The Journal of Technology Transfer

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 353–363 | Cite as

Foreign investment innovation: a review of selected policies

Article
First Online:

Abstract

Whereas foreign investment innovation (FII) has become increasingly common, after decades of debate it is still unclear whether it is desirable for the home country or for the company’s host country. This paper reviews articles from three complementary economic and business traditions which investigate this phenomenon and propose policies based on facts: the economics of technological change tradition, the international business (IB) tradition, and the line of research on international technology transfers. Articles in line with these strands of theory complement each other because they approach different aspects of complex events while explaining FII and its effects on host and home countries. Host countries obtain maximum benefits from FII when affiliates import foreign technology, purchase their inputs in the host country and enjoy product and technological autonomy vis-à-vis the parent. Different types of MNEs, affiliates and foreign R&D units have different potentials for transferring technology to host countries and provide different scope for policies. The authors recommend that governments encourage direct vertical linkages between MNEs and domestic suppliers who could reap the benefits from foreign knowledge. However, some important success factors remain exogenous to governments. As for indigenous MNEs, it is a matter of controversy whether governments should always stimulate them to conduct research in foreign locations or, alternatively, incentive them to stay at home. The need for additional evidence is still considerable in many respects.

Keywords

Multinational enterprises Foreign direct investment Technology transfers Internationalisation of R&D 

JEL Classifications

F23 033 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author is grateful to Jacob Edler for useful comments on an early draft. The paper was prepared in the framework of the PRIME Network of Excellence and the GLOBPOL project of the European Union.

References

  1. Alfranca, O., Rama, R., & von Tunzelmann, N. (2002). A patent analysis of global food and beverage firms: the persistence of innovation. Agribusiness, An International Journal, 18(3), 349–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson, T. (2005). The paradox of the Swedish innovation system: Leader in Europe. In P. Larédo & F. Sachwald (Eds.), Le système français d’innovation dans l’économie mondiale: enjeux et priorités. Paris: IFRI-Institut de l’Entreprise.Google Scholar
  3. Archibugi, A., & Iammarino, S. (1999). The policy implications of the globalisation of innovation. Research Policy, 28, 317–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Archibugi, D., & Michie, J. (1995). The globalisation of technology: a new taxonomy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 121–140.Google Scholar
  5. Archibugi, A., & Petrobelli, C. (2003). The globalisation of technology and its implications for developing countries. Windows of opportunity or further burden? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 70, 861–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beausang, F. (2003). Multinational enterprise (MNE) supplier networks: organizational innovation of innovation policy?’ Journal of Comparative International Management 6(2).Google Scholar
  7. Bijman, W. B., van Tulder, R., & van Vliet, M. (1997). Internationalisation of Dutch Agribusiness and the Organisation of R&D. In EAAE Seminar on Globalization of the Food Industry: Policy Implications, University of Reading, Reading, UK.Google Scholar
  8. Blanc, H., & Sierra, C. (1999). The internationalisation of R&D by multinationals: a trade-off between external and internal proximity. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23, 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blomström, M., Kokko, A., & Zejan, M. (1994). Host country competition, labour skills and technological transfer by multinationals. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 130, 543–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29, 627–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Braconier, H., Ekholm, K., & Midelfart-Knarwik, K. H. (2001). ‘Does FDI work as a channel for R&D spillovers? Evidence based on Swedish data.’ In The Research Institute of Industrial Economics, Working paper no. 553.2001, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  12. Cantwell, J. (1989). Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Oxford and Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Cantwell, J., Dunning, J., & Janne, O. (2004). Towards a technology-seeking explanation of U.S. direct investment in the United Kingdom. Journal of International Management, 10, 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cantwell, J., & Iammarino, S. (2000). Multinational corporations and the location of technological innovation in the UK regions. Regional Studies, 34, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cantwell, J., & Janne, O. (1999). Technological globalization and innovative centres: the role of corporate technological leadership and locational hierarchy. Research Policy, 28, 119–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cantwell, J., & Kosmopoulou, E. (2001). ‘Determinants of internationalisation of corporate technology.’ In DRUID Working Papers, pp. 35.Google Scholar
  17. Cantwell, J., & Piscitello, L. (1999). ‘The emergence of corporate international networks for the accumulation of dispersed technological competences,’ MIR, 123–147.Google Scholar
  18. Cantwell, J., & Santangelo, G. D. (1999). The frontier of international technology networks: sourcing abroad the most highly tacit capabilities. Information Economics and Policy, 11, 101–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cassiolato, J. E., Szapiro, M. H. S., & Lastres, H. M. M. (2002). Local system of innovation under strain: the impacts of structural changes in the telecommunications cluster of Campinas, Brazil. International Journal of Technology Management, 24, 680–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Casson, M. (1991). Summary and conclusions. In M. Casson (Ed.), Global research strategy and international competitiveness. Oxford and Cambridge, US: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Doz, Y. L. (2005). A commentary on innovation systems in small open economies in light of the Swedish, Israeli, Finnish and Singaporean experiences. In P. Larédo & F. Sachwald (Eds.), Le système français d’innovation dans l’économie mondiale: enjeux et priorités. Paris: IFRI-Institut de l’Entreprise.Google Scholar
  22. Dunning, J. H. (1994). Multinational enterprises and the globalization of innovatory capacity. Research Policy, 23, 67–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunning, J., & Narula, R. (1996). The investment development path revisited: Some emerging issues. In J. Dunning & R. Narula (Eds.), Foreign direct investment and governments. Catalysts for economic restructuring. London and N.Y.: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Dyker, D. A. (2001). Technology exchange and the foreign business sector in Russia. Research Policy, 30, 851–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Eaton, J., & Kortum, S. (1996). Trade in ideas: Patenting & productivity in the OECD. Journal of International Economics, 40(3–4), 251–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Edler, J. (2004). International research strategies of multinational corporations: A German perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71, 599–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Erken, H., & Gilsing, V. (2005). Relocation of R&D—a Dutch perspective. Technovation, 25, 1079–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Giroud, A. (2000). Japanese transnational corporation’s knowledge transfer to Southeast Asia: the case of the electrical and electronics sector in Malaysia. International Business Review, 9, 571–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hoeckman, B. M., Maskus, K. E., & Saggi, K. (2004). ‘Transfer of technology to developing countries: Unilateral and multilateral policy options.’ Boulder: University of Colorado, Institute of Behavioural Science PEC2004–0003, 1–34.Google Scholar
  30. Iawata, S., & Methé, D. T. (2004). ‘Globalization of R&D: A survey of foreign companies in Japan and some comparisons with foreign companies in the United States. In M. G. Serapio & T. Hayashi (Eds.), Internationalization of research and development and the emergence of global R&D networks. Elsevier, 113–137.Google Scholar
  31. Ietto-Gillies, G. (2005). Transnational corporations and international production. Concepts, theories and effects. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton US: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  32. Javorcik, B. S. (2004). Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages. The American Economic Review, 94, 605–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Javorcik, B. S., Saggi, K., & Spatarenu, M. (2004). Does it matter where you come from? Vertical spillovers from foreign direct investment and the nationality of investors. In World Bank Policy Research WPS 3449, 1–22.Google Scholar
  34. Kumar, N. (2001). Determinants of location of overseas R&D activity of multinational enterprises: The case of US and Japanese corporations. Research Policy, 30, 159–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Le Bas, C., & Sierra, C. (2002). Location versus home country advantages in R&D activities: some further results on multinationals’ locational strategies. Research Policy, 31, 589–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lundvall, B. A. (1992). Introduction. In B. A. Lundvall (Ed.), National systems of innovation. Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London and N.Y.: Pinter.Google Scholar
  37. Maskus, K. E. (2003). Encouraging international technology transfer.’ In UNCTAD/CTSD Capacity Building Project on International Property Rights and Sustainable Development, 1–60.Google Scholar
  38. Meyer-Krahmer, V. F., & Reger, G. (1999). New perspectives on the innovation strategies of multinational enterprises: lessons for technology policy in Europe. Research Policy, 28, 751–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Molero, J. (2000). Multinationals, domestic firms and the internationalization of technology. In F. Chesnais, G. Ietto-Gillies, & R. Simonetti (Eds.), European integration and global corporate strategies. London and N.Y.: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Mowery, D. (2001). Technological innovation in a multipolar system: analysis and implications for U.S. policy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67, 143–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. OECD, (2005). ‘A review of the literature.’ In Background report. Internationalisation of R&D: Trends, issues and implications for S&T policies, OECD Forum on the Internationalisation of R&D, Brussels, 1–67.Google Scholar
  42. Oman, C. (2000). Policy competition for foreign direct investment. A study of competition among governments to attract FDI. OECD: Paris.Google Scholar
  43. Papanastassiou, M. (1995). ‘Governments and MNE: Partners in search of competitiveness? Confusion of limpidity in the determination of technological strategy. The case of UK,’ University of Reading, Department of Economics, Discussion Papers in International Investment & Business Studies.Google Scholar
  44. Patel, P. (1995). Localised production of technology for global markets. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 141–153.Google Scholar
  45. Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1991). Large firms in the production of the world’s technology: an important case of ‘non-globalisation.’ Journal of International Business Studies, 22, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1995). Patterns of technological activity: their measurement and interpretation. In P. Stoneman (Ed.), Handbook of the economics of innovation and technological change. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  47. Patel, P., & Pavitt, K. (1997). The technological competencies of the world’s largest firms: complex and path-dependent, but not much variety. Research Policy, 26, 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Patel, P., & Vega, M. (1999). Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages. Research Policy, 28, 145–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pearce, R. (1999). Decentralised R&D and strategic competitiveness: globalised approaches to generation and use of technology in multinational enterprises (MNEs). Research Policy, 28, 157–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pearce, R., & Papanastassiou, M. (1999). Overseas R&D and the strategic evolution of MNEs: evidence from laboratories in the UK. Research Policy, 28, 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Reddy, P. (1993). Emerging patterns of internationalization of corporate R&D: opportunities for developing countries? In C. Brundenius & G. Göransson (Eds.), New technologies and global restructuring. The third world at a crossroads. L.A.: Taylor Graham.Google Scholar
  52. Sachwald, F. (2005). Mondialisation et attractivité de la France pour la R&D des entreprises. In P. Larédo & F. Sachwald (Eds.), Le système français d’innovation dans l’économie mondiale: enjeux et priorités. IFRI-Institut de l’Entreprise: Paris.Google Scholar
  53. Saggi, K. (2000). ‘Trade, foreign direct investment, and international technology transfer. A survey.’ In Washington D.C., The World Bank Development Research Group Trade, 1–45.Google Scholar
  54. Serapio, M.G., Takabumi, H., & Dalton, D. (2004). Internationalization of Research and Development: Empirical trends and theoretical perspectives. In M. G. Serapio & H. Takabumi (Eds.), Internationalization of research and development and the emergence of global R&D networks. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  55. Smith, P. J. (2001). How do foreign patent rights affect U.S. exports, affiliate sales, and licenses?. Journal of International Economics, 55, 411–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tolentino, P. E. (1993). Technological innovation and third world multinationals. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. UNCTAD. (2005). ‘Wold investment report 2005. Transnational corporations and the internationalization of R&D,’ N.Y. and Geneva: United Nations, 331.Google Scholar
  58. UN-ECE. (2000). ‘Economic development through foreign direct investment in Central and Eastern Europe.’ In United Nations Economic Commission for Europe in co-operation with EBRD and UNCTAD, 1–13.Google Scholar
  59. Veugelers, R., & Cassiman, B. (2004). Foreign subsidiaries as a channel of international technology diffusion: Some direct firm level evidence from Belgium. European Economic Review, 48, 455–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Warner, M. A. A., & Rugman, A. (1994). Competitiveness: An emerging strategy of discrimination in US antitrust and R&D policy. Law & Policy in International Business, 25, 945–982.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsIEG-CSIC, National Research Council of SpainMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations