MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W850399859

Foreign Direct Investment Decisions of Multinational Companies

2014· article· en· W850399859 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ayşe Yüce, Mauricio Zelaya

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of global business and technology · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueInternational Business and FDI
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésForeign direct investmentMultinational corporationForeign portfolio investmentLiberian dollarBusinessReturn on investmentGreenfield projectEconomicsOpen-ended investment companyFinanceProfit (economics)Macroeconomics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)INTRODUCTIONIn the last three decades, globalization and international investment by both companies and individual investors have increased tremendously. Although investing in new projects by foreigners is evaluated favourably by local governments and public, acquisitions of local companies by foreign companies and individuals are generally evaluated as bad news. It is very timely to examine how inward and outward foreign direct investments affect local economy also how these investments affect performance of multinational companies that make these decisions. OCO Monitor, FDI Markets database reports that 4.49 trillion U.S dollar has been invested in foreign direct investment projects in the entire world and 13,490,875 new jobs have been created since 2003. At the same period 58,204 total projects have been recorded.This paper examines what factors affect multinational companies in their foreign direct investment projects. What will be the effect on profits of the companies? Do they manage the projects effectively and increase their return on investment after these projects? The paper is organized as follows: Section II shows the previous studies, Section III investigates the characteristics of the all foreign direct investment projects between 2003 and 2008. In Section IV, we show how different factors affect size of the company foreign direct investments. In Section V, we examine the important variables that influence foreign direct investment decisions. Effects of foreign direct investment on company performances before, during and after the foreign direct investment are analyzed in Section VI. We conclude the paper in Section VII.PREVIOUS STUDIESWe can classify foreign direct investment research into four different areas: those papers that concentrate on the motivations of foreign direct investment, studies that examine the location choices of the foreign direct investment, technology spillovers of inward foreign direct investment and finally individual country studies.Market access, access to high technological environment, cheap labour and resources are the most cited factors that motivate companies for foreign direct investment (Makino, Lau and Yeh (2002), Chan, Makino and Isobe (2006), Cheng (2006)).There exist many country-level studies that directly examine the foreign direct investments in a specific country or in a region. Contractor (1984) finds strategy and entry choices by U.S. multinationals are influenced by both country factors and industry characteristics. Grosse and Trevino (1996) find that bilateral trade, home country GDP and the exchange rate affect foreign direct investment into USA.Baneiji and Sambharya (1996) show that keiretsu affiliation, previous experience and higher dependence of core firms on affiliate firms, contributed to foreign direct investment decision of Japanese firms. Buckley, Clegg and Wang (2007) study both the inward and outward foreign direct investment of China to conclude that it is very important to reform the state-owned enterprises to obtain full benefits of inward foreign direct investments. Hejazi and Pauly( 2003) conclude that Canadian foreign direct investment is motivated by market access, price differences, and intra-firm trade.Harris and Ravenscraft (1991) find in their study that the majority of cross-border takeovers are in the research and development industries, whereby almost three fourths of the cross-border transactions between buyer and seller are in the same industry. Furthermore, their studies conclude that higher wealth gains are made by purchasing foreign firms than American firms. Chang and Chang (2012) examine the performance of international greenfield investments by U.S. firms and conclude that these investments can create value when they involve entering a host country for the first time or entering a developing country.Foreign direct investment in the financial industry is investigated by Moshirian (2001) by developing a model for banking industry in the US, UK and Germany. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,547
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,386

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,235
Écart entre enseignants0,222 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of global business and technologyMême sujetInternational Business and FDITravaux en français237 207