Advertisement

Italian Economic Journal

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 369–402 | Cite as

Does the Same FDI Fit All? How Competition and Affiliates Characteristics Affect Parents’ Productivity

  • Giorgia Giovannetti
  • Enrico Marvasi
  • Giorgio RicchiutiEmail author
Research Paper - Italy and Europe
  • 10 Downloads

Abstract

This paper investigates the heterogeneity within the group of foreign direct investors by analyzing the relation between parents’ productivity, the degree of domestic competition and the characteristics of their affiliates. Our results show that there is no unique recipe. Foreign direct investors may benefit differently depending on the economic environment in which they operate. Building an original 10-year panel dataset of Italian investors, we find that larger manufacturing parents tend to have more, larger and more productive affiliates in a higher number of destinations as well as being more productive in terms of total factor productivity. Having affiliates in high income countries or in both high and low income countries is associated with a productivity premium vis-à-vis investors in low income countries. Parent sector characteristics such as technology and degree of competition are also associated with productivity in a non-monotonic way. Low income country investors are found to be relatively more productive when operating in more competitive low technology sectors, while the opposite holds true for high income country investors, which become more productive when operating in less competitive high technology sectors.

Keywords

Foreign direct investment Heterogeneous firms Total factor productivity Multinationals Affiliates 

JEL Classification

F12 F14 F21 

Notes

Supplementary material

40797_2019_103_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (140 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (pdf 139 KB)

References

  1. Albornoz F, Calvo Pardo HF, Corcos G, Ornelas E (2012) Sequential exporting. J Int Econ 88(1):17–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold JM (2005) Productivity estimation at the plant level: a practical guide. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  3. Assenza T, Delli Gatti D, Grazzini J, Ricchiuti G (2016) heterogeneous firms and international trade: the role of productivity and financial fragility (No. 5959). Retrieved from https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/144994
  4. Barba Navaretti G, Castellani D, Disdier A-C (2010) How does investing in cheap labour countries affect performance at home? Firm-level evidence from France and Italy. Oxf Econ Pap 62(May 2005):234–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benfratello L, Sembenelli A (2006) Foreign ownership and productivity: Is the direction of causality so obvious? Int J Ind Org 24(4):733–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boone J (2008) A new way to measure competition. Econ J 118(531):1245–1261.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02168.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boone J, Brouwer E, Filistrucchi L, Van der Weil H (2011) Relaxing competition through product innovation. MimeoGoogle Scholar
  8. Boone J, Van Ours JC, Van der Wiel H (2013) When is the price cost margin a safe way to measure changes in competition? De Economist (Netherlands) 161(1):45–67Google Scholar
  9. Borin A, Mancini M (2016) Foreign direct investment and firm performance: an empirical analysis of Italian firms. Rev World Econ.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-016-0255-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brancati R, Marrocu E, Romagnoli M, Usai S (2016) Innovation activities and learning process in the crisis. Evidence from Italian export in manufacturing services. CRENoS Working PapersGoogle Scholar
  11. Bustos P (2011) Trade liberalization, exports, and technology upgrading: evidence on the impact of MERCOSUR on argentinian firms. Am Econ Rev 101(1):304–340.  https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.1.304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Castellani D, Mariotti I, Piscitello L (2008) The impact of outward investments on parent company’s employment and skill composition: evidence from the Italian case. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 19(1):81–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chaney T (2016) Liquidity constrained exporters. J Econ Dyn Control 72:141–154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2016.03.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cozza C, Rabellotti R, Sanfilippo M (2015) The impact of outward FDI on the performance of Chinese firms. Chin Econ Rev 36:42–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Crinò R, Epifani P (2012) Productivity, quality and export behaviour. Econ J 122(2006):1206–1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Damijan J, Kostevc Č, Rojec M (2017) Not every kind of outward FDI increases parent firm performance: the case of new EU member states. Emerg Mark Financ Trade 53(1):74–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Damijan JP, Polanec S, Prašnikar J (2007) Outward FDI and productivity: micro-evidence from Slovenia. World Econ 30(1):135–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. De Loecker J (2011) Product differentiation, multiproduct firms, and estimating the impact of trade liberalization on productivity. Econometrica 79(5):1407–1451.  https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA7617 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Loecker J, Goldberg PK (2014) Firm Performance in a Global Market. Ann Rev Econ 6(1):201–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Masi G, Giovannetti G, Ricchiuti G (2013) Network analysis to detect common strategies in Italian foreign direct investment. Physica A Stat Mech Appl 392(5):1202–1214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. De Masi G, Ricchiuti G (2018) The network of the European outward foreign direct investments. In: Smith M, Amighini A, Gorgoni S (eds) Networks of international trade and investment. Vernon PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Del Gatto M, Di Liberto A, Petraglia C (2011) Measuring productivity. J Econ Surv 25(5):952–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Desai MA, Fritz Foley C, Hines JR (2008) Capital structure with risky foreign investment. J Financ Econ 88(3):534–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Di Comite F, Thisse JF, Vandenbussche H (2014) Verti-zontal differentiation in export markets. J Int Econ 93(1):50–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Driffield N, Love JH, Yang Y (2016) Reverse international knowledge transfer in the MNE: does affiliate technological capability boost parent productivity. Res Policy 45(2):491–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Engel D, Procher V (2012) Export, FDI and firm productivity. Appl Econ 44(15):1931–1940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Federico S (2012) Headquarter intensity and the choice between outsourcing versus integration at home or abroad. Ind Corp Chang 21(6):1337–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gattai V (2015) Foreign exposure and heterogeneous performance of Italian firms: a survey of the empirical literature (1992–2014). University of Milan Bicocca, DEMS Working Paper Series, no 300Google Scholar
  29. Gattai V, Sali G (2015) FDI and heterogeneous performance of European enterprises. University of Milan Bicocca, DEMS working paper series, 291Google Scholar
  30. Giovannetti G, Marvasi E (2016) Food exporters in global value chains: evidence from Italy. Food Policy 59:110–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Giovannetti G, Marvasi E, Sanfilippo M (2015) Supply chains and the internationalization of small firms. Small Bus Econ 44(4):845–865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hallak JC, Sivadasan J (2013) Product and process productivity: implications for quality choice and conditional exporter premia. J Int Econ 91(1):53–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2013.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Levinsohn J, Petrin A (2003) Estimating production functions using inputs to control for unobservables. Rev Econ Stud 70:317–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Manova K, Wei SJ, Zhang Z (2015) Firm exports and multinational activity under credit constraints. Rev Econ Stat 97(3):574–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Manova K, Zhang Z (2012) Export prices across firms and destinations. Q J Econ 127(1):379–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mayer T, Ottaviano GIP (2008) The happy few: the internationalisation of European firms. Bruegel Blueprint Ser 43(3):135–148Google Scholar
  37. Melitz MJ (2003) The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica 71(6):1695–1725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Melitz MJ, Redding SJ (2014) Heterogeneous firms and trade. In: Handbook of international economics, 4th edn, vol 4. ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  39. Neary JP (2010) Two and a half theories of trade. World Econ 33(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Olley S, Pakes A (1996) The dynamics of productivity in the telecommunications equipment industry. Econometrica 64(6):1263–1297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parenti M (2013) Large and small firms in a global market: David vs. Goliath. CORE Discussion Paper, 58. http://www.ucllouvain.be/cps/ucl/doc/core/documents/coredp2013_58web.pdf
  42. Van Beveren I (2012) Total factor productivity estimation: a practical review. J Econ Surv 26(1):98–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wooldridge JM (2009) On estimating firm-level production functions using proxy variables to control for unobservables. Econ Lett 104(3):112–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Scienze per l’Economia e l’ImpresaUniversitá di FirenzeFlorenceItaly
  2. 2.Fondazione Manlio MasiRomeItaly
  3. 3.European University InstituteFiesoleItaly
  4. 4.Dipartimento di Ingegneria GestionalePolitecnico di MilanoMilanItaly
  5. 5.Complexity Lab in Economics (CLE)Università Cattolica del Sacro CuoreMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations