Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Direct Investment Political Geography United States of America

1. Untethered Sentiments: How Politics, Visibility, Perception, and Demographic Differences Shape American Views on Foreign Investment and Trade

Author:
Je Heon (James) Kim and Nils Wollesen Osterberg
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
The key takeaways from this study are as follows: 1. Impact of Perception on Foreign Investment Attitudes: The study finds that individual perceptions of FDI at the state level play a crucial role in shaping attitudes toward investment. Individuals who perceive high Korean FDI or states where Korean FDI has more visibility tend to have more favorable views toward foreign investment compared to those in states with low FDI or visibility of such investments. This finding highlights the importance of strategic communication and visibility in shaping public perceptions of foreign investment. Simply increasing investment is not enough; companies and governments must actively promote their contributions to local economic growth and job creation to gain broader public support. 2. Variation in Support Based on Country of Origin: While most Americans view foreign investments as beneficial, attitudes differ based on the investing country’s origin. Investments from South Korea, Japan, and Germany, for instance, are viewed more favorably than investments from China and Russia. 3. Political and Ideological Divides in Trade and Tariff Attitudes: The data reveals partisan differences regarding trade and tariffs. According to our data, a substantial majority of Republicans—at the time of this survey—favor tariffs, mirroring their party leader’s policies. Meanwhile, a minority of Democrats expressed similar support for the use of tariffs. 4. Dissonance on Trade and Tariffs: Despite broad support for U.S. participation in international trade, a significant portion of respondents also favor maintaining or increasing tariffs, suggesting support for the theoretical benefits of trade and protectionism. Evidence suggests that partisan or ideological drivers may be at work. 5. Demographic Influences on Trade and Investment Opinions: Factors such as gender, age, income, and education significantly impact trade attitudes. Younger individuals, higher-income earners, and those with higher education levels are more supportive of open trade, while lower-income and older individuals are more skeptical. 6. Reciprocity as a Key Factor in Investment Policy Preferences: Many Americans favor restrictions on inbound foreign investment unless similar restrictions are removed for U.S. investments abroad, highlighting the importance of the reciprocal approach to trade and investment policies. 7. Limited Influence of Job Creation on Investment Preferences: While respondents recognize that foreign investments create jobs, this factor alone does not significantly sway opinions on investment restrictions, as other economic and political considerations often take precedence. 8. Defense Industrial Cooperation and Export Control Concerns: A majority of respondents support maintaining or increasing restrictions on defense-related industrial cooperation, emphasizing national security concerns over economic benefits from defense-related investments and trade.
Topic:
Politics, Science and Technology, Foreign Direct Investment, Trade, and Economic Security
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. Mild Deglobalization: Foreign Investment Screening and Cross-Border Investment

Author:
Vera Z. Eichenauer and Feicheng Wang
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
Openness to foreign investments is associated with risks. To mitigate these risks, many high-income countries have strengthened the control of foreign investments over the last decade in an increasing number of sectors considered critical. Investment screening distorts the market for cross-border investments in controlled sectors, which might lead to unintended economic effects. This is the first cross-country panel study to examine the economic effects of investment screening mechanisms. We combine deal-level data on cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&A) for the period 2007–2022 with information on sectoral investment screening. Using a staggered triple difference design, we estimate a reduction of 11.7 to 16.0 percent in the number of M&A in a newly screened sector. The effects are driven by minority acquisitions and deals involving a foreign government or state-owned enterprises or US firms as investors. There is no reduction in the number of deals within the EU/EFTA, most of which are not subject to screening. The findings call policymakers’ attention to weighing the benefits of national security and the economic costs of introducing investment screening.
Topic:
Globalization, International Trade and Finance, National Security, Foreign Direct Investment, Investment, Geoeconomics, Global Capital Allocation, and Deglobalization
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and United States of America

3. Foreign Direct Investment, Brand Value, and Economic Performance: A Multinational Analysis

Author:
Tuba Yıldız, Ünal Arslan, Zeynep Ökten, Yıldız Sağlam Çelıköz, and Hale Kırmızıoğlu
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Istanbul Journal of Economics
Institution:
Istanbul University Faculty of Economics
Abstract:
The visibility and dependability of multinational corporations’ products increase with the fact that they introduce their goods to markets in other nations through foreign direct investments. The method for presenting products to international markets through foreign direct investments reveals the product’s reputation and therefore the brand’s development value. This study examines the relationship between foreign direct investments and brand value in Australia, Canada, China, France, India, Japan, Spain, the USA, and the UK for the period 2007-2023. The majority of studies in the literature attempt to explain the impact of brand value on foreign direct investments. However, very few studies explain the impac foreign direct investments on brand value and 1st generation unit root tests were generally used. Unlike existing studies, In this study, the second-generation unit root test, Durbin-Hausman cointegration, and Common Correlated Effects Mean Group estimation methods were used. As a result, it is anticipated that this study will contribute to the literature in this regard. The findings show that increases in foreign direct investments boost brand value.
Topic:
Economics, Foreign Direct Investment, Multinational Corporations, Data, and Branding
Political Geography:
Japan, China, United Kingdom, Canada, India, France, Spain, Australia, Global Focus, and United States of America

4. Assessing Digital Leadership: Is the EU Losing out to the US?

Author:
Dario Guarascio and Roman Stöllinger
Publication Date:
03-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
Since Leontief’s (1953) seminal work on the factor content of trade, the validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin-model has been judged not only on the basis of formal tests of the theory but also tested against prior expectation. In this vein, this paper uses the Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) approach to investigate whether supposed US leadership in the digital domain can be traced back to digital task endowments embodied in labour services. In a comparison between EU member states and the US, we find that the latter is more intensive in digital tasks than the EU and that this difference is explained by both an intensity-effect (US occupations being more digital-task intensive) and a structural component (relatively more digital-task intensive occupations). Viewed through the lens of the HOV theorem we find that the US is abundant in digital tasks relative to non-digital tasks, while the opposite is true for the EU. The standard tests for the predictive power of the HOV theorem are high and in line with the results for labour in previous literature.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Foreign Direct Investment, European Union, Digitalization, and Competition
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

5. Reshuffling Value Chains - South Korea as a Case Study

Author:
Françoise Nicolas
Publication Date:
04-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institut français des relations internationales (IFRI)
Abstract:
Despite all the talks about the reshuffling of value-chains and the trend to a form of industrial “Desinicization” (or decoupling/disengagement from China), the example of South Korea does not vindicate such assertions. The expansion of Korean direct investment in neighboring countries such as China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) remains a reality and it has not changed in any fundamental way over the past two decades. South Korean companies’ decisions to locate in one country rather than another are still very much based on cost factors, even if security considerations are increasingly factored in. Similarly, reshoring, which has been high on the South Korean government’s agenda for a long time, remains a marginal phenomenon for South Korean companies, despite the incentives provided. Rather than the relocation of production (in the form of reshoring or nearshoring) South Korean companies have turned to more unexpected options, such as the development of complementarity-based partnerships or vertically-integrated production networks with commodity suppliers, as in the case of the production of rare earth-based magnets. Such a strategy is likely to become more popular in the future, as it nicely combines economic and security considerations. Without a doubt, due to the highly politicized nature of the technology involved, the semiconductor industry is the one undergoing the most significant changes. In a context of rising Sino-US rivalry, the US has ramped up pressures on China with far-reaching consequences, leading South Korean semiconductor companies (with the support of the government) to engage in a strategy combining relocation to the US and onshoring in South Korea. While the economic logic is likely to prevail in most sectors thus limiting the scope for supply chain reshuffling, the examples of the semiconductor and rare earth-based magnets suggest that important changes can still be expected in the future in industries that are deemed strategic.
Topic:
Foreign Direct Investment, Supply Chains, Value Chains, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

6. The Great Supply Chain Shift from China to South Asia?

Author:
Ganeshan Wignaraja
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations
Abstract:
Global supply chains connect world industry and international trade in manufactures. East Asia’s dominance with China as the preferred assembly hub in global supply chains has brought unprecedented regional prosperity, but South Asia remains a latecomer. However, pandemic-related and post-pandemic continuing disruptions to supply chains and slowing growth are being keenly felt, dampening China’s attractiveness. In an uncertain global economy, increasingly footloose foreign investors are looking for alternative production locations. Is it South Asia’s turn to prosper through supply chains in this uncertain world? This is the topical public policy question facing India and the others in South Asia. This paper discusses the concept of global supply chains, the industrial rise of East Asia, drivers of supply chain relocation from China, South Asia’s prospects, India as a complementary hub and policy lessons from East Asia’s industrial success. For the purposes of this paper, South Asia is broadly defined as the India and its contiguous countries: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Monetary Policy, Foreign Direct Investment, Industrialization, COVID-19, Supply Chains, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
China, South Asia, Asia, Southeast Asia, and United States of America

7. The US–Italy Economic Relations in a Divided World

Author:
Adriana Castagnoli
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In 2021, bilateral trade returned to the sustained pace it had prior to the Covid pandemic. Direct investment also grew – crucially, not just Italian investment in the United States but the other way round too. While Italy’s economic ties with Russia and China remain potential hotspots, Rome has never questioned its Atlantic orientation. Nevertheless, possible austerity policies following sanctions against Russia could spread social discontent that populist parties can exploit for consensus purposes in the 2023 general election, rekindling anti-Americanism rooted in different segments of Italian society.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Foreign Direct Investment, Economic Policy, Trade, and Energy
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Italy, and United States of America

8. China’s FDI in Europe and Europe’s Policy Response

Author:
Pyoung Seob Yang, Cheol-Won Lee, Suyeob Na, Taehyn Oh, Young Sun Kim, Hyung Jun Yoon, and Yoo-Duk Ga
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
China’s investment in the European Union (EU) increased significantly during the European financial crisis, but has been on the decline in recent years. The surge of Chinese investment has raised concerns and demands for analysis on the negative effects it could have on the EU companies and industries. In this context, the present study aims to analyze the main characteristics of Chinese investment and M&A in Europe, major policy issues between the two sides, the EU’s policy responses, and prospects of Chinese future investment in Eu-rope, going on to draw important lessons for Korea. To summarize the main characteristics of China's investment in Europe, the study found that the EU's share of China's overseas direct investment has continued to increase until recently. Second, investment in the Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) is gradually increasing, although it is still insignificant compared to the top five destinations in the EU: Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Luxembourg and France. Third, China's investment in the EU is being made in pursuit of innovation in manufacturing and to acquire high-tech technologies. When it comes to China's M&A in Europe, the study found that the proportion of indirect China's M&As (via third countries (e.g. Hong Kong) or Chinese subsidiaries already established in Europe) was relatively higher than direct ones. Empirical factor analysis of investment also shows that China's investment in the EU is strongly motivated by the pursuit of strategic assets. Other factors such as institutional-level and regulatory variables are found to have no significant impact, or have an effect contrary to expectations. This suggests that China's investment in the EU is based on the Chinese government's growth strategy, and accompanies an element of national capitalism Today, It is highly expected that the COVID-19 pandemic will have a reorganizing effect on the global value chain (GVC) and Foreign investment regulation in the high-tech sector motivated by national security is emerging as a global issue as the US and the EU are tightening their control. As Korean companies are not free from the risk of falling under such regulations, a thorough and careful response is required. And for the Korean government, it is necessary to prepare legal and institutional measures regulating foreign investment in reference to the US and the EU.
Topic:
Foreign Direct Investment, Financial Crisis, European Union, Economy, Economic Growth, Global Value Chains, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, Europe, Asia, Korea, and United States of America

9. The challenge to US hegemony and the “Gilpin Dilemma”

Author:
Giorgio Romano Schutte
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI)
Institution:
Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (IBRI)
Abstract:
This article makes a comparison between the challenges faced by the US to maintain its hegemonic position at the end of the 1970s and in the 2010s. To do so we review Robert Gilpin’s writing during the first period. He suggested the US had three options: 1) a defensive protectionist reaction 2) fragmentation of the international system 3) a new wave of innovation, (“rejuvenation”). It is argued that the Reagan administration was able to establish support for the third option. We argue the US is now faced with the same dilemma again, but with a different kind of challenger: China.
Topic:
Foreign Direct Investment, Hegemony, Conflict, and Innovation
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

10. Could a Bridge between the EU and Latin America Boost Innovation “Sovereignty” in a Multipolar World?

Author:
Nicola Bilotta and Alissa Siara
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The economic ramifications of COVID-19 will accentuate the technological innovation gap between Latin America and the rest of the world. In a region already suffering from chronic underinvestment in research and development, the strain placed on government budgets by the pandemic-induced economic crisis will push innovation further back down the agenda. The region has compensated for a lack of domestic resources with foreign capital and technology imports from China and the United States. As the US–China relationship becomes more adversarial in the face of COVID, however, Latin America will emerge as a geopolitical battleground whose countries may be forced to choose sides and potentially lose out on capital inflows or technology imports. Navigating this potential storm will involve the region in a search for other options. Public–private partnerships with European Union firms represent one valuable possibility, but Europe and Latin America should first align their innovation agendas.
Topic:
International Relations, Science and Technology, Sovereignty, Foreign Direct Investment, European Union, Institutions, Coronavirus, and Digital Policy
Political Geography:
China, South America, Latin America, North America, and United States of America