IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/22002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why Do People Oppose Foreign Acquisitions? Evidence from Japanese Individual-Level Data

Author

Listed:
  • ITO Banri
  • TANAKA Ayumu
  • JINJI Naoto

Abstract

This study empirically examines the determinants of individuals' attitudes about inward foreign direct investment (FDI) using responses from questionnaire surveys that were originally designed. Individuals' preferences for inward FDI tend to differ between greenfield investments and mergers and acquisitions (M&A), and people are more likely to have a negative attitude toward M&A than greenfield investments. Our results show that people with a negative image of the so-called "vulture fund" for foreign capital tend to oppose inward FDI, and this is more pronounced for M&A than greenfield investments. Moreover, loss aversion and high time preference rates are strongly related to opposition to inward FDI, and people with such behavioral biases tend to refuse indigenous firms to be acquired by foreign capital, even if they agree to accept greenfield investment. These results indicate that people's preferences for inward FDI depend more on non-economic attributes than economic attributes, which is consistent with recent empirical studies on trade policy preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • ITO Banri & TANAKA Ayumu & JINJI Naoto, 2022. "Why Do People Oppose Foreign Acquisitions? Evidence from Japanese Individual-Level Data," Discussion papers 22002, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
  • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:22002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/22e002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Tomiura, Eiichi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2019. "Trade policy preferences and cross-regional differences: Evidence from individual-level data of Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-109.
    2. Eugene Beaulieu, 2002. "Factor or Industry Cleavages in Trade Policy? An Empirical Analysis of the Stolper–Samuelson Theorem," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 99-131, July.
    3. Hartmut Egger & Elke Jahn & Stefan Kornitzky, 2020. "Reassessing the foreign ownership wage premium in Germany," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 302-325, February.
    4. Blomstrom, Magnus & Sjoholm, Fredrik, 1999. "Technology transfer and spillovers: Does local participation with multinationals matter?1," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 915-923, April.
    5. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    6. Barry, Frank, 2004. "Export-platform foreign direct investment: the Irish experience," EIB Papers 6/2004, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    7. Wolfgang Keller & Stephen R. Yeaple, 2009. "Multinational Enterprises, International Trade, and Productivity Growth: Firm-Level Evidence from the United States," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(4), pages 821-831, November.
    8. Sourafel Girma & Holger Görg & Mauro Pisu, 2016. "Exporting, linkages and productivity spillovers from foreign direct investment," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES AND HOST COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT Volume 53: World Scientific Studies in International Economics, chapter 10, pages 191-211, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Zhang, Jianhong & van Gorp, Désirée & Ebbers, Haico & Zhou, Chaohong & Kievit, Henk, 2022. "Organizational legitimacy of emerging multinational enterprises: An individual perspective," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(6).
    10. Brian Aitken & Ann Harrison & Robert E. Lipsey, 2022. "Wages and foreign ownership A comparative study of Mexico, Venezuela, and the United States," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Globalization, Firms, and Workers, chapter 4, pages 61-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Schumacher, Julian & Trebesch, Christoph & Enderlein, Henrik, 2021. "Sovereign defaults in court," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    12. Jonathan E. Haskel & Sonia C. Pereira & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2007. "Does Inward Foreign Direct Investment Boost the Productivity of Domestic Firms?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 482-496, August.
    13. Eiji Yamamura & Yoshiro Tsutsui, 2019. "Trade policy preference, childhood sporting experience, and informal school curriculum: An examination of views of the TPP from the viewpoint of behavioral economics," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 61-90, February.
    14. Hijzen, Alexander & Martins, Pedro S. & Schank, Thorsten & Upward, Richard, 2013. "Foreign-owned firms around the world: A comparative analysis of wages and employment at the micro-level," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 170-188.
    15. Bradley Setzler & Felix Tintelnot, 2021. "The Effects of Foreign Multinationals on Workers and Firms in the United States," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(3), pages 1943-1991.
    16. Beata Smarzynska Javorcik, 2004. "Does Foreign Direct Investment Increase the Productivity of Domestic Firms? In Search of Spillovers Through Backward Linkages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 605-627, June.
    17. Tomiura, Eiichi & Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2021. "Individual characteristics and the demand for reciprocity in trade liberalization: Evidence from a survey in Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    18. Tovar, Patricia, 2009. "The effects of loss aversion on trade policy: Theory and evidence," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 154-167, June.
    19. Naoi, Megumi & Kume, Ikuo, 2011. "Explaining Mass Support for Agricultural Protectionism: Evidence from a Survey Experiment During the Global Recession," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(4), pages 771-795, October.
    20. Scheve, Kenneth F. & Slaughter, Matthew J., 2001. "What determines individual trade-policy preferences?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 267-292, August.
    21. Rafael Di Tella & Dani Rodrik, 2020. "Labour Market Shocks and the Demand for Trade Protection: Evidence from Online Surveys," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(628), pages 1008-1030.
    22. Ito, Banri & Yashiro, Naomitsu & Xu, Zhaoyuan & Chen, XiaoHong & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2012. "How do Chinese industries benefit from FDI spillovers?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 342-356.
    23. Blalock, Garrick & Gertler, Paul J., 2008. "Welfare gains from Foreign Direct Investment through technology transfer to local suppliers," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 402-421, March.
    24. J. Daniels & M. Wang & M. C. S. Wong, 2016. "Individual attitudes towards the impact of multinational corporations on local businesses: how important are individual characteristics and country-level traits?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7), pages 526-531, May.
    25. Robert E. Lipsey, 2004. "Home- and Host-Country Effects of Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Chapters, in: Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics, pages 333-379, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    26. Bruce A., Blonigen, 2011. "Revisiting the evidence on trade policy preferences," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 129-135, September.
    27. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.
    28. Jäkel, Ina C. & Smolka, Marcel, 2017. "Trade policy preferences and factor abundance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-19.
    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. Gabriel Felbermayr & Toshihiro Okubo, 2022. "Individual preferences on trade liberalization: evidence from a Japanese household survey," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 158(1), pages 305-330, February.
    2. Tomiura, Eiichi & Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2021. "Individual characteristics and the demand for reciprocity in trade liberalization: Evidence from a survey in Japan," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    3. Neil Foster-McGregor, 2012. "Innovation and Technology Transfer across Countries," wiiw Research Reports 380, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    4. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto H. & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2019. "Trade Attitudes in Latin America: Evidence from a Multi-Country Survey Experiment," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9603, Inter-American Development Bank.
    5. Ayse Kaya & James T. Walker, 2009. "Individual Attitudes towards the Impact of Multinational Enterprises on Local Businesses," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2009-02, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    6. Ito, Banri & Mukunoki, Hiroshi & Tomiura, Eiichi & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2019. "Trade policy preferences and cross-regional differences: Evidence from individual-level data of Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-109.
    7. Rodríguez Chatruc, Marisol & Stein, Ernesto & Vlaicu, Razvan, 2021. "How issue framing shapes trade attitudes: Evidence from a multi-country survey experiment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    8. Ito, Banri & Yashiro, Naomitsu & Xu, Zhaoyuan & Chen, XiaoHong & Wakasugi, Ryuhei, 2012. "How do Chinese industries benefit from FDI spillovers?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 342-356.
    9. Mico Apostolov, 2017. "The impact of FDI on the performance and entrepreneurship of domestic firms," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 390-415, December.
    10. Mico Apostolov, 2016. "Cobb–Douglas production function on FDI in Southeast Europe," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 5(1), pages 1-28, December.
    11. Apostolov Mico, 2016. "Foreign Direct Investments Induced Innovation? A Case Study − Macedonia," Comparative Economic Research, Sciendo, vol. 19(1), pages 5-25, March.
    12. Olivier N. Godart & Holger Görg, 2016. "Suppliers of multinationals and the forced linkage effect: Evidence from firm level data," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES AND HOST COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT, chapter 15, pages 277-288, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.
    14. Ioannis Bournakis & Sotiris Papaioannou & Marina Papanastassiou, 2022. "Multinationals and domestic total factor productivity: Competition effects, knowledge spillovers and foreign ownership," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(12), pages 3715-3750, December.
    15. Saglam, Bahar Bayraktar & Sayek, Selin, 2011. "MNEs and wages: The role of productivity spillovers and imperfect labor markets," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2736-2742.
    16. Banri Ito, 2021. "Trade exposure and electoral protectionism: evidence from Japanese politician-level data," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 157(1), pages 181-205, February.
    17. Aleksandra Sojka & Jorge Diaz-Lanchas & Federico Steinberg, 2019. "The Politicization of Transatlantic Trade in Europe: Explaining Inconsistent Preferences Regarding Free Trade and the TTIP," JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis 2019-09, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Rosanna Pittiglio & Filippo Reganati & Edgardo Sica, 2015. "Do Multinational Enterprises Push up the Wages of Domestic Firms in the Italian Manufacturing Sector?," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 83(3), pages 346-378, June.
    19. Kagitani, Koichi & Harimaya, Kozo, 2017. "Electoral motives, constituency systems, ideologies, and a free trade agreement: The case of Japan joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 51-66.
    20. Eiji Yamamura & Yoshiro Tsutsui, 2017. "Trade policy preference, childhood sporting experience, and informal school curriculum: Examination from the viewpoint of behavioral economics," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 17-25, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eti:dpaper:22002. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.