The picture often painted is that foreign capital inflows in China and India are prominently linked to rapid growth at the national level, and contribute to widening income disparities at the provincial/state level. In this paper we revisit Krugman’s (1993) contention that foreign capital can hardly be considered an important income growth driver, when in most developing countries it only accounts for a fractional share of gross capital formation. In the case of contemporary China and India, the data suggests that Krugman’s critique holds largely true, even in the coastal regions that are considered magnets for foreign investment. Thus, domestic factors, rather than the driving forces of globalization, appear to be the more important determinants of income growth in both countries.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia in its series EAERG Discussion Paper Series with number
0405.
References listed on IDEAS 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.: