Analyzing the FDI dynamics and the investment climate impacting the economic development of BSEC
-
Author(s)Evangelos SiskosLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5221-4444
,
Konstantia DarvidouLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8113-7302
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ed.19(3).2020.04
-
Article InfoVolume 19 2020, Issue #3, pp. 32-43
- Cited by
- 445 Views
-
98 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
The paper concentrates on the analysis of inward and outward FDI in the BSEC countries, their structuring by countries of origin and destination, and how the investment climate (in particular economic freedom and economic development) affects the actual FDI influx in the region. The BSEC countries became considerably attractive for FDI at the beginning of the 2000s, and now they receive about 4% of the world FDI. All the BSEC countries are net recipients of FDI, but some of them also actively invest abroad. Most FDI to the region originates in Europe. FDI is the most important for several small BSEC economies, especially in some periods when they made a significant contribution to capital formation. Despite a temporary increase in imports, FDI also helped to stabilize the balance of payments. Most BSEC countries usually outperform average countries worldwide by trade freedom, low tax burden, fiscal health, financial freedom, property rights, and low inflation. However, this group of countries is quite diverse by particular indicators. Corruption and excessive regulations often act as the drawbacks for the investment climate. The overall economic freedom and low tax burden are the strongest determinants of inward FDI to the BSEC countries. Improving the overall economic freedom, protecting property rights, and better control over government spending are the most crucial for stimulating economic growth. Economic growth and trade freedom are less important factors for FDI.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)F21, F23, P44, P45
-
References22
-
Tables9
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Trends in the BSEC countries’ inward FDI, %
- Table 2. Trends in the BSEC countries’ outward FDI, %
- Table 3. The main sources of FDI in the BSEC countries in 2018, %
- Table 4. Importance of FDI for the BSEC economies
- Table 5. The effect of FDI on imports and income payments, average values in 2010–2019, %
- Table 6. Investment climate indicators of the BSEC countries
- Table 7. The economic freedom subindices of the BSEC countries, score
- Table 8. Correlations between inward FDI/GDP (%) and GDP growth (%) and economic freedom (score) in 1995–2018
- Table 9. Correlations between inward FDI/GDP (%), GDP growth (%) and economic freedom subindices (score)
-
- Anagnostis, K. (2011). FDI and Impacts of Country Risk – Factors Affecting the Influx of FDI in Emerging Economies. Scientific Bulletin – Economic Sciences, 10(2), 89-97.
- Apostolov, M. (2016). Cobb–Douglas production function on FDI in Southeast Europe. Journal of Economic Structures, 5(1), 1-28.
- Astrov, V., & Havlik, P. (2008). Economic Developments in the Wider Black Sea Region (Research Reports No. 349) (37 p.). Wien: The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies.
- Botrić, V., & Škuflić, L. (2006). Main Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in the Southeast European Countries. Transition Studies Review, 13(2), 359-377.
- Christie, E. (2003). Foreign Direct Investment in Southeast Europe (Working Papers No. 24) (31 p.). Wien: The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies.
- Ganić, M., & Hrnjic, M. (2019). Does a country’s business regulatory environment affect its attractiveness to FDI? Empirical evidence from Central and Southeast European countries. Eastern Journal of European Studies, 10(2), 89-105.
- Glinavos, I. (2005). Foreign Direct Investment in the Black Sea Area. Germany: University Library of Munich.
- Handjiski, B. (2009). Investment Matters: The Role and Patterns of Investment in Southeast Europe (The World Bank Working Paper No. 159).
- International Monetary Fund (2020). Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Statistics.
- International Monetary Fund (2020). Coordinated Direct Investment Survey.
- International Monetary Fund (2020). World Economic Outlook Database.
- Lu, W., Kasimov, I., Karimov, I., & Abdullaev, Y. (2020). Foreign Direct Investment, Natural Resources, Economic Freedom, and Sea-Access: Evidence from the Commonwealth of Independent States. Sustainability, 12(8), 1-18.
- Mehic, E., Silajdzic, S., & Babic-Hodovic, V. (2013). The Impact of FDI on Economic Growth: Some Evidence from Southeast Europe. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 49(S1), 5-20.
- Papazoglou, Ch., & Liargovas, P. (1997). An Assessment of Foreign Direct Investment Towards the BSEC Transition Economies. Economia Internazionale / International Economics, 50(3), 475-487.
- Salavrakos, I.-D. (2006). Explaining different FDI inflows in Eastern European countries with reference to economic history. Global Business and Economics Review, 8(1/2), 60-86.
- Stoian, C., & Filippaios, F. (2008). Dunning’s eclectic paradigm: A holistic, yet context specific framework for analysing the determinants of outward FDI: Evidence from international Greek investments. International Business Review, 17(3), 349-367.
- The Heritage Foundation (2020). Index of Economic Freedom.
- Todorov, A. (2018). Foreign Investment and Aggregate Concentration – Evidence from Southeast Europe (Bulgarian Economic Paper No. bep-13-2018).
- Troyan, I. (2012). Integration compatibility of BSEC member states. Business Inform, 9, 68-73.
- UNCTAD (2020). Data Center.
- Veganzones-Varoudakis, M.-A., Aysan, A., & Baykal, O. (2011). The Effects of Convergence in Governance on Capital Accumulation in the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Countries (Working Paper No. 611). Economic Research Forum.
- Vlahinic-Dizdarevic, N., & Blažic, H. (2006). FDI determinants in Southeast European Countries with Special reference to Tax Incentives. Economic Studies journal, 3, 34-57.
-
Managing the sustainability of economic system as the basis of investment development in Ukraine
Serhii Kozlovskyi 
,
Illya Khadzhynov ,
Ivan Vlasenko ,
Liliya Marynchak
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.14(4).2017.06
Investment Management and Financial Innovations Volume 14, 2017 Issue #4 pp. 50-59 Views: 1147 Downloads: 204 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯNowadays, studying the categories of “economic sustainability”, “economic sustainability management” and the peculiarities of these concepts is especially relevant. Their use would provide an opportunity to ensure the sustainable and most effective functioning of the subject of economic relations in the current period of time, as well as to create a high potential for its development and ensuring the conditions for investing capital in the Ukrainian economy. All this determined the purpose of this study, which consists in the analysis of the theory and essence of the economic sustainability concept, the interpretation of the concept of “economic sustainability of the system” and the concept of “management of economic sustainability of the system”, distinguishing factors affecting the sustainability of the Ukrainian economic system, determining the relationship of economic sustainability with economic security, investing as well as forecasting the level of the Ukrainian economy sustainability based on the innovative modeling methods. The object of the research is to develop the theory of the “economic sustainability” concept and to determine the level of economic sustainability of the economy aimed at raising the investment climate in Ukraine. To ensure the development, security and investment attractiveness of the Ukrainian economy, an organizational structure of the management model for the sustainability of the Ukrainian economic system was developed using the developed economic and mathematical model.
-
Promotion of green economic growth in post-Soviet countries: Role of foreign direct and portfolio investments
Bayali Atashov ,
Elnura Mammadova ,
Elshan Ibrahimov
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(4).2023.23
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 21, 2023 Issue #4 pp. 288-303 Views: 265 Downloads: 56 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯGreen economic growth ensures the country’s wealth and population well-being with decreasing ecological damages. This strategy requires effective government policy to push economic agents to environmentally friendly behavior and significant financial resources to invest in technological modernization. The study aims to assess whether promotion of green economic growth in post-Soviet countries depends on direct and portfolio investment. The paper develops the index of green economic growth performance considering traditional economic growth, social, and environmental indicators. To determine the contribution of direct and portfolio investments in the promotion of green economic growth performance, regression equations (for the panel of countries as a whole and each country in particular) are developed. All models are supplemented with traditional economic growth control variables (GDP growth, inflation, gross fixed capital formation, trade). The information base is public data from the World Bank for the sample of 13 post-Soviet countries for 2000–2021. It was revealed that Estonia and Latvia have the highest level of green economic growth performance, while Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan have the lowest. The most effective country (Latvia) uses its green economic growth potential only for 62.33%. Modeling results do not confirm the significance of foreign and portfolio investment contributions in promoting green economic growth in most post-Soviet countries (portfolio investments boost green economic growth in Estonia and Moldova, while foreign direct investments contribute to green economic growth in Ukraine). These results might be explained by a lack of institutional capacity and government efficiency to ensure effective absorption of investments.
