Advertisement

The role of inward foreign direct investment on entrepreneurship

  • Natália Barbosa
  • Vasco EirizEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper investigates whether foreign firms had a positive impact on entrepreneurial activity measured by the net creation of firms. Using firm-level panel data for the Portuguese manufacturing and service industries over the period 1986 to 2000, we test whether the impact of foreign firms on firms’ entry depends on the number and size of previous foreign entrants. Overall, the results cast some doubts on the influence of foreign firms in assisting entrepreneurial activity. The impact of a first foreign investment is, in general, positive but the marginal impact of additional investments appears to be negative.

Keywords

Inward FDI International entrepreneurship Manufacturing and service industries Portugal 

References

  1. Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (1989). Small-firm entry in US manufacturing. Economica, 56, 255–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anand, J., & Delios, A. (2002). Absolute and relative resources as determinants of international acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 119–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anand, J., & Kogut, B. (1997). Technological capabilities of countries, firm rivalry and foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 28, 445–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersson, T., & Svensson, R. (1994). Entry modes for direct investment determined by the composition of firm-specific skills. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 9, 551–560.Google Scholar
  5. Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58, 277–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barbosa, N., Guimarães, P., & Woodward, D. (2004). Foreign firms entry in an open economy: The case of Portugal. Applied Economics, 36, 465–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barbosa, N., & Louri, H. (2002). On the determinants of multinationals’ ownership preferences: Evidence from Greece and Portugal. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 20, 493–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barbosa, N., & Louri, H. (2005). Corporate performance: Does ownership matter? A comparison of foreign- and domestic-owned firms in Greece and Portugal. Review of Industrial Organization, 27, 73–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barrios, S., Görg, H., & Strobl, E. (2005). Foreign direct investment, competition and industrial development in the host country. European Economic Review, 49, 1761–1784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barry, F., & Bradley, J. (1997). FDI and trade: The Irish host-country experience. Economic Journal, 107, 178–1811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Birkinshaw, J. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 207–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blonigen, B. A., Davies, R. B., Waddell, G. R., & Naughton, H. T. (2007). FDI in space: Spatial autoregressive relationships in foreign direct investment. European Economic Review, in press.Google Scholar
  13. Boden, R. J., & Nucci, A. R. (2000). On the survival prospects of men’s and women’s new business ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cantwell, J., & Piscitello, L. (2002). The location of technological activities of MNCs in European regions: The role of spillovers and local competencies. Journal of International Management, 8, 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cavusgil, S. T. (1980). On the internationalization process of firms. European Research, 8, 273–281.Google Scholar
  16. Chang, S., & Rosenzweig, P. M. (2001). The choice of entry mode in sequential foreign direct investment. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 747–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cuervo, A. (2005). Individual and environmental determinants of entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1, 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Backer, K., & Sleuwaegen, L. (2003). Does foreign direct investments crowd out domestic entrepreneurship?. Review of Industrial Organization, 22, 67–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Driffield, N., & Love, J. H. (2006). Does the motivation for foreign direct investment affect productivity spillovers to the domestic sector?. Applied Economics Quarterly, 52, 3–28.Google Scholar
  20. Dunning, J. H. (1993) Multinational Enterprise and the Global Economy. Wokingham: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  21. Fotopoulos, G., & Spence, N. (1999). Net entry behaviour in Greek manufacturing: Consumer, intermediate and capital goods industries. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 17, 1219–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Geroski, P. A. (1991). Market dynamics and entry. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Geroski, P. A. (1995). What do we know about entry? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 421–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Görg, H., & Strobl, E. (2005). Foreign direct investment and local economic development: Beyond productivity spillovers. In T. H. Moran, E. M. Graham & M. Blomström (Eds.), Does foreign direct investment promote development? (pp. 137–157). Washington: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
  25. Griffith, R., Redding, S., & Simpson, H. (2004). Foreign ownership and productivity: New evidence from the service sector and the R&D lab. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 20, 440–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hennart, J., & Park, Y. (1993). Greenfield vs. acquisition: The strategy of Japanese investors in the United States. Management Science, 39, 1054–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hisrich, R. D., Honig-Haftel, S., McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (1996). International entrepreneurship: Past, present, and future. Entrepreneurship: Theory and practice (Summer), 5–7.Google Scholar
  28. Honig, B. (1998). What determines success? Examining the human, financial, and social capital of Jamaican microentrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 371–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jack, S. L., & Anderson, A. R. (2002). The effects of embeddedness on the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 17, 467–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internationalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitment. Journal of International Business Studies, 8, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1990). The mechanism of internationalization. International Marketing Review, 7(4), 11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (2003). Business relationship learning and commitment in the internationalization process. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 83–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kogut, B., & Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Li, J. (1995). Foreign entry and survival: Effect of strategic choices on performance in international markets. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 333–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lin, P., & Saggi, K. (2005). Multinational firms and backward linkages: A critical survey and a simple model. In T. H. Moran, E. M. Graham & M. Blomström (Eds.), Does foreign direct investment promote development?(pp. 159–174). Washington: Institute for International Economics.Google Scholar
  36. Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Manolopoulos, D., Papanastassiou, M., & Pearce, R. (2005). Technology sourcing in MNEs and the roles of subsidiaries: An empirical investigation. International Business Review, 14, 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Markusen, J., & Venables, A. (1999). Foreign direct investment as a catalyst for industrial development. European Economic Review, 43, 335–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mata, J. (1993). Entry and type of entrant: Evidence from Portugal. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 11, 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McDougall, P. P., & Oviatt, B. M. (2000). International entrepreneurship: The intersection of two research paths. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 902–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mirza, H. (2000). The globalisation of business and East Asian developing-country multinationals. In N. Hood & S. Young (Eds.). The globalization of multinational enterprise activity and economic development (pp. 202–224). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  42. Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (1994). Toward a theory of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 25, 45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). Defining international entrepreneurship and modeling the speed of internationalization. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, (September), 537–553.Google Scholar
  44. Pavitt, K. (1984). Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 13, 343–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Reynolds, P. (1997). Who starts new firms? Preliminary explorations of firms in gestation. Small Business Economics, 9, 449–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rivera-Batiz, F. L., & Rivera-Batiz, L. A. (1990). The effects of direct foreign investment in the presence of increasing returns due to specialization. Journal of Development Economics, 34, 287–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rodríguez-Clare, A. (1996). Multinationals, linkages, and economic development. American Economic Review, 86, 852–873.Google Scholar
  48. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25, 217–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) (2001) World Investment Report 2001—Promoting Linkages. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  50. Wright, R. W., & Ricks, D. A. (1994). Trends in international business research: Twenty-five years later. Journal of International Business Studies, 25, 687–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Young, S., Dimitratos, P., & Dana, L. P. (2003). International entrepreneurship research: What scope for international business theories?. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 1, 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). International entrepreneurship: The current status of the field and future research agenda. In M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, S. M. Camp, & D. L. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset (pp. 255–288). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  53. Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: International diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 925–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Economics and ManagementUniversity of MinhoBragaPortugal

Personalised recommendations