IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Foreign direct investment in developing countries: What policymakers should not do and what economists don't know


  • Nunnenkamp, Peter


Since recent financial crises in Asia and Latin America, developing countries have been strongly advised to rely primarily on foreign direct investment (FDI) in order to promote economic development on a sustainable basis. Even harsh critics of rash capital account liberalization argue in favor of opening up towards FDI. Yet, economists know surprisingly little about the driving forces and the economic effects of FDI. There are few undisputed insights on which policymakers can rely. Globalization through FDI has become significantly more important since the early 1990s. Various groups of developing countries have participated to a strikingly different degree in the FDI boom. However, the distribution of FDI does not support the widely held view that FDI is concentrated in just a few developing countries. Considered in relative terms, various small and less advanced countries have been attractive to FDI. Policymakers should be aware that various measures intended to induce FDI, including the liberalization of FDI regulations and business facilitation, are unlikely to do the trick. Promotional efforts will help little to attract FDI if economic fundamentals are not conducive to FDI. Fiscal and financial incentives offered to foreign investors may do more harm than good by giving rise to costly “bidding wars.” The importance of traditional determinants of FDI, notably the size of local markets, can no longer be taken for granted. Globalization tends to induce a shift from purely market-seeking FDI to new types of FDI, for which the international competitiveness of local production is highly relevant. The challenge for policymakers in developing countries then is to create immobile domestic assets that provide a competitive edge in the competition for FDI. This task has various dimensions, ranging from local capacity building and the provision of efficient business-related services to trade liberalization with regard to capital goods and intermediate products. Policymakers should not expect too much from FDI inflows. Capital formation continues to be a national phenomenon in the first place. FDI is superior to other types of capital inflows in some respects, particularly because of its risksharing properties, though not necessarily in all respects. The nexus between FDI and overall investment as well as economic growth in host countries is neither self-evident nor straightforward, but remains insufficiently explored territory

Suggested Citation

  • Nunnenkamp, Peter, 2001. "Foreign direct investment in developing countries: What policymakers should not do and what economists don't know," Kiel Discussion Papers 380, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwkdp:380

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Dohse, Dirk, 2000. "Regionen als Innovationsmotoren: zur Neuorientierung in der deutschen Technologiepolitik," Kiel Discussion Papers 366, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    2. Kamps, Christophe & Scheide, Joachim, 2001. "End of the upswing in Euroland: No reason to cut interest rates," Kiel Discussion Papers 374, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    3. Thiele, Rainer, 2000. "East Timor's transition to independence: Building up an economy from scratch," Kiel Discussion Papers 368, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Gilroy, Bernard Michael & Lukas, Elmar, 2002. "The New Agenda for FDI: Evidence from South Korea and Germany," MPRA Paper 17970, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Nunnenkamp, Peter, 2003. "Ausländische Direktinvestitionen in Lateinamerkia: Enttäuschte Hoffnungen trotz attraktiver Standortbedingungen?," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 3104, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW).

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:zbw:ifwkdp:380. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: .

    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.