Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 40, Issue 7, pp 1095–1112 | Cite as

Do all firms benefit equally from downstream FDI? The moderating effect of local suppliers’ capabilities on productivity gains

Article

Abstract

Using a panel data set on Indonesian manufacturers from 1988 to 1996, this paper examines how host-country firms’ capabilities influence their propensity to benefit from downstream foreign direct investment (FDI). We estimate local suppliers’ productivity response to multinational entry in downstream industries. We find that firms with stronger production capabilities benefit less than others. In contrast, firms with greater absorptive capacity benefit more. These results are largely robust to the inclusion of firm fixed effects, industry-year and region-year fixed effects, and other controls, and indicate the importance of firm capabilities in moderating the effect of downstream FDI on productivity. Finally, we also find some evidence, though less robust, that firms with greater complementary capabilities (proxied by firm size) also benefit more from downstream FDI.

Keywords

foreign direct investment productivity Indonesia 

References

  1. Aitken, B., & Harrison, A. 1999. Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela. American Economic Review, 89 (3): 605–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blalock, G. 2002. Technology adoption from foreign direct investment and exporting: Evidence from Indonesian manufacturing, PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  3. Blalock, G., & Gertler, P. 2008. Welfare gains from foreign direct investment through technology transfer to local suppliers. Journal of International Economics, 74 (2): 402–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blalock, G., & Gertler, P. 2009. How firm capabilities affect who benefits from foreign technology. Journal of Development Economics, forthcoming. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2008.11.011.Google Scholar
  5. Blomstrom, M., & Wolff, E. 1994. Multinational corporations and productivity convergence in Mexico. In W. Baumol, R. Nelson, & E. Wolff (Eds), Convergence of productivity: Cross-national studies and historical evidence: 263–284. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Caves, R. 1974. Multinational firms, competition, and productivity in host-country markets. Economica, 41 (162): 176–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chung, W., Mitchell, W., & Yeung, B. 2003. Foreign direct investment and host country productivity: The American automotive component industry in the 1980s. Journal of International Business Studies, 34 (2): 199–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1): 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Feinberg, S., & Majumdar, S. 2001. Technology spillovers from foreign direct investment in the Indian pharmaceutical industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 32 (3): 421–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Globerman, S. 1979. Foreign direct investment and spillover efficiency benefits in Canadian manufacturing industries. Canadian Journal of Economics, 12 (1): 42–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haddad, M., & Harrison, A. 1993. Are there positive spillovers from direct foreign investment? Evidence from panel data for Morocco. Journal of Development Economics, 42 (1): 51–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haskel, J., Pereira, S., & Slaughter, M. 2002. Does inward foreign direct investment boost the productivity of domestic firms? Discussion Paper 8433, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  13. Hoxby, C. 2005. Competition among public schools: A reply to Rothstein (2004), Working Paper 11216, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  14. Jabbour, L., & Mucchielli, J. L. 2007. Technology transfer through vertical linkages: The case of the Spanish manufacturing industry. Journal of Applied Economics, 10 (1): 115–136.Google Scholar
  15. Javorcik, B. S. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kinoshita, Y. 2000. R&D and technology spillovers via FDI: Innovation and absorptive capacity, Working Paper No. 349, William Davidson Institute.Google Scholar
  17. Kokko, A. 1994. Technology, market characteristics, and spillovers. Journal of Development Economics, 43 (2): 279–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lane, P., Salk, J., & Lyles, M. 2001. Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22 (12): 1139–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Levinsohn, J., & Petrin, A. 2003. Estimating production functions using inputs to control for unobservables. Review of Economic Studies, 70 (2): 317–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu, X., Siler, P., Wang, C., & Wei, Y. 2000. Productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment: Evidence from UK industry level panel data. Journal of International Business Studies, 31 (3): 407–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moulton, B. R. 1990. An illustration of a pitfall in estimating the effects of aggregate variables on micro units. Review of Economics and Statistics, 72 (2): 334–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pack, H., & Saggi, K. 2001. Vertical technology transfer via international outsourcing. Journal of Development Economics, 65 (2): 389–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rodrik, D. 1999. The new global economy and developing countries: Making openness work, Policy Essay 24, Overseas Development Council, Washington, DC: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Szulanski, G. 1996. Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter special issue): 27–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Thornton, R. J., & Innes, J. T. 1989. Interpreting semilogarithmic regression coefficients in labor research. Journal of Labor Research, 10 (4): 443–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. World Bank. 1993. Foreign direct investment: Benefits beyond insurance. Washington, DC: Development Brief 14, Development Economics Vice-Presidency.Google Scholar
  27. Zahra, S., & George, G. 2002. Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27 (2): 185–203.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Economics and ManagementCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations