Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 133–146 | Cite as

Effects of Adverse Selection on a Multinational Firm’s Decision on where to Subcontract



This paper analyses the effects of adverse selection on a multinational firm’s decision on where to subcontract. Adverse selection arises since subcontractor firms have more information than the multinational concerning their production costs. The results obtained show that adverse selection confers to subcontractor firms an advantage in their relationship with the multinational, inducing the multinational to subcontract in more than one country. In this way, adverse selection modelling outcomes justify, and are coherent with, the empirical evidence such as, the diversity of countries that multinational firms subcontract and the fast production relocation between countries.


international subcontracting adverse selection location 

JEL Classification

D82 F23 L24 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abraham, K. and Taylor, S., “Firms’ use of outside contractors: Theory and evidence,” Journal of Labor Economics, vol. 14(3), pp. 394–424, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Das, S., “Direct foreign investment versus licensing,” Review of Development Economics, vol. 3(1), pp. 86–97, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Donaghu, M. and Barff, R., “Nike just did it: International subcontracting and flexibility in athletic footwear production,” Regional Studies, vol. 24(6), pp. 537–552, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Feenstra, R., “Integration of trade and disintegration of production in the global economy,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 12(4), pp. 31–50, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. Graziani, G., “International subcontracting in the textile and clothing industry,” in Sven, A. and Henryk K. (eds.), Fragmentation—New Production Patterns in the World Economy. New York (Oxford University Press), 2001.Google Scholar
  6. Grossman, G. and Helpman, E., “Outsourcing in a global economy,” Review of Economic Studies, vol. 72(1), pp. 135–159, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Macho-Stadler, I. and Pérez-Castrillo, D., An Introduction to the Economics of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. Park, H., Reddy, S., and Sarkar, S., “Make or buy strategy of firms in the U.S.,” Multinational Business Review, Fall, pp. 89–97, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. Porter, M. E., Competitive Advantage—creating and sustaining superior performance. The Free Press: New York, 1985.Google Scholar
  10. Swenson, D., “Overseas assembly and country sourcing choices,” Journal of International Economics, vol. 66, pp. 107–130, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Tempest, R., “Barbie and the world economy” The Los Angeles Times, September 22, p. 1, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. UNCTAD—United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, World Investment Report: Transnational Corporations and Export Competitiveness. New York and Geneva: United Nations, 2002.Google Scholar
  13. UNCTAD—United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, World Investment Report: FDI Policies for Development: National and International Perspectives. New York and Geneva: United Nations, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. Vining, A. and Globerman, S., “A conceptual framework for understanding the outsource decision,” European Management Journal, vol. 17(6), pp. 645–654, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Walker, G. and Weber, D., “A Transaction cost approach to make-or-buy decisions,” Administrative Science Quartely, vol. 29, pp. 373–391, 1984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. WTO—World Trade Organization, Annual Report 1998. Geneva: World Trade Organization, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CETE, Faculty of EconomicsUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations