Gelişmekte olan ülkeler için doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarının belirleyicileri

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 4, 1023 - 1040, 25.10.2022

Ahmet Kardaşlar

https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.1152283

Cited By: 2

Öz

Küreselleşmenin bir ürünü olan ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler tarafından sermaye yetersizliğini gidermek için kilit rol oynayacağı öngörülen doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları (DYY), günümüzde hem gelişmiş hem de gelişmekte olan ülkelerin ev sahipliği yapabilmek için rekabet ettikleri bir yatırım türü olarak kabul edilmektedir. Doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarının sağladığı avantajlar sadece düşük maliyetli üretim olmaktan ziyade ev sahibi ülkeye istihdam, teknoloji ile yönetim bilgisini de getirmekte ve teknolojinin yayılma etkisiyle birlikte başta bulunduğu endüstri olmak üzere ülke genelinde birçok avantajlar sağlamaktadır. Bu nedenle doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarının belirleyicileriyle olan ilişkisinin araştırılması amaçlanmış, doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarının ülkelere giriş ve çıkışlarında ortak parametrelerin etkileri bir arada incelenmiştir. Çalışmada 16 gelişmekte olan ülke için 1996-2016 yıllık veriler doğrultusunda panel veri yöntemi kullanılarak yapılan analizler sonucunda piyasa büyüklüğü, döviz kuru, ticari açıklık, işgücü verimliliği, yolsuzluk ve politik risk ile DYY girişleri arasında pozitif yönlü ilişki bulunurken faiz oranı ile DYY girişleri arasında negatif yönlü ilişki bulunmaktadır. Benzer şekilde piyasa büyüklüğü, döviz kuru, ticari açıklık, işgücü verimliliği, yolsuzluk ve politik riskteki artışlar ülkelerden DYY çıkışlarına sebep olurken faiz oranında ki artışlar DYY çıkışlarını azaltmaktadır. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgulara göre gelişmekte olan ülkelerin uluslararası sermayeden beklediği payı alabilmesi için başta ekonomik istikrarı sağlayacak değişkenler olmak üzere politik faktörleri de göz önünde bulundurarak uygun yatırım ikliminin oluşumunu sağlaması gerekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doğrudan Yabancı Sermaye Yatırımı, Yolsuzluk, Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler, Politik Risk

The determinants of foreign direct investment for developing countries

Öz

As product of globalization and projected to play a key role in eliminating capital shortage by developing countries, Foreign direct investment (FDI) is considered tobe a form of investment in which both developed and developing countries compete to have it. The advantages of FDI bring not only low-cost production but also employment, technology and management information to the host country and provide many advantages throughout the country, including the industry where the technology is spreading. Therefore, it is aimed to examine the relationship of FDI with it’s determinants in a detailed way and the effects of common parameters in the inflow and outflow of foreigndirect investments are examined together. As a result of the analyzes made by using panel data method according to the data of 1996-2016 for 16 developing countries, market size, exchange rate, openness, labor productivity, corruption and political risk are positively correlated with FDI inflows while there is a negative correlation between interest rate and FDI inflows. Smilarly, the increases in market size, exchange rate, openness, labor productivity, corruption and political risk lead to FDI outflows from countries while increases in interest rates reduce FDI outflows. According to the findings obtained from the study, for developing countries to get the share they expect from international capital, it is necessary to ensure the formation of appropriateinvestment climate by taking into consideration the political factors, especially the variables that will provide economic stability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Foreign Direct Investment, Corruption, Developing Countries, Political Risk

Kaynakça

• Abd el Hamid Ali, H. (2013). Foreign aid and economic growth in Egypt: A cointegration analysis. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 3(3), 743-751.
• Abou al Foul, B. (2008). Foreign Aid and Economic Growth in Egypt and Jordan: An Empirical Analysis. Economic Research Forum.
• Ang, J. B. (2010). Does foreign aid promote growth? Exploring the role of financial liberalization. Review of Development Economics, 14(2), 197-212.
• Asiedu, E. (2002). On thedeterminants of foreigndirectinvestmenttodevelopingcountries: is Africadifferent?. World development, 30(1), 107-119.
• Asiedu, E. (2005). Foreigndirectinvestment in Africa: the role of naturalresources, market size, governmentpolicy, institutionsandpoliticalinstability.
• Asteriou, D. &Hall, S. G. (2011). AppliedEconometrics(2nd ed.). UK: Palgrave, MacMillan.
• Bennett, P. D., &Green, R. T. (1972). Politicalinstability as a determinant of directforeigninvestment in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 182-186.
• Bevan, A. A., &Estrin, S. (2004). Thedeterminants of foreigndirectinvestmentintoEuropeantransitioneconomies. Journal of comparativeeconomics, 32(4), 775-787.
• Billington, N. (1999). Thelocation of foreigndirectinvestment: an empiricalanalysis. Appliedeconomics, 31(1), 65-76.
• Borrmann, C. (2003). Methodologicalproblems of FDI statistics in accessioncountries (No. 231). HWWA-Report.
• Bouoiyour, J. (2003). Thedeterminingfactors of foreigndirectinvestment in Morocco. Savingsand Development, 91-106.
• Breitung, J. (2000): TheLocalPower of SomeUnitRootTestsfor Panel Data, in: B. Baltagi (ed.), NonstationaryPanels, Panel Cointegration, andDynamicPanels, Advances in Econometrics, Vol. 15, JAI: Amsterdam, 161-178.
• Breusch, T. S. & A. R. Pagan (1980). “TheLagrangemultipliertestanditsapplicationsto model specificationtests in econometrics”, Review of EconomicStudies 47, 239–53.
• Buckley, P. J., Clegg, L. J., Cross, A., Liu, X., Voss, H., &Zheng, P. (2007). Thedeterminants of Chineseoutwardforeigndirectinvestment. In Foreign Direct Investment, Chinaandthe World Economy (pp. 81-118). PalgraveMacmillan, London.
• Chakrabarti, A. (2001). Thedeterminants of foreigndirectinvestments: Sensitivityanalyses of cross‐countryregressions. kyklos, 54(1), 89-114.
• Chen, J. E., &Zulkifli, S. A. M. (2012). Malaysianoutward FDI andeconomicgrowth. Procedia-SocialandBehavioralSciences, 65, 717-722.
• Chen, J. E., Chin, L., Law, S. H., & Azman-Saini, W. N. W. (2016). Outward FDI andInstitutionalFactors: MalaysianExperience. Journal of EmergingEconomies&IslamicResearch, 4(3).
• Chowdhury, A., & McKinley, T. (2007). Gearing Macroeconomic Policies to Manage Large Inflows of ODA: The Implications for HIV/AIDS Programmes (No. 2007/43). Research Paper, UNU-WIDER, United Nations University (UNU).
• Daouas, M. (2001). Africanfaceschallenges of globalization. Finance & Development, 38(4), 4-4.
• Denkabe, P. (2004). Policy, aid and growth: A threshold hypothesis. Journal of African Finance and Economic Development, 6, 1-21.
• Easterly, W. (2003). Can foreign aid buy growth?. Journal of economic Perspectives, 17(3), 23-48.
• Eichengreen, B., &Tong, H. (2007). Is China's FDI coming at theexpense of othercountries?. Journal of theJapaneseand International Economies, 21(2), 153-172.
• Frankel, J. A. (2000). Globalization of theEconomy (No. w7858). NationalBureau of EconomicResearch.
• Frenkel, M., Funke, K., &Stadtmann, G. (2004). A panel analysis of bilateral FDI flowstoemergingeconomies. Economicsystems, 28(3), 281-300.
• Froot, K. A. (1993). Introductionto" Foreign Direct Investment". In Foreign Direct Investment (pp. 1-12). University of Chicago Press.
• Fung, K. C., Garcia-Herrero, A., &Siu, A. (2009). A comparativeempiricalexamination of outwardforeigndirectinvestmentfromfourasianeconomies: People'sRepublic of China; Japan;Republic of Korea; andTaipei, China. Asian Development Review, 26(2), 86.
• Green, W. H. (2003). Econometric Analysis (5th ed.). New Jersey: PearsonEducation, Inc.
• Griffin, K. B., & Enos, J. L. (1970). Foreign assistance: objectives and consequences. Economic development and cultural change, 18(3), 313-327.
• Kosack, S. (2003). Effective aid: How democracy allows development aid to improve the quality of life. World development, 31(1), 1-22.
• Krishnankutty, R. (2010). Testingtherelationshipbetween FDI inflowandoutflow in India: a criticalanalysis.
• Levin, A., F. Lin, and C. Chu (2002): UnitRootTests in Panel Data: AsymptoticandFinite-SampleProperties, Journal of Econometrics, 108,1—24.
• Lindtnerova, K. (2014). Foreign aıd decrease–threat for mıllennıum development golas? European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 10(10).
• Loots, E. (2002). Globalisation, EmergingMarketsandthe South AfricanEconomy*(1). South AfricanJournal of Economics, 70(2), 123-132.
• Masron, T. A., &Shahbudin, A. S. M. (2010). Pushfactors of outward FDI: EvidencefromMalaysiaandThailand. Journal of Business andPolicy. RetrievedNovember, 18, 2011.
• Morris, S., &Jain, P. (2016). Determinants of Outward FDI: Empirical Analysis of OECD Source Countries.
• Ovaska, T. (2003). The failure of development aid. Cato J., 23, 175.
• Pesaran, M.H., Ullah, A. &Yamagata, T. (2008). “A bias-adjusted LM test of errorcross-sectionindependence”, EconometricsJournal ,volume 11, pp. 105–127.
• Root, F. R., &Ahmed, A. A. (1979). Empiricaldeterminants of manufacturingdirectforeigninvestment in developingcountries. Economic Development andCulturalChange, 27(4), 751-767.
• Schneider, F., &Frey, B. S. (1985). Economicandpoliticaldeterminants of foreigndirectinvestment. World development, 13(2), 161-175.
• UNCTAD, (2006) World Investment Report, (2006) FDI fromDevelopingandTransitionEconomies: Implicationsfor Development