IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jed/journl/v34y2009i1p81-98.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation Under The Threat Of Direct Foreign Investment

Author

Listed:
  • Soma Roy

    (Department of Economics, Dum Dum Motijheel College)

  • Rajat Acharyya

    (Department of Economics, Jadavpur University)

Abstract

We examine the implication of direct and indirect foreign competition on domestic innovation decision. In most of the existing theoretical analyses the foreign firms are assumed to enter the domestic-country market as an exporter and thus are subject to a tariff duty imposed by the local government. We consider a broader setting where the foreign firm also has the option of setting up a production unit in the domestic country to supply output to the domestic country. This enables it to avoid the tariff that it faces due to export. Once we allow for such a strategy option for the foreign firm, competition becomes more direct and intense since tariffs no longer discount for the technological inferiority of home firms. We show that innovation by the home firm will be discouraged at high tariffs under the threat of DFI. Again at low tariff rates exports by the foreign firm make market competition more intense and reduce the incentive for innovation. Hence the home firm always (never) innovates at low (high) R&D cost whatever be the tariff rate. For intermediate R&D cost the home firm innovates if the foreign firm opts for exports.

Suggested Citation

  • Soma Roy & Rajat Acharyya, 2009. "Innovation Under The Threat Of Direct Foreign Investment," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 34(1), pages 81-98, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:jed:journl:v:34:y:2009:i:1:p:81-98
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jed.or.kr/full-text/34-1/6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neven, D. & Siotis, G., 1996. "Technology sourcing and FDI in the EC: An empirical evaluation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 543-560, July.
    2. Hubert, Florence & Pain, Nigel, 2001. "Inward Investment and Technical Progress in the United Kingdom Manufacturing Sector," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 48(2), pages 134-147, May.
    3. Bouet, Antoine, 2001. "Research and development, voluntary export restriction and tariffs," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 323-336, February.
    4. Clemenz, Gerhard, 1990. "International R&D competition and trade policy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1-2), pages 93-113, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    2. Guest Editors & Ana Teresa Tavares & Stephen Young, 2005. "FDI and multinationals: patterns, impacts and policies," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 3-16.
    3. Chen, Shiu-Sheng, 2017. "Exchange rate undervaluation and R&D activity," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 148-160.
    4. Bertrand, Olivier & Zuniga, Pluvia, 2006. "R&D and M&A: Are cross-border M&A different? An investigation on OECD countries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 401-423, March.
    5. Bouët, Antoine & Fontagné, Lionel & Mimouni, Mondher & Von Kirchbach, Friedrich, 2002. "Market Access Maps for GTAP: A Bilateral Measure of Merchandise Trade Protection," Conference papers 331018, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Mutinelli, Marco & Piscitello, Lucia, 1998. "The entry mode choice of MNEs: an evolutionary approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 491-506, September.
    7. Pain, Nigel & Young, Garry, 2004. "The macroeconomic impact of UK withdrawal from the EU," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 387-408, May.
    8. Mico APOSTOLOV, 2016. "Ownership And Control Structures A Case Study," Management Research and Practice, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 8(2), pages 23-37, June.
    9. Sourafel Girma & David Greenaway & Katharine Wakelin, 2013. "Who Benefits from Foreign Direct Investment in the UK?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 60(5), pages 560-574, November.
    10. Kasuga, Hidefumi, 2003. "Capital market imperfections and forms of foreign operations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(7), pages 1043-1064, September.
    11. Alicia N. Rambaldi & Kam Ki Tang & G. Iyer Krishnai, 2004. "Measuring Spillovers from Alternative Forms of Foreign Investment," CEPA Working Papers Series WP012004, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    12. Shuyuan Jiang & Dan Cheng, 2017. "The Impact of Outward FDI on the Upgrading of China¡¯s Manufacturing Industry Structure: A Literature Review," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(6), pages 154-161, June.
    13. Cassiman, Bruno & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1999. "Importance of International Linkages for Local Know-How Flows: Some Econometric Evidence From Belgium," CEPR Discussion Papers 2337, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Rajat Acharyya & Swapnendu Banerjee, 2005. "On Tariff, Quality Choice and Innovation in a Vertically Differentiated Monopoly with Discrete Preferences," Departmental Working Papers wp0504, National University of Singapore, Department of Economics.
    15. Roberto Basile & Davide Castellani & Antonello Zanfei, 2009. "National boundaries and the location of multinational firms in Europe," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(4), pages 733-748, November.
    16. Chia-Hui Huang & Tony Chieh-Tse Hou & Chih-Hai Yang, 2013. "FDI modes and parent firms' productivity in emerging economies:Evidence from Taiwan," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(8), pages 1240-1268, December.
    17. Christian Bellak, 2004. "How Domestic and Foreign Firms Differ and Why Does it Matter?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 483-514, September.
    18. Hess, Sebastian, 2005. ""In The Jungle": Towards a Common Documentation Standard for CGE-Based Experiments," Conference papers 331354, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    19. William Milberg, 1999. "The Rhetoric of Policy Relevance in International Economics," Macroeconomics 9904009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Ilona Elzbieta Serwicka & Jonathan Jones & Colin Wren, 2014. "The Motives for the FDI Location Choice in the `Old' and `New' Europe," ERSA conference papers ersa14p255, European Regional Science Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; Tariff; Foreign Direct Investment; Foreign Competition;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F12 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Models of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Scale Economies; Fragmentation
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F21 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - International Investment; Long-Term Capital Movements
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:jed:journl:v:34:y:2009:i:1:p:81-98. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sung Y. Park (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eccaukr.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.