The topic of foreign direct investment (FDI) has been prominent in assessments of economic development in Indonesia during the past 50 years. In this article I review Indonesia's FDI record in a historical perspective; the current urge to control FDI inflows and the need to augment domestic savings and facilitate technology transfers are not at all new in Indonesia. I draw in particular on the discourse on FDI in this journal, the Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, giving special attention to contributions by this journal to the international literature on FDI and its impact. The article demonstrates that the relation between FDI and economic growth has been less straightforward in Indonesia than elsewhere in Southeast Asia. Although FDI has grown in a restrictive investment climate, on occasion it has failed to do so despite more liberal conditions. This may be attributed to the sustained role of natural resources in determining Indonesia's attractiveness as a host country of FDI.
The time appears due for a reappraisal of the economic argument in the imperialism debate. For decades the standard procedure has been first to refute Hobson and Lenin on empirical grounds and then to present a non-economic explanation for the European overseas expansion during the era of modern imperialism (1870–1914). Presently a new paradigm is gaining acceptance. It is an approach which puts the emphasis solidly back on the economic side but without its Marxist connotations. Cain and Hopkins took the lead with their theory of ‘gentlemanly capitalism’; they link the landed South and City finance with Imperial policy thus explaining overseas expansion by referring to macroeconomic changes at home. Davis and Huttenback associate the profitability of Empire investments with their ‘two-England hypothesis’ for British business: London investors stood apart, profited more and exerted a greater influence. It is my intention to show that a similar type of non-Marxist economic argument applies also to the case of Dutch expansion in the Indonesian archipelago at the time of modern imperialism.
The author examines the economy of a rural village in Indonesia in which a high proportion of households rely on remittances from urban informal sector earnings. Household income and per capita income are analyzed according to whether or not households have at least one temporary migrant, and by the sex and age of the household head. Findings indicate that "remittances from short-term circular migration push many households into the middle and upper income ranges. However, the wealthiest households continue to rely on traditional high earning activities and do not depend on remittances. The poorest households are scattered among those who rely on remittances and those still totally dependent upon traditional low earning village activities, regardless of the sex and age of the household head."
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.