HUKUKİ VE YASAL DÜZENLEME NİTELİKLERİNİN DOĞRUDAN YATIRIMLARA ETKİSİ: GELİŞMİŞ VE GELİŞMEKTE OLAN ÜLKELERİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, hukuki ve yasal düzenleme niteliklerinin doğrudan yabancı yatırım girişleri üzerindeki etkisini incelemek ve bu etkinin gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler arasında değişip değişmediğini araştırmaktır. Örneklem, 2008 ile 2021 yılları arasında 66 ülkenin doğrudan yabancı yatırım girişi verilerini içermektedir. Regresyon parametrelerini tahmin etmek için, Machado ve Santos Silva (2019) tarafından önerilen sabit etkiler kantil regresyon modeli kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca, regresyon sonuçları, Driscoll-Kraay (1998) standart hatalarıyla rassal etkiler ve sabit etkiler modelleri tahmin edilerek desteklenmiştir. Kantil regresyon analizi sonuçları, hukuki ve yasal düzenleme niteliklerinin doğrudan yabancı yatırım girişleri üzerinde önemli ve pozitif bir etkiye sahip olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu etki, gelişmekte olan ülkelerde gelişmiş ülkelere kıyasla daha yüksektir ve doğrudan yabancı yatırım düzeyi arttıkça bu fark daha da belirginleşmektedir. Bu bulgular, karar alıcılar için önemli politika önerileri sunmaktadır. Özellikle gelişmekte olan ülkelerde doğrudan yabancı yatırım girişlerini çekmek için mülkiyet haklarını koruma, sözleşme güvenliği sağlama ve etkili anlaşmazlık çözüm mekanizmalarını uygulama konularında hukuki sistemleri güçlendirmek son derece önemlidir. Ayrıca, rant arayışı davranışını azaltmak ve güçlü grupların haksız avantajlar elde etmesini engellemek için çaba sarf edilmelidir. Bu konuların ele alınmaması, uzun vadede ülkenin ekonomik gelişimini riske atabilir.

Keywords

• Doğrudan Yabancı Yatırım
• Hukukun Üstünlüğü
• Gelişmiş Ülke
• Gelişmekte Olan Ülke
• Kantil Regresyon

IMPACT OF LEGAL AND REGULATORY QUALITIES ON FDI INFLOW: A COMPARISON OF DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Abstract

The objective of this research is to determine the impact of legal and regulatory qualities on foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows and explore its impact in developed and developing countries, comparatively. The sample comprises data on FDI inflows from 66 countries, spanning the period 2008 to 2021. To estimate the regression parameters, the quantile regression with fixed effects model proposed by Machado and Santos Silva (2019) was employed. Additionally, the regression results were supported using random effects and fixed effects models with Driscoll-Kraay (1998) standard errors. The results of the quantile regression analysis reveal that legal and regulatory qualities have a positively significant effect on FDI inflows. This impact is greater in developing countries than in developed countries, and the discrepancy increases with higher FDI levels. These findings hold important policy implications for decision-makers. To attract FDI, particularly in developing countries, it is crucial to strengthen legal systems by safeguarding property rights, establishing contractual certainty, and implementing effective dispute resolution mechanisms. More so, efforts should be taken to reduce rent-seeking behavior and prevent powerful groups from receiving unfair advantages. Failure to address these issues may increase the risks and impede a country's economic development in the long run.

Keywords

• FDI
• Rule of Law
• Developed Country
• Developing Country
• Quantile Regression

References

1. Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2005). Unbundling institutions. Journal of Political Economy, 113(5), 949-995. doi:10.1086/432166.
2. Alexander, J. S. (2014). The rule of law and foreign direct investment in the developing world. (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). University of California, Irvine.
3. Asiedu, E. (2002). On the determinants of foreign direct investment to developing countries: Is Africa different?. World Development, 30(1), 107-119.
4. Baltagi, B. H., & Wu, P. X. (1999). Unequally spaced panel data regressions with AR(1) disturbances. Econometric Theory, 15(6), 814–823. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3533276.
5. Bénassy-Quéré, A., Coupet, M., & Mayer, T. (2007). Institutional determinants of foreign direct investment. The World Economy, 30(5), 764-782. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01022.x.
6. Bhargava, A., Franzini, L., & Narendranathan, W. (1982). Serial correlation and the fixed effects model. The Review of Economic Studies, 49(4), 533–549. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297285.
7. Brown, M. B., & Forsythe, A. B. (1974). Robust tests for the equality of variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69, 364–367.
8. Buchinsky, M. (1998). Recent advances in quantile regression models: A practical guideline for empirical research. The Journal of Human Resources, 33(1), 88-126. doi:10.2307/146316.

9. Coase, R. H. (1960). The problem of social cost. The Journal of Law & Economics, 3(1), 1-44.
10. Chakrabarti, A. (2001). The determinants of foreign direct investments: Sensitivity analyses of cross-country regressions. Kyklos, 54(1), 89-114. doi:10.1111/1467-6435.00142.
11. Comi, S., Grasseni. M., & Resmini, L. (2021). Can judicial efficiency improve territorial attractiveness to FDI? The Italian experience. European Journal of Political Economy, 70, 102043. doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2021.102043.
12. Contractor, F. J., Dangol, R., Nuruzzaman, N., & Raghunath, S. (2020). How do country regulations and business environment impact foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows? International Business Review, 29(2), 101640. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.101640.
13. D’Agostino, R. B., & Belanger, A. (1990). A suggestion for using powerful and informative tests of normality. The American Statistician, 44(4), 316–321. doi:10.2307/2684359.
14. Demirhan, E., & Masca. M (2008). Determinants of foreign direct investment flows to developing countries: a cross-sectional analysis. Prague Economic Papers, 2008(4), 356-369.
15. Driscoll, J., & Kraay, A. C. (1998). Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 549-560.
16. European Commission. (2022). EU Justice Scoreboard. Erişim adresi: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/eu-justice-scoreboard_en.
17. European Union. (2019). Regulation (EU) 2019/452 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 establishing a framework for the screening of foreign direct investments into the Union. Official Journal of the European Union. 79(I), 1-14.
18. Galvao, A. F., G. Montes-Rojas, W. Sosa-Escudero, & Wang, L. (2013). Tests for skewness and kurtosis in the one-way error component model. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 122, 35–52.
19. Ghosh, M., Syntetos, P., & Wang, W. (2012). Impact of FDI restrictions on inward FDI in OECD countries. Global Economy Journal, 12(3). doi:10.1515/1524-5861.1822.
20. Gizaw, G., Kefelegn, H., Minwuye, B., Mengesha, G., & Berihun, D. (2023). Impact of business regulations on foreign direct investment inflows and economic growth in East African countries. Cogent Economics & Finance, 11(1), 2163874. doi:10.1080/23322039.2022.2163874.
21. Grosse, R., & Trevino, L. J. (2005). New institutional economics and FDI location in Central and Eastern Europe. Management International Review, 45(2), 123-145.
22. Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis (3rd ed). New York, NY: Macmillan.
23. Hossain, M. T., Hassan, Z., Shafiq, S., & Basit, A. (2018). Ease of doing business and its impact on inward FDI. Indonesian Journal of Management and Business Economics, 1(1), 52–65.
24. Howell, L. D. (2013). ICRG methodology. Syracuse, NY: PRS Group. In.
25. Jarque, C.M., & Bera, A.K. (1987). A Test for normality of observations and regression residuals. International Statistical Review, 55, 163-172. doi:10.2307/1403192
26. Jensen, N. M. (2003). Democratic governance and multinational corporations: political regimes and inflows of foreign direct investment. International Organization, 57(3), 587–616.
27. Kalinova, B., Palerm, A., & Thomsen, S. (2010). OECD's FDI restrictiveness index: 2010 update (Paper No. 010/03). OECD Working Papers on International Investment. doi:10.1787/5km91p02zj7g-en.
28. Kato, K., Galvao Jr, A. F., & Montes-Rojas, G. (2012). Asymptotics for panel quantile regression models with individual effects. Journal of Econometrics, 170(1), 76-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2012.02.007
29. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and analytical issues (Paper No. WPS5430). World Bank Policy Research Papers.
30. Kaushal, L. A. (2021). Impact of institutional and regulatory quality on FDI inflow: Case of a developing Indian economy. Cogent Economics & Finance. 9(1), 1985201. doi:10.1080/23322039.2021.1985201.
31. Kaya, G. (2021). İnternet kullanımına etki eden faktörlerin analizi: panel kantil regresyon modeli. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.
32. Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. Jr. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46(1), 33-50.
33. Lee, H., Biglaiser, G., & Staats, J. L. (2014). Legal system pathways to foreign direct investment in the developing world. Foreign Policy Analysis, 10(4), 393-411. doi: 10.1111/fpa.12026.
34. Levene, H. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances. In Olkin, I. (Ed.), Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling (278-292. pp). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
35. Lorenzani, D., & Lucidi. F. (2014). The economic impact of civil justice reforms (Paper No. 530). European Commission Economic Papers.
36. Machado, J. A. F., & Santos Silva, J. M. C. (2019). Quantiles via moments. Journal of Econometrics, 213(1), 145-173. doi:10.1016/j.jeconom.2019.04.009
37. Mengistu, A. A., & Adhikary. B. K. (2011). Does good governance matter for FDI inflows? Evidence from Asian economies. Asia Pacific Business Review, 17(3). 301-324. doi:10.1080/13602381003755765
38. Nicoletti, G., Golub, S. S., Hajkova, D., Mirza, D., & Yoo. K.-Y. (2003). The influence of policies on trade and foreign direct investment. (No. 36, 2003/1). OECD Economic Studies.
39. OECD. (2018). Foreign direct investment for development. maximising benefits. minimising costs. Erişim adresi: https://www.oecd.org/investment/investmentfordevelopment/1959815.pdf
40. OECD. (2021). The impact of regulation on international investment in Finland. Erişim adresi: https://www.oecd.org/investment/the-impact-of-regulation-on-international-investment-in-finland-b1bf8bee-en.htm.
41. OECD. (2023). FDI restrictiveness (indicator). doi: 10.1787/c176b7fa-en. Erişim adresi: https://data.oecd.org/fdi/fdi-restrictiveness.htm#:~:text=FDI%20restrictiveness%20is%20an%20OECD.foreign%20personnel%20and%20operational%20restrictions
42. Perry, A. (2000). Effective legal systems and foreign direct investment: In search of the evidence. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 49(4), 779-799.
43. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels (IZA Discussion Paper No. 1240). Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
44. Powell, E. J., & Rickard, S. J. (2010). International trade and domestic legal systems: Examining the impact of Islamic law. International Interactions, 36(4), 335-362. doi: 10.1080/03050629.2010.523668.
45. Rizos, A., & Kapopoulos, P. (2021). Judicial efficiency and economic growth: Evidence based on EU data (Paper No. 107861). Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
46. Royston, P. (1992). Comment on sg3.4 and an improved D'Agostino test. Stata Technical Bulletin, 1(3).
47. Sabir, S., Rafique, A., & Abbas, K. (2019). Institutions and FDI: Evidence from developed and developing countries. Financial Innovation, 5(8), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-019-0123-7
48. Saha, S., Sadekin, M. N., & Saha, S. K. (2022). Effects of institutional quality on foreign direct investment inflow in lower-middle income countries. Heliyon, 8(10). doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10828.
49. Shapiro, S. S., & Francia, R. S. (1972). An approximate analysis of variance test for normality. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 67, 215–216. doi:10.1080/01621459.1972.10481232.
50. Shapiro, S. S., & Wilk, M. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika, 52, 591–611. doi:10.2307/2333709.
51. Staats, J. L., & Biglaiser, G. (2012). Foreign direct investment in Latin America: The importance of judicial strength and rule of law. International Studies Quarterly, 56(1), 193-202.
52. The Economist (2021). A different approach to investing in developing countries. Erişim adresi: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2021/10/09/a-different-approach-to-investing-in-developing-countries.
53. United Nations. (2006). Measuring restrictions on FDI in services in developing countries and transition economies. Erişim Adresi https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/iteiia20061_en.pdf.
54. Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. (2016). Panel veri ekonometrisi stata uygulamalı. İstanbul: Beta Yayım ve Basım A.Ş. Zongo, A. (2020). The Impact of restrictive measures on bilateral FDI in OECD countries. (MPRA Paper No. 101929). University of Bordeaux. Erişim adresi: https://mpra.ui-muenchen.de/101929/.