2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2010.01324.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Foreign Direct Investment and De‐industrialisation

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to discuss the various issues regarding de‐industrialisation and to systematically analyse the causes of this phenomenon. In addition, the effect of the recent increase in foreign direct investment on de‐industrialisation will be analysed. Unlike extant studies, this study employs a more reliable method of estimation, known as the generalised method of moments system, for establishing the importance of foreign direct investment (FDI) with regard to de‐industrialisation. For a gener… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
37
2
4

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
3
37
2
4
Order By: Relevance
“…This measure captures the productive manufacturing units that are classified according to the kind of principal economic activity, which include works that are performed by power-driven machinery or manually, factory based work or in a household (United Nations, 1990). Also, this measure of industrialisation is favoured by Kang and Lee (2011), UNIDO (2013) and Gui-Diby and Renard (2015).…”
Section: Stylized Facts On Remittance and Industrialisation In Africamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This measure captures the productive manufacturing units that are classified according to the kind of principal economic activity, which include works that are performed by power-driven machinery or manually, factory based work or in a household (United Nations, 1990). Also, this measure of industrialisation is favoured by Kang and Lee (2011), UNIDO (2013) and Gui-Diby and Renard (2015).…”
Section: Stylized Facts On Remittance and Industrialisation In Africamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Providing strong micro-foundations for the use of non-homothetic preferences, Foellmi and Zweimüller (2008) thus developed a multi-sector growth model -in which new goods are continuously introduced into an original hierarchical utility function -which shows ability to reproduce the hump-shaped relationship between the manufacturing share of total employment and income, a trajectory observed in the data and confirmed by empirical research (see e.g. Rowthorn and Wells 1987;Krugman and Lawrence 1993;Ramaswamy 1997, 1999;Alderson 1999;Coutts 2004, 2013;Kollmeyer, 2009;Kang and Lee, 2011;Rodrik, 2015). …”
Section: Non-homothetic Preferences (Income Effects)mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…The technological or supply-side argument, which links the process of deindustrialization with rapid productivity growth in the manufacturing sector, has been largely supported by empirical studies (see e.g. Kravis et al, 1983;Wolff 1985, 1989;Rowthorn and Wells 1987;Lawrence, 1991;Krugman and Lawrence 1993;Ramaswamy 1997, 1999;Coutts, 2004, 2013;Pissarides, 2004, 2007;Nickell et al, 2008;Kollmeyer, 2009;Kang and Lee, 2011;Tregenna, , 2015Cruz, 2015) 21 . While figure 5 confirms that the fall in the manufacturing share of national employment has occurred along with faster labor productivity growth in manufacturing n virtually all selected countries, it is not clear whether larger productivity growth differential between manufacturing and services has led to more deindustrialization in cross-section of countries.…”
Section: Cross-sector Differences In Technology (Relative Price Effects)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations