Listing 1 - 4 of 4 |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
The causes and consequences of foreign direct investment (FDI) in developing countries remains a subject of debate among researchers and policymakers alike. The authors use international data and a new micro-data set of firms in thirteen Southern African Developing Countries (SADCs) to investigate the benefits and determinants of FDI in this region. FDI appears to have facilitated local development in the SADC region. Foreign firms tend to perform better than domestic firms, tend to be larger, are located in richer and better-governed countries and in countries with more competitive financial intermediaries, and they are more likely to export than domestic firms. They also exhibit positive spillover effects to domestic firms. Relying on a standard model to predict the country-level FDI inflows per capita, the authors find that SADC is attracting their expected level of FDI inflows, at least relative to its income level, human capital, demographic structure, institutions, and economic track record. There are some differences between SADC and the rest of the world in FDI behavior: in SADC, the income level is less important and openness more so. The authors use two comparison groups to compare with SADC to shed light on why other regions have attracted more FDI per capita than SADC. The factors that explain SADC's low FDI inflows are economic fundamentals (e.g., previous growth rates, average income, phone density, and the adult share of population).
Advanced economies --- Debt Markets --- Demographic --- Developing countries --- Economic development --- Economic Theory & Research --- Emerging Markets --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Financial intermediaries --- Firm performance --- Foreign capital --- Foreign Direct Investment --- Foreign firms --- Foreign ownership --- Growth rates --- Human capital --- Income --- Institutional environment --- International Economics and Trade --- Investment and Investment Climate --- Investment climate --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Private Sector Development --- Regional integration --- Sales growth --- Technology transfer --- Track record
Choose an application
To utilize public resources efficiently, it is required to take full advantage of competition in public procurement auctions. Joint bidding practices are one of the possible ways of facilitating auction competition. In theory, there are pros and cons. It may enable firms to pool their financial and experiential resources and remove barriers to entry. On the other hand, it may reduce the degree of competition and can be used as a cover for collusive behavior. The paper empirically addresses whether joint bidding is pro- or anti-competitive in Official Development Assistance procurement auctions for infrastructure projects. It reveals the possible risk of relying too much on a foreign bidding coalition and may suggest the necessity of overseeing it. The data reveal no strong evidence that joint bidding practices are compatible with competition policy, except for a few cases. In road procurements, coalitional bidding involving both local and foreign firms has been found pro-competitive. In the water and sewage sector, local joint bidding may be useful to draw out better offers from potential contractors. Joint bidding composed of only foreign companies is mostly considered anti-competitive.
Access to Markets --- Affiliated --- Affiliated organizations --- Auction --- Bidding --- Competition --- Competition policy --- Decentralization --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Foreign companies --- Foreign firms --- ICT Policy and Strategies --- Information and Communication Technologies --- International Economics & Trade --- Investment and Investment Climate --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Markets and Market Access --- Microfinance --- Public disclosure --- Public Sector Corruption and Anticorruption Measures
Choose an application
The causes and consequences of foreign direct investment (FDI) in developing countries remains a subject of debate among researchers and policymakers alike. The authors use international data and a new micro-data set of firms in thirteen Southern African Developing Countries (SADCs) to investigate the benefits and determinants of FDI in this region. FDI appears to have facilitated local development in the SADC region. Foreign firms tend to perform better than domestic firms, tend to be larger, are located in richer and better-governed countries and in countries with more competitive financial intermediaries, and they are more likely to export than domestic firms. They also exhibit positive spillover effects to domestic firms. Relying on a standard model to predict the country-level FDI inflows per capita, the authors find that SADC is attracting their expected level of FDI inflows, at least relative to its income level, human capital, demographic structure, institutions, and economic track record. There are some differences between SADC and the rest of the world in FDI behavior: in SADC, the income level is less important and openness more so. The authors use two comparison groups to compare with SADC to shed light on why other regions have attracted more FDI per capita than SADC. The factors that explain SADC's low FDI inflows are economic fundamentals (e.g., previous growth rates, average income, phone density, and the adult share of population).
Advanced economies --- Debt Markets --- Demographic --- Developing countries --- Economic development --- Economic Theory & Research --- Emerging Markets --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Financial intermediaries --- Firm performance --- Foreign capital --- Foreign Direct Investment --- Foreign firms --- Foreign ownership --- Growth rates --- Human capital --- Income --- Institutional environment --- International Economics and Trade --- Investment and Investment Climate --- Investment climate --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Private Sector Development --- Regional integration --- Sales growth --- Technology transfer --- Track record
Choose an application
To utilize public resources efficiently, it is required to take full advantage of competition in public procurement auctions. Joint bidding practices are one of the possible ways of facilitating auction competition. In theory, there are pros and cons. It may enable firms to pool their financial and experiential resources and remove barriers to entry. On the other hand, it may reduce the degree of competition and can be used as a cover for collusive behavior. The paper empirically addresses whether joint bidding is pro- or anti-competitive in Official Development Assistance procurement auctions for infrastructure projects. It reveals the possible risk of relying too much on a foreign bidding coalition and may suggest the necessity of overseeing it. The data reveal no strong evidence that joint bidding practices are compatible with competition policy, except for a few cases. In road procurements, coalitional bidding involving both local and foreign firms has been found pro-competitive. In the water and sewage sector, local joint bidding may be useful to draw out better offers from potential contractors. Joint bidding composed of only foreign companies is mostly considered anti-competitive.
Access to Markets --- Affiliated --- Affiliated organizations --- Auction --- Bidding --- Competition --- Competition policy --- Decentralization --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Foreign companies --- Foreign firms --- ICT Policy and Strategies --- Information and Communication Technologies --- International Economics & Trade --- Investment and Investment Climate --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Markets and Market Access --- Microfinance --- Public disclosure --- Public Sector Corruption and Anticorruption Measures
Listing 1 - 4 of 4 |
Sort by
|