IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v19y2001i6p953-973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

US county-level determinants of inbound FDI: evidence from a two-step modified count data model

Author

Listed:
  • List, John A.

Abstract

We employ a two-step modified count data model to determine the county-level attributes that are conducive to attracting new foreign plants. Our estimation results indicate that previous counts of foreign direct investment, market size and accessibility, and land area are positively related to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) occurrences; while higher input costs deter new foreign firm entry. Contrary to anecdotal evidence, our results suggest that stringent environmental regulations do not have a negative impact on FDI inflows. These findings have significant implications for policymakers, as flows of FDI are expected to increase dramatically given the economic integration of our global economy.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • List, John A., 2001. "US county-level determinants of inbound FDI: evidence from a two-step modified count data model," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 953-973, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:19:y:2001:i:6:p:953-973
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-7187(99)00051-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Virginia D. McConnell & Robert M. Schwab, 1990. "The Impact of Environmental Regulation on Industry Location Decisions: The Motor Vehicle Industry," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 66(1), pages 67-81.
    2. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    3. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    4. Bruce A. Blonigen & Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "Protectionist Threats and Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Chapters,in: The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 55-80 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Papke, Leslie E., 1991. "Interstate business tax differentials and new firm location : Evidence from panel data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 47-68, June.
    6. John A. List & Mitch Kunce, 2000. "Environmental Protection and Economic Growth: What Do the Residuals Tell Us?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 267-282.
    7. Henderson, J Vernon, 1996. "Effects of Air Quality Regulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 789-813, September.
    8. List, John A & Shogren, Jason F, 1998. "The Deadweight Loss of Christmas: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1350-1355, December.
    9. Coughlin, Cletus C & Terza, Joseph V & Arromdee, Vachira, 1991. "State Characteristics and the Location of Foreign Direct Investment within the United States," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(4), pages 675-683, November.
    10. Levinson, Arik, 1996. "Environmental regulations and manufacturers' location choices: Evidence from the Census of Manufactures," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 5-29, October.
    11. Robert Tannenwald, 1997. "State regulatory policy and economic development," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Mar, pages 83-108.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:indorg:v:19:y:2001:i:6:p:953-973. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505551 .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.