Search Results

This chapter explores the process of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from China. In the late 1970s, China started to integrate into the world economy. It evolved from a state that merely attracted a high level of investment from abroad to one that has become a leading source of global investment capital. Chinese outward FDI to all regions of the world has since been developing. Among the leading sources of outward FDI from China are the financial services. China still promotes outward FDI, especially in research and development, production and marketing, and energy. Its comprehensive bilateral investment treaty (BIT) regime has drastically enhanced, with most recent BITs containing robust investor protection as well as investor-state arbitration provisions for a wide range of issues.

This chapter introduces the four BRIC states, namely Brazil, Russia, India and China, as well as the concept of outward foreign direct investment (FDI). These four BRIC states became the leading global economic factors in the 21st century. They are now symbolic of the modern concept of globalisation. The regulation of outward FDI in services involves a complex interplay of national, regional, and multilateral rules. Outward FDI can decrease the one-sidedness of globalisation. FDI also brings capital, skills, and technology that nations need to prove and sustain competitive industries. The various bilateral and regional agreements that contain provisions regarding the protection of investments are the most vital means of regulating outward FDI. The substance of Multilateral Agreement on Investment in Services (MAIS) highlights the common elements of the BRICs multilateral commitments.

To what extent South Korea adopted neoliberal reforms and thus conformed to the pressures of globalization is explored in this chapter. After the Asian financial crisis of 1997, South Korea was compelled to adopt IMF-style liberalization policies and, by implication, to abandon economic nationalism. However, this chapter argues otherwise. The evolution of Korea’s economic trajectory since World War II shows that no real shift has taken place in Korea’s economic nationalist trajectory despite the adoption of Segyehwa (iglobalization policies) in the early 1990s incorporated under outward foreign direct investments by Korean business followed by inward foreign investment. Despite deep international economic integration, the capacity of the Korean state has not diminished nor has the traditional nationalist development trajectory reversed. The Korean state remains developmental, neo-mercantilist, and economically nationalist.

This chapter explains the process of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from India. Since the liberalisation of its economy in the early 1990s, India has experienced significant economic reforms. The Indian government had loosed regulations for the outbound flow of capital and had eliminated the requirement of approval for foreign joint ventures during the various stages of economic liberalisation. The concentration of Indian outward FDI in the developed countries, especially Europe, is its most prominent characteristic. It has also developed in response to the government's relaxation of the laws governing outward expansion from the 1990s onward. The most important barriers to India's accession to a multilateral services investment treaty seem to be its desire to assure knowledge transfer in connection with FDI and its foreign ownership limits in financial services and telecommunications.

This chapter discusses the phenomenon of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from Brazil. Brazil has presented a comparatively low level of outward FDI compared to the overall size of its economy. The rapid rise of Brazilian outward FDI may be due to competitive pressures in home markets and the expansion and diversification of sales, markets, and production bases abroad. Brazil's outward international investment activities are mostly associated to exporting strategies, dominated by fixed assets from Brazilian headquarters. Outward FDI in services from Brazil should deepen in the future as the local market becomes deficient in maintaining high profit levels for Brazilian firms. Brazil's bilateral investment treaties (BITs) contain provisions to promote FDI. The growth of FDI from Brazil seems to be largely the result of external opportunities rather than a planned international business strategy of either the state or the firms themselves.

This paper examines the role of China in the international economy and the changing relationship between the two. China is currently undergoing a transition from investment and export-led growth to an economy more based on consumption expenditure. This involves a major readjustment of the domestic economy and its international relationships. Foreign direct investment which has been a key stimulus to growth and to exports is now being diverted to serving the domestic consumer and is also being encouraged to relocate from the coast regions to Western China. These strategies imply a shift from “made in China” to “created in China” which involves a move from cheap labour intensive production to higher value activities. This must be conducted in the face of a relative slow down in Chinese growth and the effort to correct the imbalances such as income distribution and coastal/inland inequalities. Current turbulence in the global economy notably the Eurozone exacerbates policy difficulties.

This chapter describes the phenomenon of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from Russia. Russia has a unique perspective on international investment law. Its status as a net FDI exporter is often not appreciated by commentators. In addition, its weak integration into the institutional structure of international economic relations has really helped the growth of Russian outward FDI, as represented by its long-term absence from the World Trade Organisation (WTO). It is noted that Russian bilateral investment treaties (BITs) tend to consider a provision guaranteeing qualified investors most favoured nation (MFN) treatment. Over the last two decades, the inconsistent pattern of Russia's investment treaty practice has led to the broad diversity of BITs in force today. Russia's commitment to a program of BITs may have helped their considerable FDI flows in recent years.

This chapter looks at the trends in the regulation of outward foreign direct investment (FDI) from Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC countries). The rapid rise of multinational enterprises (MNEs) from developing countries has been examined throughout this book. The BRIC countries' engagement in outward FDI seems to follow a standardised pattern. The enhanced ability of firms from BRIC countries to compete with international firms had led to ani increase in outward FDI. The increase in FDI from the BRICs reveals a developing consensus between the traditional capital exporting and capital importing countries. The MAIS represents an instrument of FDI liberalisation. The proposed MAIS treaty captivates the spirit of socially conscious investment while remaining true to the principles of liberalisation that underpinned bilateral investment treaties (BITs) as well as the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).

The chapter outlines different dimensions of Chinese global economic power. It shows how China has developed forms of market and production power, and how these interacts with the desire to establish technological leadership in some areas. The main focus, though, is on the flow of money from China to others considering both Chinese aid, and Chinese outward foreign direct investment. It suggests that the growth of outward investment has been a key source of change in the way that China’s global economic role and power have been perceived; not always to China’s benefit. It concludes by considering the potential consequences of the economic impact of the covid-19 pandemic on China’s ability to exert global economic power in the future.

Outward investment from India has increased significantly since the turn of the century. This chapter traces the evolution of Indian MNEs since the 1960s and takes a view about the future of internationalization of Indian firms based on available evidence in the academic literature. Available evidence suggests that outward investment by early Indian MNEs was, in large part, an effort to protect export markets. Outward investment by MNEs in the 1990s and in the 21st century may have been driven by strategic objectives to acquire overseas assets with locational advantages or embedded knowledge about overseas locations, rather than by the objective of acquiring technological and other capabilities. There is little research (and consequently evidence) about whether Indian firms have the ownership and organizational structures and that can encourage/facilitate widespread overseas investment and successful integration of overseas operations of these MNEs into their global operations.