SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: "Cumhuriyet'in 100. Yılında Türkiye'nin Sosyo-Ekonomisi" Özel Sayısı

Causality between Foreign Direct Investment Outflows and Economic Fragility: A Study on Eight Fragile Economies

Doğrudan Yabancı Yatırım Çıkışları ile Ekonomik Kırılganlık Arasında Nedensellik: Sekiz Kırılgan Ekonomi Üzerine İnceleme

Abdulkadir Sezai EMEÇ
Ahmet KOLUMAN
Pages
74–88
Publication Date
2023-10-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results of the bootstrap panel causality analysis developed by Kónya (2006), the causality relationship between the variables representing economic fragility and FDI outflows is highest in Thailand and lowest in China.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to investigate the causality relationship between FDI outflows and economic fragility indicators in eight fragile economies (Argentina, Brazil, China, Colombia, India, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data set of the study, which covers the period 1995-2021, consists of FDI outflows and economic fragility indicators; consumer price index, central government debt/GDP, total reserves/foreign debt, M2/GDP, current account balance/GDP, domestic private sector loans provided by banks/GDP and total debt/exports.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results of the bootstrap panel causality analysis developed by Kónya (2006), the causality relationship between the variables representing economic fragility and FDI outflows is highest in Thailand and lowest in China.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2021 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar · ekonomik kırılganlık · Kónya nedensellik testi.

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the causality relationship between FDI outflows and economic fragility indicators in eight fragile economies (Argentina, Brazil, China, Colombia, India, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey). The data set of the study, which covers the period 1995-2021, consists of FDI outflows and economic fragility indicators; consumer price index, central government debt/GDP, total reserves/foreign debt, M2/GDP, current account balance/GDP, domestic private sector loans provided by banks/GDP and total debt/exports. According to the results of the bootstrap panel causality analysis developed by Kónya (2006), the causality relationship between the variables representing economic fragility and FDI outflows is highest in Thailand and lowest in China. The results show that there is no strong consensus on the direction of the causal relationship between economic fragility indicators and FDI outflows. Based on the findings of the study, it is recommended that each country should develop policies in line with its own internal dynamics.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, kırılgan sekiz ekonominin (Arjantin, Brezilya, Çin, Kolombiya, Hindistan, Güney Afrika, Tayland, Türkiye) doğrudan yabancı yatırım çıkışları ile ekonomik kırılganlık göstergeleri arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisini araştırmaktır. 1995-2021 dönemini kapsayan çalışmanın veri seti, doğrudan yabancı yatırım çıkışları ile ekonomik kırılganlık göstergesi olarak belirlenen; tüketici fiyat endeksi, merkezi hükümet borçları/gayrisafi yurt içi hâsıla, toplam rezerv/dış borç, M2/gayrisafi yurt içi hâsıla, cari işlemler dengesi/ gayrisafi yurt içi hâsıla, bankalar tarafından sağlanan yurtiçi özel sektör kredileri/ gayrisafi yurt içi hâsıla ve toplam borç/ihracat değişkenlerinden oluşmaktadır. Kónya (2006) tarafından geliştirilen bootstrap panel nedensellik analizi sonuçlarına göre; ekonomik kırılganlığı temsil eden değişkenler ile doğrudan yabancı yatırım çıkışları arasında nedensellik ilişkisi en çok Tayland’da, en az Çin’de görülmektedir. Araştırma sonuçları, ekonomik kırılganlık göstergeleri ile doğrudan yabancı yatırım çıkışları arasındaki nedensel ilişkinin yönü konusunda güçlü bir fikir birliği olmadığını göstermektedir. Çalışmanın bulgularına dayanarak her ülkenin kendi iç dinamiklerine uygun politika geliştirmesi önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

EMEÇ, A. S., KOLUMAN, A. (2023). Causality between Foreign Direct Investment Outflows and Economic Fragility: A Study on Eight Fragile Economies. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: "Cumhuriyet'in 100. Yılında Türkiye'nin Sosyo-Ekonomisi" Özel Sayısı, 74–88. https://ajindex.com/articles/971873

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Afonso, A. ve Rault, C. (2009). Bootstrap panel granger causality between government budget and external deficits for the EU. CESIFO Working Paper No. 2581. http://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/25655
  2. Al-Sadig, A. (2013). The effects of foreign direct investment on private domestic investment: evidence from developing countries. Empirical Economics, 44(3), 1267-1275. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00181-012-0569-1
  3. Amal, M., Raboch, H. ve Tomio, B. T. (2009). Strategies and determinants of foreign direct investment (FDI) from developing countries: Case study of Latin America. Latin American Business Review, 10(2-3), 73-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10978520903212532
  4. Baltagi, B. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data. (Third Edition). John Wiley ve Sons. Bennett, P. D. ve Green, R. T. (1972). Political instability as a determinant of direct foreign investment in marketing. Journal of Marketing Research, 9(2), 182-186. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377200900210
  5. Breusch, T. ve Pagan, A. (1980). The LM test and its application to model specification in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies 47, 239–254. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111
  6. Buckley, P.J., Clegg, L.J., Cross, A.R., Liu, X., Voss, H. ve Zheng, P. (2007). The determinants of Chinese outward foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(4), 499-518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400277
  7. Calvo, G. A., Leiderman, L. ve Reinhart, C. M. (1996). Inflows of capital to developing countries in the 1990s. Journal of economic perspectives, 10(2), 123-139. https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.10.2.123
  8. Chen, J. E. ve Zulkifli, S. A. M. (2012). Malaysian outward FDI and economic growth. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 65, 717-722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.189
  9. Chen, J. E., Chin, L., Law, S. H. ve Azman-Saini, W. N. W. (2016). Outward FDI and institutional factors: Malaysian experience. Journal of Emerging Economies and Islamic Research, 4(3), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.24191/jeeir.v4i3.9095
  10. Chudik A. ve Pesaran M. H. (2015). Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. Journal of Econometrics 188(2), 393-420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.03.007
  11. De Mello, L. (1997). FDI in developing countries and growth: A selective survey. Journal of Development Studies, 34(1), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220389708422501
  12. De Paula, L. F. R. ve Alves Jr, A. J. (2000). External