Thursday, October 31, 2013

The significance of adequate institution in Foreign investment

Multinational enterprises (MNEs) investment in developing world: Does institution play any role in technological spillovers to local firms?
Introduction
This essay is on technological spillovers from MNEs to local firms in the local markets especially in developing world in Africa and Asia. It elucidates how MNEs transfer technology to local firms and the role of institutions in enhancing technological spillovers to local firms. Furthermore, gaps in the literature are uncovered, unit of analysis is mentioned and methodology to tackle the issue is mentioned.
MNEs investment and its positive effects on technological spill overs to the local firms
Piscitello (2003) argued that Multinational enterprises have become important economic agents with respect to generation, commercialization and international transfer of technological knowledge to local companies especially in developing countries. MNEs  and their FDI  transfer technology to local firms in terms of R&D capabilities and equipments, manufacturing know how, marketing resources, work practices and managerial techniques, supplier and distribution expertise; physical transfer of resources to new locations or sharing resources without physical transfer between parts involved. Additionally, Meyer and Sinani (2009) argued that local firms learn from MNEs by observing technology and management practices employed by MNEs or by attracting employees trained by MNEs.
Furthermore, Liefner, Hennemann and Xin (2006) added that trading with foreign companies helps domestic companies to get new ideas that enable them to enter the market with new products. This implies that, domestic companies gain absorption capacities from MNEs in the form of knowledge base, skilled human resources and some form of in house knowledge generation. This concur with Cantwell and Athreye (2007) statement that MNE and FDI promote technological catch up to the countries that already have acquired sufficient absorptive capacity and spill over through skilled labour and technological innovation infrastructures such as R&D institutions.
On top of that, Marin and Bell (2005) argued that Multinational Companies’ subsidiaries are leaky containers at the end of the technological transfer process of technology spill over. This implies that MNCs subsidiaries own knowledge creations that are significant source of spill over potential.  Innovation Spill over occur in different industries such as electronics, agriculture, service and manufacturing because they employ skilled workers and undertake R&D (Marin & Bell, 2005).
Moreover, Glass and Sagi (1998) argued that technology transfer from FDI to the local firms in the developing world is linked to the rate of imitation of best technology available. Moreover, Glass and Sagi (1998) argued that  indicators of technological innovation transfer to domestic firms are such as R&D (Reported expenditures on R&D), employees’ training intensity, skills intensity of employees  employed in production such as engineers, professionals and technicians; Investment in licensed technology (Evidenced in licensed designs, know how), Investment in capital embodied technology, investment on IT, investment on equipment for innovation and  report on expenditure to introduced new products. However, Spill over is not automatic phenomenon as it occurs to a particular group of domestic firms that do investment in technology infrastructures and in training of human resources (Marin & Bell, 2005).This means that limited absorptive capacity of the domestic firms in the developing world act as a constraint of the technology transfer tunnel from FDI. This is also emphasized by Meyer and Sinani (2009) who argued that productivity spill overs are related to the host country level of development in terms of level of income in the economy. This is to say when country is very poor, it is hard for spill over to take place because catch up potential of innovation technology is very low as absorptive capacity is associated with the level of income which provide firms with financial resources to acquire technology, equipments and other complementary resources, to pay wages that match foreign investors wages and to attract and retain skilled employees.
Institution’s Role in MNEs Technological Spillovers
Giddens (1984) defined institutions as the more enduring features of social life which includes conventions (regularities in action and norms), rules, rituals, organizations and systems of organizations. This means that institutions are applied to customs and behaviour patterns of a society as well as formal organization of government and public services. Put differently, Institutions consist of norms, values, laws and regulations that formulate behaviour that governs daily interactions in the society. Additionally, Benito and Larimo (2003) argued that institutions involve the way the governments are shaping the conditions for developing various sectors in the economy including education, tax and competition policies.
Meyer and Sinani (2009) stated that institutional development of the host economy influences national innovation system of the country; as institutions are fundamental cause of economic development of any  country ( Acemoglu et al, 2004).This is supported by Glass and Sagi (1998) who argued that Government policies in a given county enable the upgrading of technology through fair competition, trade and market openness, R&D policies, regulations that provides good environment for international trade such as FDI and development in higher education. The best example is Singapore which emerged as new technology producer through setting good policies and regulations that attracts FDI; another example is China’s positive economic results due to good policies. Chinese government policies promoted joint venture and encouraged domestic firms to become suppliers of foreign firms as well as special economic zones that encouraged FDI to invest in China. Moreover, Korea’s economic development relied little on technological spillovers from FDI but depended on setting good policies and regulations on international trade, copying, reverse engineering, Licencing, R&D policies and higher education. This implies that technology spill over of a country from MNEs to local firms rely on the institutions of a given country (Glass & Sagi, 1998).
Weak Institutions as impediment of innovation technology spillovers
World Bank (2002) stated that weak/inadequate institutions include tangled laws, corruption and corrupt courts, biased credit systems and elaborate business registration. Furthermore, Meyer and Sinani (2009) argued that weak institutions are associated with inefficient market, network driven business practices and protected niches for local firms. Weak institutions make local firms to take advantage of business practices and fail to observe fair competition and intellectual property rights. This results into local firms to attain illegally knowledge that FDIs prevents from diffusing. Athreye and  Cantwell, (2007) argued that property rights and licensing are more sensitive to local institutions and governance of a specific country; this implies that FDI and international trade flourish in the countries with adequate institutions. Thus Meyer and Sinani (2009) further argued that MNEs and FDI prefer going to the countries where there is open trade regimes, free trade and fair competition. This means therefore that enforcing adequate institutions should be prioritized since it is a prerequisite behind innovation catch up and flourishing of international business.
Gaps available in the literature
Firstly, a gap in the literature is how do human capital and institutional development affect increase in firms’ productivity. Secondly, there is a gap in the literature as to why other countries in the emerging markets with almost the same strategies like China are not progressing in the same pace as China despite following the same Chinese policies such as promoting joint venture and encouraging domestic firms to become suppliers of foreign firms. Moreover, literature seem not to address the technology and human capital gap between domestic and foreign firms since the larger the gap in technology between the two,  the less likely the domestic firms can  gain from the foreign firms spill overs. Lastly, the literature has a gap in showing the effects of exchange rates levels on FDI inflows.
Unit of analysis
Unit of analysis is Government institutions, MNEs subsidiaries,domestic firms, Higher institutions and R&D institutions.
Methodology to takle the issue
Literature review especially on  meta analysis papers on FDI can shed the light on FDI and its positive and negative spliovers  to the developing world.Additionally, openness to international trade generates competitive market environment  and higher level of exchange between host country firms and FDIs.
Reference
Acemoglu D., Johnson S., & Robinson J.,(2004).Institutions as the fundamental cause of long run growth, NBER Working paper 10481.(http://www.nber.org/papers/w.10481)
Athreye, S., & Cantwell, J.,(2007).Creating competition? Globalization and the emergence of new technology producers. Research policy, 36(2), 209-226.
Benito G.R.G., & Larimo (2003).Multinational Enterprises from small economies: Internationalizing patterns of large companies from Denmark, Finland and Norway. Studies of Management and Organization, 32(1)57-78.
Giddens, A., (1976).New rules of sociological methods, London, Hutchinson
Glass A.J.,& Saggi K.,(1998).International technology transfer and the technology gap.Journal of Development economic 55,369-398.
Liefner I.,Hennemann S., Xin L.,(2006).Cooperation in the innovation process in developing countries:Empirical evidence from Zhongguancum,Beijing.Environment and Planning 38(1)111-130.
Marin, A.,& Bell M.,(2005).Technology spill overs from FDI: the active role of MNC subsidiaries in Argentina in the 1990s.Journal of Development studies,42(4)678-697.
Meyer K.E & Sinani E., (2009).Where and When does FDI generate positive spillovers. A Meta analysis. Journal of International Business studies, 1075-1094
Piscitello L., (2003).Knowledge transfer in cross boarder acquisitions. Knowledge transfer between firms. Paper presented at the DRUID SUMMER CONFERENCE, Copenhagen, Denmark
World Bank (2002).World Development report 2002: Building Institutions for markets, Oxford, Oxford University Press.



No comments:

Post a Comment