from foreign affiliates to their local suppliers, but they may also be a result of increased competition in upstream sectors. While the former case would call for offering FDI incentive packages, it would not be the optimal policy in the latter. Certainly more research is needed to disentangle these two effects. This paper - a product of Trade, Development Research Group - is part of a larger effort in the group to study the contribution of trade and foreign direct investment to technology transfer.

Does Foreign Direct Investment Increase the Productivity of Domestic Firms? In Search of Spillovers Through Backward Linkages

Many countries compete against one another in attracting foreign investors by offering ever more generous incentive packages and justifying their actions with the productivity gains that are expected to accrue to domestic producers from knowledge externalities generated by foreign affiliates. Despite this being hugely important to public policy choices, there is little conclusive evidence indicating that domestic firms benefit from foreign presence in their sector. It is possible, though, that researchers have been looking for foreign direct investment (FDI) spillovers in the wrong place. Multinationals have an incentive to prevent information leakage that would enhance the performance of their local competitors in the same industry but at the same time may want to transfer knowledge to their local suppliers in other sectors. Spillovers from FDI may be, therefore, more likely to take place through backward linkages-that is, contacts between domestic suppliers of intermediate inputs and their multinational clients-and thus would not have been captured by the earlier literature. This paper focuses on the understudied issue of FDI spillovers through backward linkages and goes beyond existing studies by shedding some light on factors driving this phenomenon. It also improves over existing literature by addressing several econometric problems that may have biased the results of earlier research. Based on a firm-level panel data set from Lithuania, the estimation results are consistent with the existence of productivity spillovers. They suggest that a 10 percent increase in the foreign presence in downstream sectors is associated with 0.38 percent rise in output of each domestic firm in the supplying industry. The data indicate that these spillovers are not restricted geographically, since local firms seem to benefit from the operation of downstream foreign affiliates on their own, as well as in other regions. The results further show that greater productivity benefits are associated with domestic-market, rather than export-oriented, foreign affiliates. But no difference is detected between the effects of fully-owned foreign firms and those with joint domestic and foreign ownership. The findings of a positive correlation between productivity growth of domestic firms and the increase in multinational presence in downstream sectors should not, however, be interpreted as a call for subsidizing FDI. These results are consistent with the existence of knowledge spillovers from foreign affiliates to their local suppliers, but they may also be a result of increased competition in upstream sectors. While the former case would call for offering FDI incentive packages, it would not be the optimal policy in the latter. Certainly more research is needed to disentangle these two effects.

/pdf/does-foreign-direct-investment-increase-the-productivity-of-189ezba492.pdf

Many governments offer significant inducements to attract inward investment, motivated by the expectation of spillover benefits. This paper begins by reviewing possible sources of spillovers. It then provides a comprehensive evaluation of the empirical evidence on productivity, wages and exports spillovers in developing, developed and transitional economies. Although theory can identify a range of possible spillover channels, robust empirical support for positive spillovers is hard to find. The reasons for this are explored and the paper concludes with a review of policy aspects.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID475044_code355382.pdf?abstractid=475044&mirid=3

Much Ado About Nothing? Do Domestic Firms Really Benefit from Foreign Investment?

Governments the world over offer significant inducements to attract investment, motivated by the expectation of spillover benefits to augment the primary benefits of a boost to national income from new investment. There are several possible sources of induced spillovers from foreign direct investment. This article evaluates the empirical evidence on productivity, wage, and export spillovers in developing, developed, and transition economies. Although theory can identify a range of possible spillover channels, robust empirical support for positive spillovers is at best mixed. The article explores the reasons and concludes with a review of policy aspects.

/pdf/much-ado-about-nothing-do-domestic-firms-really-benefit-from-77tms2nlmt.pdf

Much ado about nothing? do domestic firms really benefit from foreign direct investment?

A rapidly expanding literature on firm heterogeneity and firm level globalisation strategies has developed over the last decade. There are new insights on why some firms export and others do not, why some firms fail to survive in export markets and some choose to produce overseas rather than export. This article provides a synthesis and evaluation of this literature. It reviews both new theories of firms in an open economy context and the extensive microeconometric evidence base, which has now developed. It highlights the implications of this evidence base for policy and includes an assessment of how the research agenda may evolve.

/pdf/firm-heterogeneity-exporting-and-foreign-direct-investment-205kakekdt.pdf

Firm heterogeneity, exporting and foreign direct investment*

Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level

Do Domestic Firms Learn to Export from Multinationals

The presumed higher productivity of foreign firms and resulting spillovers to domestic firms has led governments to offer financial incentives to foreign firms. We investigate if there is any productivity or wage gap between foreign and domestic firms in the UK and if the presence of foreign firms in a sector raises the productivity of domestic firms. Our results indicate that foreign firms do have higher productivity than domestic firms and they pay higher wages. We find no aggregate evidence of intra‐industry spillovers. However, firms with low productivity relative to the sector average, in low‐skill low foreign competition sectors gain less from foreign firms.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/sjpe12023.pdf?abstractid=2335787&mirid=1&type=2

Who Benefits from Foreign Direct Investment in the UK

The presumed higher productivity of foreign firms and resulting spillovers to domestic firms has led governments to offer financial incentives to foreign firms. We investigate if there is any productivity or wage gap between foreign and domestic firms in the UK and if the presence of foreign firms in a sector raises the productivity of domestic firms. Our results indicate that foreign firms do have higher productivity than domestic firms and they pay higher wages. We find no aggregate evidence of intra-industry spillovers. However, firms with low productivity relative to the sector average, in low-skill low foreign competition sectors gain less from foreign firms.

Previous research (on countries other than the UK) finds better-performing firms to be more likely to export. We test this hypothesis for UK firms. The relationship between exporting and firm variables is significantly different for firms that have experienced a major innovation ("innovating firms"). Noninnovating firms are more likely to export if they have lower unit labour costs, whilst innovating firms are more likely to do so if they have had more innovations. Ceteris paribus, the probability that a firm is an exporter is higher if it is in a sector with high R&D expenditures (relative to output), which is consistent with product cycle theories of trade. For non-innovators, firms are also more likely to be exporters in sectors with low capital intensity. Copyright 2002 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Katharine Wakelin

Papers

Innovation and export behaviour at the firm level

Do Domestic Firms Learn to Export from Multinationals

Who Benefits from Foreign Direct Investment in the UK

Who Benefits from Foreign Direct Investment in the UK

Efficiency, innovation and exports