Determinants of foreign direct investment: empirical evidence from EU accession candidates
AbstractThis study examines bilateral foreign direct investments (FDI) between the members of the European Union and eight central and east European candidate (CEEC) economies in transition, awaiting accession into the European Union (EU). Cross-section data were obtained for Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovak Republic, and Slovenia for 1997. Once the main characteristics of FDI recipient and donor nations are identified in a bilateral framework, it will be feasible to predict future FDI inflows. This study reveals that the key determinants of FDI inflows in CEECs are size of the host economy, host country risk, labour costs in host country, and openness to trade. Countries that are receiving fewer foreign investments could make themselves more attractive to potential donor nations by focusing on some of the key determinants identified by this study.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Economics.
Volume (Year): 36 (2004)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Claudia M. Buch & Robert M. Kokta & Daniel Piazolo, 2001. "Does the East Get What Would Otherwise Flow to the South? FDI Diversion in Europe," Kiel Working Papers 1061, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- Ray Barrell & Dawn Holland, 2000. "Foreign Direct Investment and Enterprise Restructuring in Central Europe," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(2), pages 477-504, July.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.