Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

International Competitiveness Impacts of FDI in CEECs


Author Info

  • Gabor Hunya

    (The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw)


This paper follows the definition of international competitiveness of countries (nations) as defined by Trabold (1995) including the ability to sell, the ability to attract FDI and the ability to adjust - all these leading to the ability to earn. These components can be measured by specific economic indicators and brought into relationship with FDI and the performance of foreign affiliates in a country. The analysis focuses on five transition countries Estonia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovenia (CEEC?5). These are the most advanced among the transition countries in terms of per capita GDP, FDI penetration and economic transformation. This paper contributes to the discussion on competitiveness by going through a number of industry competitiveness indicators attracting FDI, foreign penetration of industries, productivity levels and development, market shares in the EU. In order to measure the influence of FDI on the competitiveness in manufacturing, a unique database was set up based on company balance sheets in the five countries. The economic performance of the foreign affiliates could be compared with that of domestic enterprises. The highest share of FIEs (foreign investment enterprises) by all indicators was reached by Hungary in each year between 1993 and 1998. 70% of manufacturing sales came from FIEs, which employed 45% of the manufacturing labour force in 1998. The second place is occupied by Poland with 41% of sales and 26% of employment. The Czech Republic ranks third, with 32% and 20% respectively. The difference between Hungary on the one hand and the Czech Republic and Poland on the other was three times in 1994 and narrowed to two times in 1998. The most dynamic increase was recorded in the Czech Republic. In Slovenia and Estonia, foreign penetration is lower and increased more slowly than in the other countries. The positive link between foreign penetration and various components of international competitiveness holds true both at the aggregate and the sectoral levels. It is obvious that the activity of a strong foreign sector in manufacturing increases international competitiveness. In 1994-1998 GDP growth, productivity growth, structural change and profit rates were higher in countries with a stronger presence of FDI. The deeper the foreign penetration, the faster was the speed of structural change Hungary was first, followed by the Czech Republic and Poland in the period 1996?1998. This is relevant both for the change in the output structure and the country's exports to the EU. The size and industry distribution of foreign penetration depends on industry-specific features and on the characteristics of the privatization policy. The foreign presence remained relatively small in branches with great structural difficulties and oversized capacities, such as the steel industry. Privatization is not enough to set restructuring of these industries in motion. Sectoral policy and financial restructuring is necessary to make companies attractive for foreign take?overs. A duality between foreign- and domestic-dominated industries appeared in all countries and has been growing over time. It can be observed between modern, foreign-dominated industries on the one hand and traditional industries with both domestic and foreign companies on the other. It is also present as a foreign-domestic gap within the industries with both foreign and domestic companies. The dichotomy of productivity and profit rates between the foreign- and the domestic-owned companies in one and the same industry is largest in Hungary and smallest in Slovenia. In Slovenia the balanced relationship between the domestic and the foreign sector is coupled with a low average rate of foreign penetration and a relatively low presence of technology-intensive industries. The small gap between the foreign and the domestic sector may indicate a slow rate of technological progress and not spill?overs.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL:
File Function: Order URL / Description
Download Restriction: Only to order

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw in its series wiiw Research Reports with number 268.

as in new window
Length: 34 pages including 17 Tables
Date of creation: Aug 2000
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published as wiiw Research Report
Handle: RePEc:wii:rpaper:rr:268

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Rahlgasse 3, A-1060 Vienna
Phone: (+43-1) 533 66 10
Fax: (+43-1) 533 66 10-50
Web page:
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:

Related research

Keywords: foreign direct investment; competitiveness; CEECs; manufacturing; economic policy;

Find related papers by JEL classification:


No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.


Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Svetla Boneva, 2005. "Classification of the Main Economic Costs and Benefits of the EU Enlargement," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 1, pages 86-99.
  2. Ivan Angelov, 2001. "Positive and Negative Effects from the Integration of Bulgaria to European Union," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 24-61.
  3. Urmas Varblane, 2001. "Flows of foreign direct investments in the Estonian economy," University of Tartu - Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia), in: Foreign Direct Investments in the Estonian Economy, volume 9, chapter 1, pages 1-30 Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Tartu (Estonia).
  4. Hubert Gabrisch & Maria Luigia Segnana, 2002. "Intra-industry trade between European Union and Transition Economies. Does income distribution matter?," IWH Discussion Papers, Halle Institute for Economic Research 155, Halle Institute for Economic Research.
  5. Yusaf Akbar & Sonia Ferencikova, 2007. "Industrial Clustering and Global Value Chains in Central and Eastern Europe: Role of Multinational Enterprises in Industrial Upgrading," Prague Economic Papers, University of Economics, Prague, University of Economics, Prague, vol. 2007(3), pages 237-251.
  6. Carmen Nastase & Carmen Chasovschi & Mariana Lupan, 2008. "Investment And Innovation In Support Of Rural Development In Romania," Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, Faculty of Sciences, "1 Decembrie 1918" University, Alba Iulia, vol. 2(10), pages 15.
  7. Anna Wziatek-Kubiak, 2006. "On Essence and Masurement of Changes in Competitiveness of the Accession Countries. Critical Review of Literature," CASE Network Studies and Analyses, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research 0321, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
  8. Jutta G√ľnther, 2002. "The significance of FDI for innovation activities within domestic firms - The case of Central East European transition economies," IWH Discussion Papers, Halle Institute for Economic Research 162, Halle Institute for Economic Research.
  9. Olivera Kostoska & Pece Mitrevski, 2013. "Estimating the FDI Impact on Economic Growth and Export Performances of the European Economies in Transition," Papers, 1310.1342,


This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


Access and download statistics


When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wii:rpaper:rr:268. See general 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: (Customer service).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.