Advertisement

Effects of Autocracy and Democracy on FDI’s Inflows

  • Tahir Yousaf
  • Qurat ul AinEmail author
  • Yasmeen Akhtar
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1002)

Abstract

This study aims to examine the effect of Autocracy and Democracy on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows in 15 Asian developing countries. For empirical examination, this study used panel data over the period 1995 to 2015 by employing dynamic panel data. The study shows a significant and positive relationship with autocracy and significant and negative relation with democracy. The empirical finding suggests that the country can attract more FDI in the presence of more autocratic institutions and less democratic institutions. Among the controlling variables trade, market capitalisation, population and literacy rate are significant with democracy while trade becomes insignificant with the main variable democracy.

Keywords

FDI Autocracy Democracy Asian developing countries Dynamic panel data Developing countries 

References

  1. 1.
    Agbloyor, E.K., Gyeke-Dako, A., et al.: Foreign direct investment and economic growth in SSA: the role of institutions. Thunderbird Int. Bus. Rev. 58(5), 479–497 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bano, S., Zhao, Y., et al.: Why did fdi inflows of Pakistan decline? from the perspective of terrorism, energy shortage, financial instability, and political instability. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 55(1), 90–104 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellos, S., Subasat, T.: Governance and foreign direct investment: a panel gravity model approach. Int. Rev. Appl. Econ. 26(3), 303–328 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, K., Nie, H., Ge, Z.: Policy uncertainty and FDI: evidence from national elections. J. Int. Trade Econ. Dev., 1–10 (2018)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cuthbertson, K.: The expectations hypothesis of the term structure: The UK interbank market. Econ. J. 106(436), 578–592 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Du, J., Lu, Y., Tao, Z.: Regional institutional strength and FDI location choice in China: implications for East Asian FDI source countries/areas. Tech. rep., Working Paper Series 9 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guerin, S.S., Manzocchi, S.: Political regime and fdi from advanced to emerging countries. Rev. World Econ. 145(1), 75–91 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harms, P., Ursprung, H.W.: Do civil and political repression really boost foreign direct investments? Econ. Inq. 40(4), 651–663 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jensen, N.M.: Democratic governance and multinational corporations: political regimes and inflows of foreign direct investment. Int. Organ. 57(3), 587–616 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, Q.: Democracy, autocracy, and expropriation of foreign direct investment. Comp. Polit. Stud. 42(8), 1098–1127 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, Q., Resnick, A.: Reversal of fortunes: democratic institutions and foreign direct investment inflows to developing countries. Int. Organ. 57(1), 175–211 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Libman, A., Vinokurov, E.: Is it really different? patterns of regionalisation in post-soviet central Asia. Post-Communist Econ. 23(4), 469–492 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mathur, A., Singh, K.: Foreign direct investment, corruption and democracy. Appl. Econ. 45(8), 991–1002 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mengistu, A.A., Adhikary, B.K.: Does good governance matter for FDI inflows? evidence from Asian economies. Asia Pac. Bus. Rev. 17(3), 281–299 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    North, D.C., Weingast, B.R.: Constitutions and commitment: the evolution of institutions governing public choice in seventeenth-century England. J. Econ. Hist. 49(4), 803–832 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Okafor, E.E.: Youth unemployment and implications for stability of democracy in Nigeria. J. Sustain. Dev. Afr. 13(1), 358–373 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Olson, M.: Dictatorship, democracy, and development. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 87(3), 567–576 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oneal, J.R.: The affinity of foreign investors for authoritarian regimes. Polit. Res. Q. 47(3), 565–588 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Resnick, A.L.: Investors, turbulence, and transition: democratic transition and foreign direct investment in nineteen developing countries. Int. Interact. 27(4), 381–398 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tsamadias, C., Pegkas, P., Mamatzakis, E., Staikouras, C.: Does R&D, human capital and FDI matter for TFP in OECD countries? Econ. Innov. New Technol. 28(4), 386–406 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    White, H.: Using least squares to approximate unknown regression functions. Int. Econ. Rev. 21, 149–170 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business School, Sichuan UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.School of Public Finance and Taxation, Southwestern University of Finance and EconomicsChengduPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.University of SargodhaSargodhaPakistan

Personalised recommendations