This paper studies how the presence of multinational enterprises affects the export performance of Bulgarian manufacturing firms—export spillovers from FDI. Using export data at the firm/product/destination level for the period 2004–2006, it finds positive forward spillover on export value and quantity, related to quality upgrading. Conversely, it finds negative (or insignificant) backward and horizontal spillover on export flows, related to quality downgrading. When aggregating data at the firm level and considering that a firm can operate in several sectors, the paper shows that the presence of foreign input suppliers allows domestic firms to export additional varieties of lower quality and upgrade the average quality of existing varieties, whereas the presence of foreign customers generates the opposite effect.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
See Görg and Greenaway (2004) for more details.
Using cross-section data at the firm level, Aitken et al. (1997) demonstrate that the probability of domestic firms exporting is positively influenced by the presence of exporting multinational enterprises in the same industry and region. Using firm level panel data from the UK, Greenaway et al. (2004) find that MNEs’ exports have a positive impact on domestic firms’ export decisions, but no effect on how much they export (i.e. firm level export-to-sales ratios). Ruane and Sutherland (2005) find that domestic firms’ export decisions and export intensities are negatively related to MNEs’ export intensity, using panel data from Ireland. Exploring similar data from Spain, Barrios et al. (2003) find no significant evidence of export spillovers from FDI, in terms of both probability of exporting and export intensity at the firm level.
Previous studies on spillovers from FDI in Bulgaria focus on the effects on firm productivity, rather than export performance (Monastiriotis and Alegria 2011).
Data obtained from World Bank’s World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS) Database.
Exports of goods and service as percentage of GDP grew from 35% in 2001 to 47% in 2006. Imports as a percentage of GDP went from 44 to 64% in the same period.
Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU in 2007. Czech Republic, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia entered the Union in 2004.
Bulgarian National Bank (2007), “Economic Review,” 1/2007.
In the text, we use price and unit value as synonyms, i.e. both refer to the value/quantity ratio.
Note that 2-digit IO codes correspond to 2-digit NACE codes, but some 2-digit NACE codes correspond to a single 2-digit IO code (such as 10-11-12; 13-14-15; 31-32), therefore the number of IO industries (19) is smaller than the number of 2-digit NACE industries (24).
In line with previous studies (Javorcik 2004), we exclude intra-industry supplies when measuring vertical spillovers at the 2-digit sector level to prevent the problem of double-counting. However, it is worth noting that vertical spillovers may be underestimated. Alfaro and Charlton (2009) find that many vertical subsidiaries are only visible at the four-digit level because the intermediate goods they supply are so close to their parent companies’ final goods that they appear to be the same goods at the two-digit level. One way to overcome this problem is by using an I/O table at the 4-digit sector level. Unfortunately, a more disaggregated I/O table for Bulgaria is not available.
Note that the number of observations is slightly smaller as the quality measure is missing in some cases. The quality measure computed according to Khandelwal et al. (2013) relies on 3-digit level import elasticities for each importing country, estimated by Broda et al. (2006). Unfortunately, import demand elasticities are not available for some firm-product-destination triplets.
When splitting our sample according to EU destination status, we note that vertical spillovers, in terms of both value and quantity, mainly impact exports to the EU, whereas horizontal spillovers exclusively affect non-EU exports. These patterns highlight the fact that Bulgarian firms were already highly vertically integrated with firms located in EU economies in the years preceding Bulgaria’s accession to the EU, and were mainly horizontally competing with firms from the rest of the world. The related results are available upon request.
Tables related to the first stages are available upon request.
Aitken, B., Hanson, G. H., & Harrison, A. E. (1997). Spillovers, foreign investment, and export behavior. Journal of International Economics, 43(1–2), 103–132.
Aitken, B., & Harrison, A. E. (1999). Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela. American Economic Review, 89(3), 605–618.
Alfaro, L., & Charlton, A. (2009). Intra-industry foreign direct investment. American Economic Review, 99(5), 2096–2119.
Amiti, M., & Khandelwal, A. K. (2013). Import competition and quality upgrading. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(2), 476–490.
Amiti, M., & Konings, J. (2007). Trade liberalization, intermediate inputs, and productivity: Evidence from Indonesia. American Economic Review, 97(5), 1611–1638.
Bajgar, M., & Javorcik, B. (2016). Climbing the rugs of the quality ladder: FDI and domestic exporters in Romania (Working paper). University of Oxford.
Baldwin, R., & Harrigan, J. (2011). Zeros, quality and space: Trade theory and trade evidence. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 3(2), 60–88.
Barrios, S., Görg, H., & Strobl, E. (2003). Explaining firms’ export behaviour: R&D spillovers and the destination market. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65(4), 475–496.
Barrios, S., Görg, H., & Strobl, E. (2011). Spillovers through backward linkages from multinationals: Measurement matters! European Economic Review, 55(6), 862–875.
Bas, M., & Strauss-Kahn, V. (2015). Input-trade liberalization, export prices and quality upgrading. Journal of International Economics, 95(2), 250–262.
Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., Redding, S. J., & Schott, P. K. (2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 105–130.
Broda, C., J. Greenfield, J., & Weinstein, D. (2006). From groundnuts to globalization: A structural estimate of trade and growth (NBER working paper 12512).
Bulgarian National Bank (2007). Economic Review, issue 1/2007, pp. 1–48.
Cantwell, J. (1989). Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Chen, C., Sheng, Y., & Findlay, C. (2013). Export spillovers of FDI on China’s domestic firms. Review of International Economics, 21(5), 841–856.
Du, L., Harrison, A., & Jefferson, G. (2014). FDI spillovers and industrial policy: The role of tariffs and tax holidays. World Development, 64, 366–383.
Eckel, C., Iacovone, L., Javorcik, B., & Neary, P. J. (2015). Multi-product firms at home and away: Cost- versus quality-based competence. Journal of International Economics, 95(2), 216–232.
Fernandes, A., Freund, C., & Pierola, M. (2016). Exporter behavior, country size and stage of development: Evidence from the exporter dynamics database. Journal of Development Economics, 119, 121–137.
Fieler, C., Eslava, M., & Xu, D. Y. (2014). Trade, technology and input linkages: A theory with evidence from Colombia (NBER working paper no. 19992). March 2014.
Findlay, R. (1978). Relative backwardness, direct foreign investment and the transfer of technology: A simple dynamic mode. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 92(1), 1–16.
Girma, S. (2005). Absorptive capacity and productivity spillovers from FDI: A threshold regression analysis. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 281–306.
Girma, S., & Wakelin, K. (2002). Are there Regional Spillovers from FDI in the UK? In David Greenaway, Richard Upward, & Katharine Wakelin (Eds.), Trade, investment, migration and labour markets. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Görg, H., & Greenaway, D. (2004). Much ado about nothing? Do domestic firms really benefit from foreign direct investment? World Bank Research Observer, 19(2), 171–197.
Greenaway, D., Sousa, N., & Wakelin, K. (2004). Do domestic firms learn to export from multinationals? European Journal of Political Economy, 20(4), 1027–1043.
Hallak, J. C. (2006). Product quality and the direction of trade. Journal of International Economics, 68(1), 238–265.
Hallak, J. C., & Sivadasan, J. (2014). Product and process productivity: Implications for quality choice and conditional exporter premia. Journal of International Economics, 91(1), 53–67.
Haskel, J. E., Pereira, S. C., & Slaughter, M. J. (2007). Does inward foreign direct investment boost the productivity of domestic firms? Review of Economics and Statistics, 89(3), 482–496.
Havranek, T., & Irsova, Z. (2011). Estimating vertical spillovers from FDI: Why results vary and what the true effect is. Journal of International Economics, 85(2), 234–244.
Hummels, D., & Klenow, P. J. (2005). The variety and quality of a nation’s exports. American Economic Review, 95(3), 704–723.
Imbruno, M., Pittiglio, R., & Reganati, F. (2015). FDI, intermediate inputs and firm performance: Theory and evidence from Italy (GEP discussion papers 2015-15). University of Nottingham.
Javorcik, B. K. (2004). Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages. American Economic Review, 94(3), 605–627.
Keller, W., & Yeaple, S. (2009). Multinational enterprises, international trade, and productivity growth: Firm-level evidence from the United States. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(4), 821–831.
Khandelwal, A. (2010). The long and short (of) quality ladders. Review of Economic Studies, 77(4), 1450–1476.
Khandelwal, A., Schott, P., & Wei, S. (2013). Trade liberalization and embedded institutional reform: Evidence from Chinese exporters. American Economic Review, 103(6), 2169–2195.
Kneller, R., & Pisu, M. (2007). Industrial linkages and export spillovers from FDI. World Economy, 30(1), 105–134.
Konings, J. (2001). The effects of foreign direct investment on domestic firms. Economics of Transition, 9, 619–633.
Kugler, M., & Verhoogen, E. (2012). Prices, plant size, and product quality. Review of Economic Studies, 79(1), 307–339.
Manova, K., Yu, Z., (2017). Multiproduct firms and product quality (Working paper). University of Oxford.
Manova, K., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Export prices across firms and destinations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(1), 379–436.
Mayer, T., & Ottaviano, G. I. P. (2008). The happy few: The internationalisation of European firms: New facts based on firm-level evidence. Intereconomics/Review of European Economic Policy 43(3), 135–148.
Melitz, M. J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, 71(6), 1695–1725.
Monastiriotis, V., & Alegria, R. (2011). Origin of FDI and intra-industry domestic spillovers: The case of Greek and European FDI in Bulgaria. Review of Development Economics, 15(2), 326–339.
Rauch, J. E. (1999). Networks versus markets in international trade. Journal of International Economics, 48(1), 7–35.
Ruane, F., & Sutherland, J. (2005). Foreign direct investment and export spillovers: How do export platforms fare? (IIIS discussion paper no. 58).
Schott, P. K. (2004). Across-product versus within-product specialization in international trade. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(2), 646–677.
Sutton, J. (2007). Quality, trade and the moving window: The globalization process. Economic Journal, 117(524), 469–498.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
WTO. (2003). Trade policy review on Bulgaria. WTO WT/TPS/S/121.
WTO. (2009). Trade policy review on the European Communities. WT/TPR/S/214.
Xu, X., & Sheng, Y. (2012). Productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment: Firm-level evidence from China. World Development, 40(1), 62–74.
The authors are extremely grateful to the editor and two anonymous referees for their constructive comments. This paper also benefited from discussions with Simone Bertoli, Ana M. Fernandes, Beata S. Javorcik, Richard Kneller, Joel Stiebale, and participants at the conference on “Quality FDI, Growth and Development: Discussing the Impact and Policy Options” at UNIDO (Vienna), and CSAE 2017 conference at Oxford University. We thank them for helpful comments and suggestions. All remaining errors are the authors’ own. Michele Imbruno acknowledges the support received from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche of the French government through the program “Investissements d’avenir” (ANR-10-LABX-14-01).
About this article
Cite this article
Ciani, A., Imbruno, M. Microeconomic mechanisms behind export spillovers from FDI: evidence from Bulgaria. Rev World Econ 153, 703–734 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-017-0290-4
- Export spillover
- Multi-product firms
- Unit value