2004
DOI: 10.1007/s00168-003-0174-5
| View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: ABSTRACT.This paper tests one of the fundamental assumptions of regional policy makers over the last 20 years. Western governments, in seeking to attract internationally mobile capital have spent significant sums of public money on subsidies and grants. This is justified on the basis that the social returns to FDI are significantly greater than the private returns, due to productivity or technology spillovers from inward investors to domestic industry. However, this paper generates some estimates of these spil… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
12
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(38 reference statements)
4
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In contrast, inter-firm collaboration is not significant for SME growth. The negative result for regional-level financial investors and innovation is consistent with these results; similarly, the finding that growth is strongly linked to international investors is as might be expected given the typical focus of these relationships around employment creation rather than innovation (see, e.g., Driffield 2004). The observed outcomes for interaction with financial advisors are also broadly in line with expectations (i.e., the local and regional particularly negative for growth, the UK level positive for innovation, again suggesting the value of cross-locality networks).…”
Section: Innovation Network and Smes 359supporting
confidence: 86%
“…In contrast, inter-firm collaboration is not significant for SME growth. The negative result for regional-level financial investors and innovation is consistent with these results; similarly, the finding that growth is strongly linked to international investors is as might be expected given the typical focus of these relationships around employment creation rather than innovation (see, e.g., Driffield 2004). The observed outcomes for interaction with financial advisors are also broadly in line with expectations (i.e., the local and regional particularly negative for growth, the UK level positive for innovation, again suggesting the value of cross-locality networks).…”
Section: Innovation Network and Smes 359supporting
confidence: 86%
“…In the case of backward linkages, domestic firms may generally benefit from MNEs when the latter increase the demand for inputs supplied by the former under the condition of increasing returns to scale, which may in turn improve the productivity of domestic firms. In order to get inputs to comply with quality standards, MNEs may provide technical support to domestic firms so as to improve the quality of goods, support for establishing productive infrastructures and for acquiring raw materials, as well as support for organization and management (Driffield 2004;Crespo et al 2009). As for forward linkages, domestic firms may benefit from MNEs if they supply higher quality and lower price inputs than domestic suppliers (Markusen and Venables 1999).…”
Section: Fdi Spillover Channelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the evidence for the UK seems to be more supportive of a regional dimension of the spillover effect. Driffield (2004), using UK sector‐level data, finds the existence of positive productivity spillovers from FDI in the same manufacturing sector and region 5 . Using establishment‐level data for the UK, Girma and Wakelin (2002) and Girma (2005) find positive regional spillovers from FDI.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%