Outward Foreign Direct Investments as a Catalyst of Urban-Regional Income Development? Evidence from the United States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Challenging populist views of outward foreign direct investments (OFDIs) that suggest they move prosperity abroad, this article builds a model suggesting that OFDIs support urban-regional income levels due to (1) labor; (2) knowledge; and (3) multiplier, spillover, and intermediate input effects. In a panel study of median incomes in US urban regions between 2005 and 2013, we first establish a base model that measures income as a function of local factor endowments (high skill levels, fast-growing and technologically sophisticated industries, and urban scale effects). This base model is highly significant. In the next step, we extend this model by adding our main variables of greenfield inward and outward investment intensity, and finally we integrate other indicators that measure the geographic, industrial, and functional composition of OFDIs. While the results for other investment-related indicators are mixed, the main investment variables are highly significant, thus providing strong support that greenfield OFDIs act as a catalyst of urban-regional income development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it