رابطه بین سرمایه گذاری مستقیم خارجی به سمت داخل و تجارت صادرات استانی چین

This study evaluates the causal links between inward foreign direct investment (FDI) and exports from the PRC as a whole and also from its provinces. The national study is based on a monthly time series for the years 1986 to 1999 and cointegration/error correction modelling (ECM) techniques are used to conclude that for the PRC as a whole the relationship between FDI and exports is bidirectional. The relationship between inward FDI/exports for the PRC's provinces, cities, and autonomous regions is analysed in three panel data sets: the high FDI recipients (HFDI, n=144) concentrated along the Chinese coast, medium FDI recipients (MFDI, n=192) in Central China, and the low FDI group (LFDI, n=128) in Western China. The panel data studies reveal that in the HFDI and LFDI, bidirectional causality applies, while exports Granger cause FDI in the MFDI. All regional results are confirmed by Sims tests. The policy implications are explained.

The objective of this analysis is to explain the causal relationship between China's inward foreign direct investment (FDI) and exports for China as a whole and for its provinces and cities. This analysis focuses on the precedence and timing of the relationship between inward FDI and Chinese exports. Stern (1997) summarises the arguments about the complementary nature of inward FDI and the trade of the recipient (host) country. FDI and exports from the host country may be complementary, particularly if the foreign interest is secured through the establishment of foreign invested enterprises (FIEs). Inward FDI brings with it the expertise of the foreign partner in selecting and promoting exports on international market in this way FDI enhances the recipient country's export performance. The nature of the relationship between inward FDI and exports from the host country is inextricably associated with questions about precedence and timing. The literature about this aspect of the inward FDI/exports relationship is incomplete in the case of the PRC. This study is designed to fill this gap. The following question is addressed here. Does inward FDI precede or lead exports, or vice versa? Although this questions evaluated empirically for the PRC and its provinces, an economic rationale is presented for the possibility that the relationship can occur in either of two single directions; alternatively, that there exists a bidirectional relationship between inward FDI and exports or there is no causal link at all. The importance of the causal relationship between inward FDI and exports is central to development planning and strategies. If there is a definite unidirectional causality from export expansion to FDI (EXP→FDI), then some credence is given to an export led growth strategy. Exports not only stimulate economic development and structural change, they also attract FDI into China. If this is so, then development planners can expect those regions of their domestic economies with a pre existing export orientation to act as conduits for FDI. An appropriate policy in these circumstances is trade liberalisation designed to reduce exporters' cost and to encourage exports. The FDI that is encouraged by export expansion will stimulate the overall development of the domestic economy. If the causative process is in the opposite direction (FDI→EXP), then the implication is that the inflow of FDI is a prerequisite for the expansion of China's exports. Then, the appropriate development strategy is to provide incentives for FDI, which in time leads to export growth. This seems to have been the motivation for the establishment of the first special economic zones (SEZs) by the PRC in 1979. Alternatively, export growth and inward FDI may have a reciprocal causative relationship (EXP↔FDI). In other words, FDI and exports interact in the process of development. Finally, if there is no evident direction of causation between export growth and FDI, then alternative strategies to the encouragement of FDI or export promotion are required for structural transformation and growth of the Chinese economy. In summary, a rigorous test of causality between PRC's exports and its inward FDI is necessary as a way of informing the Chinese government and development agencies about the success of past policy and future development strategies for China. To this point in time, the policy emphasis has been focused on the eastern or seaboard provinces of China or provinces and cities close to the major sources of FDI, such as Hong Kong. The Chinese government has encouraged the growth of exports in the east by establishing SEZs and economic and technological development zones (ETDZs) and providing incentives for investment in them. This experience suggests that inward FDI should lead, precede, or cause export growth in the coastal provinces of China and the incentives provided to foreign investors in these constitutes an appropriate policy mix for the eastern region. However, the central and western provinces of China have not received the same incentives for FDI. Some export growth has occurred in the central region in particular without the same level of incentives being offered for FDI while in western provinces generally, limited amounts of FDI have been received. This uneven distribution of FDI suggests that regional differences in the exports/FDI relationship should be taken into account. The remainder of this paper is structured in the following way, an economic rationale is developed in Section 2, which is followed by a description of the methodology in Section 3. The data set and empirical analyses are discussed in Section 4. Finally, conclusions and policy implications appear in Section 5.

The major finding of this study is that bidirectional causality applies to the link between inward FDI and exports from the PRC. This is the clear outcome of the national time series analysis of the issue and is reinforced in a pooled regression model across 29 PRC provinces. We also find bidirectional causality between inward FDI and exports from the HFDI recipient provinces concentrated along the PRC coast. More than 80% of the PRC's total export values originate from these coastal provinces, so it is not surprising that the outcome for the HFDI panel mirrors the national pattern. This major outcome of the study provides some testimony to the effectiveness of the policy of opening the PRC's doors leading to greater interaction between the PRC and the rest of the world. In particular, FDI was encouraged from 1978 and beyond while the emphasis of the PRC's development policy was refocused to allow a greater emphasis to be given to export promotion. The FIEs contribution to the PRC's development is also emphasised in our statistics where the proportion of export values contributed by the FIEs doubled between 1992 and 1998. If it was the intention of the PRC government to create trade through foreign involvement in 1978, then the policy intention has been realised at least in the coastal provinces. However, the linkage between inward FDI and exports in the central provinces of the PRC (MFDI) differs from the national and HFDI study. In the case of the MFDI, causality appears to flow from exports or export potential to FDI. This provides some support for those researchers such as Dollar (1992) and Jun and Singh (1996) who find that outward-oriented economies particularly those exploiting their export potential attract more foreign investment and grow faster. It is their outward orientation and policies such as export enhancement that attract FDI and create trade subsequently. It is interesting to note that our results for the MFDI correspond with Jun and Singh's analysis, which finds that export potential leads FDI frequently. This finding for the MFDI may be indicative of a process of staged development. In a first stage, the degree of openness attracts FDI, which in time creates trade in the form of increased exports. If causality is assessed at an early stage of this process, then exports or potential exports could appear to be leading FDI, however, the direction could be reversed at a later stage when the FDI has turned export potential into real export growth. Our conclusion about the MFDI provinces may simply reflect an early stage of the export development process. The role of the FIEs in insulating the PRC's exports against the effects of economic downturns is evident in the case of the MFDI. The US value of total exports from the MFDI provinces fell by 13.1% between 1997 and 1998 as a consequence of the Asian currency crisis while FIE exports from the MFDI provinces fell by only 1.33%. The results for the LFDI provinces show some evidence of FDI playing a leading role in the development of exports from Western China. However, the development of the full potential of this region will depend on foreign capital being invested in infrastructure projects before the full export and domestic growth potential of this region of China is realised. Our finding of causality flowing from FDI to exports in the LFDI must be seen in this context.