Linking FDI and Sustainable Environment in EU Countries: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Bruce Ren and Version 1 by Chiriac Irina.

The aim of this study is to emphasize the link between the foreign direct investments (FDIs) and the sustainable environment in EU countries. We also focus on investigating the influence of other factors related to business environment on FDIs, considering the investors’ sustainable choice for the host countries, grouped according to FTSE Russell criteria. Using panel methodology and applying Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) method of data analysis, the authors reached the conclusion that a better-rated business environment, with concern for sustainability, has more of a chance to attract larger sums of FDIs, mostly in the case of developed economies. This fact proves that the main advantage considered by a foreign investor in developed EU countries is represented by CO2 emissions (sustainable environment) and a good ease of doing business environment. The study highlights the factors that influence the decision of investing in developed countries, rather than in emerging and frontier ones. This paper contributes to the existing literature by identifying the group of countries which need a more sustainable approach to attract a large amount of FDIs, given that the inflow of FDIs is a crucial factor of economic growth, a possible source of innovation and technology, and a way to reduce poverty. 

  • the investors profile
  • ease of doing business
  • FDI
  • sustainable environment
  • economic growth
  • climate change
  • climate business
Please wait, diff process is still running!

References

  1. Mladen, V.; Bobek, V.; Macek, A.; Skoko, H.; Horvat, T. Business environment and foreign direct investments: The case of selected European emerging economies. Econ. Res. 2020, 33, 243–266.
  2. OECD. Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 1996; Available online: https://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investment-policy/2090148.pdf (accessed on 25 November 2021).
  3. Adams, S. Foreign Direct investment, domestic investment, and economic growth in Sub Saharan Africa. J. Policy Model. 2009, 31, 939–949.
  4. Alfaro, L.; Chanda, A.; Kalemli-Ozcan, S.; Sayek, S. Does Foreign Direct Investment Promote Growth? Exploring the Role of Financial Markets on Linkages. World Econ. 2009, 32, 111–135.
  5. Borensztein, E.; De Gregorio, J.; Lee, J. How Does Foreign Direct Investment Affect Economic Growth? J. Int. Econ. 1995, 45, 115–135. Available online: https://olemiss.edu/courses/inst310/BorenszteinDeGLee98.pdf (accessed on 28 November 2021).
  6. Basu, P.; Guariglia, A. Foreign Direct Investment, inequality, and growth. J. Macroecon. 2007, 29, 824–839.
  7. Sedmikrasky, M.; Klazar, S. Tax competition for FDI in Central-European countries. CESifo Work. Pap. 2002, 647, 301066. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/76066 (accessed on 28 November 2021).
  8. Alfaro, L. Foreign Direct Investment and Growth: Does the Sector Matter? Harvard Business School Working Paper. 2003. Available online: http://www.grips.ac.jp/teacher/oono/hp/docu01/paper14.pdf (accessed on 28 November 2021).
  9. Wacziarg, R. Measuring the Dynamic Gains from Trade. World Bank Econ. Rev. 2001, 15, 393–429.
  10. Phuong, N.L. Literature Review on the Impacts of Foreign Direct Investment in the Emerging Economy: The Case of Vietnam. Open J. Bus. Manag. 2021, 9, 851–857.
  11. Masron, T.; Abdullah, H. Institutional Quality as a Determinant for FDI Inflows: Evidence from ASEAN. World J. Manag. 2010, 2, 115–128.
  12. Bergstrand, J.; Egger, P. A knowledge-and-physical-capital model of international trade flows, foreign direct investment, and multinational enterprises. J. Int. Econ. 2007, 73, 278–300.
  13. Stein, E.; Daude, C. Longitude Matters: Time Zones and the Location of Foreign Direct Investment. J. Int. Econ. 2007, 71, 96–122.
  14. Walsh, J.; Yu, J. Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: A Sectoral and Institutional Approach; IMF: Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
  15. Blonigen, B. Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment; NBER: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011; p. 16704.
  16. Di Giovanni, J. What Drives Capital Flows? The Case of Cross-Border M&A Activity and Financial Deepening. J. Int. Econ. 2005, 65, 127–149.
  17. Head, K.; Ries, J. FDI as an Outcome of the Market for Corporate Control: Theory and Evidence. J. Int. Econ. 2008, 74, 2–20.
  18. Scholes, M.S.; Wolfson, M.A. The Effects of Changes in Tax Law on Corporate Reorganization Activity. J. Bus. 1990, 63, 141–164.
  19. Desai, M.A.; Foley, F.C.; Hines, J.F. Repatriation Taxes and dividend Distortions. Natl. Tax J. 2001, 54, 829–851.
  20. Knack, S.; Keefer, P. Does Social Capital Have an Economic Payoff? A Cross-Country Investigation. Q. J. Econ. 1997, 112, 1251–1288.
  21. Kostevc, C.; Redek, T.; Susjan, A. Foreign Direct Investment and Institutional Environment in Transition Economies. Transit. Stud. Rev. 2007, 14, 40–54.
  22. Klapper, L.; Love, I. The impact of business environment reforms on new firm registration. Policy Res. Work. Pap. 2010, 49, 5493.
  23. Ghosh, I. The Relation between Trade and FDI in Developing Countries—A Panel Data Approach. Glob. Econ. J. 2007, 7, 3.
  24. Hossain, M.T.; Hassan, Z.; Shafiq, S.; Basit, A. Ease of Doing Business and Its Impact on Inward FDI. Indones. J. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2018, 1, 52–65. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326588273_Ease_of_Doing_Business_and_Its_Impact_on_Inward_FDI (accessed on 29 November 2021).
  25. Žylius, R.; Basheka, B.C. Insights on the Relevance of World Bank Doing Business Reports and the Recommendations for Improvement. Indones. J. Manag. Bus. Econ. 2018, 1, 52–65. Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3219641 (accessed on 29 November 2021).
  26. Khan, H.; Metaxoglou, K.; Knittel, C.R.; Papineau, M. Carbon emissions and business cycles. J. Macroecon. 2019, 60, 1–19.
  27. Alesina, A.S.; Ardagna, G.N.; Schiantarelli, F. Regulation and investment. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 2005, 3, 791–825.
  28. Klapper, L.; Laeven, L.; Rajan, R. Entry regulation as a barrier to entrepreneurship. J. Financ. Econ. 2006, 82, 591–629.
  29. Barseghyan, L. Entry costs and cross-country differences in productivity and output. J. Econ. Growth 2008, 13, 145–167.
  30. Bruhn, M. License to sell: The effect of business registration reform on entrepreneurial activity in Mexico. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2011, 93, 382–386.
  31. Djankov, S.; McLiesh, C.; Ramalho, R. Regulation and Growth. Econ. Lett. 2006, 92, 395–401.
  32. Gillanders, R.; Whelan, K. Open for Business? Institutions, Business Environment and Economic Development. Int. Rev. Soc. Sci. 2014, 67, 535–558.
  33. Djankov, S.; Freund, C.; Pham, C. Trading on time. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2010, 92, 166–173.
  34. Lawless, M. Tax Complexity and Inward Investment. Research Technical Papers 5/RT/09. Central Bank of Ireland. 2009. Available online: https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/publications/research-technical-papers/5rt09---tax-complexity-and-inward-investment-(lawless).pdf?sfvrsn=4 (accessed on 29 November 2021).
  35. Jayasuriya, D. Improvements in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Rankings: Do They Translate into Greater Foreign Direct Investment Inflows? Policy Res. 2011, 8, 5787.
  36. Bhatia, A.; Tuli, S. Sustainability reporting: An empirical evaluation of emerging and developed economies. J. Glob. Responsib. 2018, 9, 207–234.
  37. Khanna, T.; Palepu, K.G. Winning in Emerging Markets: A Road Map for Strategy and Execution; Harvard Business Review Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2010.
  38. Chipalkatti, N.; Le, Q.V.; Rishi, M. Sustainability and Society: Do Environmental, Social, and Governance Factors Matter for Foreign Direct Investment? Energies 2021, 14, 6039.
  39. Dunning, J.H. Towards an eclectic theory of international production: Some empirical tests. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 1980, 11, 9–31.
  40. Duro, A.; Piccione, V.; Ragusa, M.A.; Veneziano, V. New Enviromentally Sensitive Patch Index—ESPI—For MEDALUS protocol. AIP Conf. Proc. 2014, 1637, 305–312.
  41. Teotónio, I.; Oliveira Cruz, C.; Matos Silva, C.; Morais, J. Investing in Sustainable Built Environments: The Willingness to Pay for Green Roofs and Green Walls. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3210.
  42. Zachariadis, T. Assessment of sustainable transport policies with an energy–economy–environment model. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology, Rhodes, Greece, 1–3 September 2005; pp. A1659–A1664.
  43. Dunning, J.H.; Lundan, S.M. Institutions and the OLI paradigm of the multinational enterprise. Asia Pac. J. Manag. 2008, 25, 573–593.
  44. Donaubauer, J.; Meyer, B.; Nunnenkamp, P. Aid, Infrastructure, and FDI: Assessing the transmission channel with a new index of infrastructure. World Dev. 2016, 78, 230–245.
  45. North, D.C. Economic performance through time. Am. Econ. Rev. 1994, 84, 359–368. Available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2118057 (accessed on 29 November 2021).
  46. Herrera-Echeverri, H.; Haar, J.; Estevez-Breton, J.B. Foreign direct investment, institutional quality, economic freedom and entrepreneurship in emerging markets. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 1921–1932.
  47. Sanchez-Martın, M.E.; de Arce, R.; Escribano, G. Do changes in the rules of the game affect FDI flows in Latin America? A look at the macroeconomic, institutional and regional integration determinants of FDI. Eur. J. Political Econ. 2014, 34, 279–299.
  48. Zhang, J. Foreign Direct Investment, Governance, and the Environment in China; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2014.
  49. Godinez, J.R.; Liu, L. Corruption distance and FDI flows into Latin America. Int. Bus. Rev. 2015, 24, 33–42.
  50. World Bank. World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Rankings. 2021. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/ (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  51. Olival, A.I.D.N. The influence of Doing Business’ Institutional Variables in Foreign Direct Investment; GEE Papers; Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos, Ministério da Economia: Madeira, Portugal, 2012.
  52. Piwonski, K. Does the ‘Ease of Doing Business in a Country Influence its Foreign Direct Investment Inflows? Bryant University: Smithfiled, VA, USA, 2010; Available online: https://digitalcommons.bryant.edu/honors_finance/13/ (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  53. Globerman, S.; Shapiro, D. Governance infrastructure and US foreign direct investment. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2003, 34, 19–39.
  54. Azam, M.; Khan, H.; Hunjra, A.I.; Ahmad, H.M.; Chani, D.; Irfan, M. Institutional, Macro Economic Policy Factors and Foreign Direct Investment: South Asian Countries Case. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2011, 5, 4306–4313. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1888565 (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  55. Mahuni, K.; Bonga, W.G. Nexus between Doing Business Indicators and Foreign Direct Investment for Zimbabwe: A Time Series Analysis. J. Econ. Financ. 2017, 2, 1–8. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314095383_Nexus_Between_Doing_Business_Indicators_and_Foreign_Direct_Investment_for_Zimbabwe_A_Time_Series_Analysis (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  56. Sethi, D.; Guisinger, S.E.; Phelan, S.E.; Berg, D.M. Trends in foreign direct investment flows: A theoretical and empirical analysis. J. Int. Bus. Stud. 2003, 34, 315–326.
  57. Vogiatzoglou, K. Ease of Doing Business and FDI Inflows in ASEAN. J. Southeast Asian Econ. 2016, 33, 343–363.
  58. Shahadan, F.; Sarmidi, T.; Faizi, F.J. Relationships between Doing Business Indexes and FDI Net Inflows: Empirical Evidence from Six Asian Countries (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Iran, Pakistan and Sri Lanka). Prosiding Persidangan Kebangsaan Ekonomi. 2014. Available online: https://www.ukm.my/fep/perkem/pdf/perkem2014/PERKEM_2014_4B5.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  59. Bersan, H.; Merovci, S.; Hetemi, A. The Impact of the Ease Doing Business Indicators on Foreign Direct Investment in the European Transition Economies. Ekonomika 2019, 98, 19–32.
  60. Azman-Saini, W.N.W.; Law, S.H.; Ahmad, A.H. FDI and economic growth: New evidence on the role of financial markets. Econ. Lett. 2010, 107, 211–213.
  61. Becker, J.; Fuest, C.; Riedel, N. Corporate tax effects on the quality and quantity of FDI. Eur. Econ. Rev. 2012, 56, 1495–1511.
  62. Bayraktar, N. Importance of investment climates for inflows of foreign direct investment in developing countries. Bus. Econ. Res. 2015, 5, 24–50.
  63. Carstensen, K.; Toubal, F. Foreign direct investment in Central and Eastern European countries: A dynamic panel analysis. J. Comp. Econ. 2004, 32, 3–22.
  64. Göndör, M.; Nistor, P. Fiscal policy and foreign direct investment: Evidence from some emerging EU economies. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 58, 1256–1266.
  65. Anderson, J.; Gonzales, A. Does Doing Business Matter for Foreign Direct Investment? Doing Business 2013 Report; The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
  66. Hermes, N.; Lensink, R. Foreign direct investment, financial development and economic growth. J. Dev. Stud. 2003, 40, 142–163.
  67. Bellak, C.; Leibrecht, M. Do low corporate income tax rates attract FDI? Evidence from Central- and East European countries. Appl. Econ. 2009, 41, 2691–2703.
  68. Ge, Y.; Hu, Y.; Ren, S. Environmental Regulation and Foreign Direct Investment: Evidence from China’s Eleventh and Twelfth Five-Year Plans. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2528.
  69. Walter, I.; Ugelow, J.L. Environmental Policies in Developing Countries. AMBIO 1979, 8, 102–109.
  70. Keller, W.; Levinson, A. Pollution Abatement Costs and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows to U.S. States. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2002, 84, 691–703.
  71. Chung, S. Environmental regulation and foreign direct investment: Evidence from South Korea. J. Dev. Econ. 2014, 108, 222–236.
  72. Cai, X.; Lu, Y.; Wu, M.; Yu, L. Do environmental regulations drive away inbound foreign direct investment? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China. J. Dev. Econ. 2016, 123, 73–85.
  73. Ghinamo, M.; Panteghini, P.M.; Revelli, F. FDI determination and corporate tax competition in a volatile world. Int. Tax Public Finance 2010, 17, 532–555.
  74. Hatmanu, M.; Sandu, C.B.; Jaba, E. A Comparative Study on Drivers for Corporate Environmental Responsibility, EU15 vs. EU-NMS13. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6397.
  75. Dicu, R.M.; Robu, I.-B.; Aevoae, G.-M.; Mardiros, D.-N. Rethinking the Role of M&As in Promoting Sustainable Development: Empirical Evidence Regarding the Relation between the Audit Opinion and the Sustainable Performance of the Romanian Target Companies. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8622.
  76. Morgan, J.P. Why COVID-19 Could Be a Major Turning Point for ESG Investing. 2020. Available online: https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/research/covid-19-esg-investing (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  77. Joysri, A. FDI, Growth and the Environment: Evidence from India on CO2 Emission during the Last Two Decades. J. Econ. Dev. 2009, 34, 43. Available online: http://www.jed.or.kr/full-text/34-1/3.pdf (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  78. Ahmed, K.; Qazi, A.Q. Environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 emission in Mongolia: An empirical analysis. Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 2014, 25, 8–79.
  79. Silva Concalves, V.A.; Santos, F.J. Energy management system ISO 50001:2011 and energy management for sustainable development. Energy Policy. 2019, 133, 110868.
  80. Meinshausen, M.; Meinshausen, N.; Hare, W.; Raper, S.C.B.; Frieler, K.; Knutti, R.; Frame, D.J.; Allen, M.R. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 2009, 458, 1158–1162.
  81. Rogelj, J.; McCollum, D.L.; Reisinger, A.; Meinshausen, M.; Riahi, K. Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation. Nature 2013, 493, 79–83.
  82. Castan Broto, V. Urban governance and the politics of climate change. World Dev. 2017, 93, 1–15.
  83. Abid, M. Impact of economic, financial, and institutional factors on CO2 emissions: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa economies. Util. Policy 2016, 41, 85–94.
  84. Tamazian, A.; Rao, B.B. Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies. Energy Econ. 2010, 32, 137–145.
  85. Rieger, A. Doing Business and Increasing Emissions? An Exploratory Analysis of the Impact of Business Regulation on CO₂ Emissions. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 2019, 25, 69–86. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26964340 (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  86. Chunling, L.; Memon, J.A.; Thanh, T.L.; Ali, M.; Kirikkaleli, D. The Impact of Public-Private Partnership Investment in Energy and Technological Innovation on Ecological Footprint: The Case of Pakistan. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10085.
  87. Jiang, Z.; Lyu, P.; Ye, L.; Wenqian, Z.Y. Green innovation transformation, economic sustainability and energy consumption during China’s new normal stage. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 123044.
  88. Liddle, B. Consumption-based accounting and the trade-carbon emissions nexus in Asia: A heterogeneous, common factor panel analysis. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3627.
  89. Wen, H.; Dai, J. The Change of Sources of Growth and Sustainable Development in China: Based on the Extended EKC Explanation. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2803.
  90. Kurniawan, R.; Managi, S. Economic Growth and Sustainable Development in Indonesia: An Assessment. Bull. Indones. Econ. Stud. 2018, 54, 339–361.
  91. Qichang, X.; Xingyu, W.; Xiaoping, C. How does foreign direct investment affect CO2 emissions in emerging countries? New findings from a nonlinear panel analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 249, 119422.
  92. Zeeshan, K.; Muhsin, A.; Dervis, K.; Salman, W.; Zhilun, J. The impact of technological innovation and public-private partnership investment on sustainable environment in China: Consumption-based carbon emissions analysis. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1313–1330.
  93. Zahoor, A.; Michael, C.; Sajid, A.; Muntasir, M.; Hamid, U.; Haider, M. Moving toward a green revolution in Japan: Symmetric and asymmetric relationships among clean energy technology development investments, economic growth, and CO2 emissions. Energy Environ. 2021, 89, 379–399.
  94. Gang, C.; Changjuan, Z.; Najaf, I.; Ozge, G.; Hayriye, I.; Dervis, K. Does energy productivity and public-private investment in energy achieve carbon neutrality target of China? J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 298, 1–7.
  95. FTSE Russell Classification, Equity Country Classification. 2021. Available online: https://www.ftserussell.com/equity-country-classification (accessed on 30 November 2021).
  96. EUROSTAT Database, Europe 2020 Indicators. 2021. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/data/database (accessed on 30 November 2021).
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback