Do National Borders Matter? Distance as FDI Determinant: The Case of Serbia

  • Dimitrios KyrkilisEmail author
  • Natasa Grujic
Part of the Contributions to Economics book series (CE)


The aim of this chapter is to define the meaning and the role of distance in determining cross-border investment transactions. Specifically it aims, using Serbia as an individual country case at demonstrating the implementation of a model based on Ghemawat’s cultural, administrative, geographic and economic (CAGE) distance framework for testing the key distance-related determinants of the foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows to a country. Since 2000 Serbia has embarked on an extensive political and economic reforms programme, having achieved democratic stability by now. Its economic growth has been mainly driven by foreign direct investments. This chapter analyses how each one of distance dimensions, i.e. cultural, administrative, geographic and economic, affects FDI inflows to Serbia. The empirical application of the model shows that cultural distance affects FDI flows negatively, while administrative, geographic and economic distance have a positive effect on FDI inflows to Serbia.


FDI flows CAGE model Serbia 

JEL Classifications

F21 F60 


  1. Anderson, E., & Coughlan, A. T. (1987, January). International market entry and expansion via independent or integrated channels of distribution. Journal of Marketing, 51, 71–82.Google Scholar
  2. Berry, H., Guillén, M. F., & Zhou, N. (2010). An institutional approach to cross-national distance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1460–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borner, S., Brunetti, A., & Weber, B. (1995). Political credibility and economic development. New York: St. Martin Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, N. (2004). Intra-national versus international trade in the European Union: Why do national borders matter? Journal of International Economics, 63(1), 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davidson, W. H. (1982). Global strategic management. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Drogendijk, R., & Slagengen, A. (2006). Hofstede, Schwartz, or managerial perceptions? The effects of different cultural distance measures on establishment mode choice by multinational enterprises. International Business Review, 15, 361–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunning, J. H. (1988). The eclectic paradigm of international production: A restatement and some possible extensions. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Erramilli, M. (1996). Nationality and subsidiary ownership patterns in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Friedman, T. L. (2006). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century (1st rev. and expanded ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  10. Ghemawat, P. (2001). Distance still matters. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 137–147.Google Scholar
  11. Ghemawat, P. (2007). Redefining global strategy: Crossing borders in a world where differences still matter. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  12. Green, R. T., & Cunningham, W. H. (1975). The determinants of U.S. foreign investment: An empirical examination. Management International Review, 15(2/3), 113–120.Google Scholar
  13. Guillen, M., & Suarez, S. (2005). Explaining the global digital divide: Economic, political and sociological drivers of crossnational internet use. Social Forces, 84(2), 681–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guler, I. I., & Guillen, M. F. (2010). Institutions and the internationalization of US venture capital firms. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 185–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Head, K., & Mayer, T. (2002). Illusory border effects: Distance mismeasurement inflates estimates of home bias in trade (CEPII Working Paper 2002-01).Google Scholar
  16. Hennart, J. F., & Larimo, J. (1998). The impact of culture on the strategy of multinational enterprises: Does national origin affect ownership decisions? Journal of International Business Studies, 29(3), 515–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (1991). Culture and organizations: Software of the mind. USA: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  19. House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations. The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Iyer, G. R. (1997). Comparative marketing: An interdisciplinary framework for institutional analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(3), 531–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johanson, J., & Vahlne, J. E. (1977). The internalization process of the firm: A model of knowledge development and increasing foreign market commitments. Journal of International Business Studies, 8(Spring/Summer), 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson J. L., Cullen J. B., & Sakano, T. (1991, June). Cultural congruency in international joint ventures: Does it matter? Proceedings of the eastern academy of management fourth biennial international conference, Nice, France.Google Scholar
  23. Kim, W. C., & Hwang, P. (1992). Global strategy and multinational entry mode choice. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(1), 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kogut, B., & Singh, H. (1988). The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krishna, P. (2003). Are regional trading partners “natural”? Journal of Political Economy, 111(1), 202–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. La Porta, R., Lopez de Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1998). Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy, 106(6), 1113–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Li, J. T., & Guisinger, S. (1991). Comparative business failures of foreign-controlled firms in the United States. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(2), 209–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lubatkin, M., Calori, R., Very, P., & Veiga, J. J. (1998). Managing mergers across borders: A two-nation exploration of a nationally bound administrative heritage. Organization Science, 9(6), 670–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mayer, D., & Jebe, R. (2010). The legal and ethical environment for multinational corporations, good business: Exercising effective and ethical leadership (pp. 159–171). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Mayer, T., & Zignago, S. (2005). Market access in global and regional trade (CEPII Working Paper 2).Google Scholar
  31. Mayer, T., & Zignago, S. (2011). Notes on CEPII’s distances measures: The GeoDist database (CEPII Working Paper No 2011-25).Google Scholar
  32. McSweeney, B. (2002). Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith – A failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55(1), 89–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nieman, M. D., & Thies, C. G. (2012). Property rights regimes, technological innovation, and foreign direct investment. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  34. Olson, M. (1996). Big bills left on the sidewalk: Why some nations are rich and others poor. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ozawa, T. (1979). International investment and industrial structure: New theoretical implications from the Japanese experience. Oxford Economic Papers, 31(1), 72–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Park, S. H., & Ungson, G. R. (1997). The effect of national culture, organizational complementarity, and economic motivation on joint venture dissolution. Academy of Management Journal, 40(2), 279–307.Google Scholar
  37. Perry, A. (2006). An ideal legal system for attracting foreign direct investment? Some theory and reality. American University International Law Review, 15(6), 1627–1659.Google Scholar
  38. Porter, M., Takeuchi, E., & Sakakibara, H. M. (2000). Can Japan compete? London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Ragozzino, R. (2009). The effects of geographic distance on the foreign acquisition activity of U.S. Management International Review, 52, 509–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schwartz, H. S. (2008). Cultural value orientations: Nature & implications of national differences. Moscow: Publ. House of SU HSE.Google Scholar
  41. Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C. Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, methods, and applications (pp. 85–119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Shenkar, O. (2001). Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3), 519–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Solocha, A., & Soskin, M. D. (1994). Canadian direct investment, mode of entry, and border location. MIR: Management International Review, 34(1), 79–95.Google Scholar
  44. Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (2001). The role of national culture in international marketing research. International Marketing Review, 18(1), 30–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steyt, J. Y. P. (2006) Comparative foreign direct investment law: Determinants of the legal framework and the level of openness and attractiveness of host economies. (LL.M. Graduate Research Papers, Paper 1).Google Scholar
  46. Stopford, J. M., & Wells Jr., L. T. (1972). Managing the multinational enterprise. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  47. Trompenaars, F. (1993). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. London: Nicholas Brealey.Google Scholar
  48. Tsang, E., & Yip, P. (2007). Economic distance and the survival of foreign direct investments. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1156–1168.Google Scholar
  49. Yeung, H. W. C. (1997). Business networks and transnational corporations: A study of Hong-Kong firms in the ASEAN region. Economic Geography, 73(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yoshino, M. Y. (1976). Japan’s multinational enterprises. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zaheer, S., & Zaheer, A. (1997). Country effects on information seeking in global electronic networks. Journal of International Business Studies, 28(1), 77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Balkan, Slavic and Oriental StudiesUniversity of MacedoniaThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations