Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment

Foreign direct investment (FDI) is an important element of the global economy and a central component of economic development strategies of both developed and developing countries. Numerous scholars theorize that the economic benefits of attracting multinational corporations come at tremendous polit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International organization 2003-07, Vol.57 (3), p.587-616
1. Verfasser: Jensen, Nathan M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 616
container_issue 3
container_start_page 587
container_title International organization
container_volume 57
creator Jensen, Nathan M.
description Foreign direct investment (FDI) is an important element of the global economy and a central component of economic development strategies of both developed and developing countries. Numerous scholars theorize that the economic benefits of attracting multinational corporations come at tremendous political costs, arguing that democratic political systems attract lower levels of international investment than their authoritarian counterparts. Using both cross-sectional and time-series cross-sectional tests of the determinants of FDI for more than 100 countries, I generate results that are inconsistent with these dire predictions. Democratic political systems attract higher levels of FDI inflows both across countries and within countries over time. Democratic countries are predicted to attract as much as 70 percent more FDI than their authoritarian counterparts. In a final empirical test, I examine how democratic institutions affect country credibility by empirically analyzing the link between democracy and sovereign debt risk for about eighty countries from 1980 to 1998. These empirical tests challenge the conventional wisdom on the preferences of multinationals for authoritarian regimes.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S0020818303573040
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60702143</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0020818303573040</cupid><jstor_id>3594838</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3594838</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-9e2853c4143745d211685a16d00bbf78f7be8999fd9d3b247ba30f2558cbbfc23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV1rFDEYhYMouNb-AMGLAcG70TfJ5Ms73brbYovWD7wMmUxmyTqTbJPZav-92d1SQZFeheQ557yHvAg9w_AKAxavvwAQkFhSoExQaOABmmFGcc1AyodotsP1jj9GT3JeAwBusJqhzYkbo01m8rZaxmuXggnWVSZ01cV2mHwoJAYzVPOYNjHtb_lN9SkOvljK-2e38qPLe8dZ6If4M1exrxYxOb8K1YlPzk6FXLs8jS5MT9Gj3gzZHd-eR-jb4v3X-Wl9_nF5Nn97XlvW8KlWjkhGbYMbKhrWEYy5ZAbzDqBteyF70TqplOo71dGWNKI1FHrCmLSFW0KP0MtD7ibFq20ZrkefrRsGE1zcZs1BACnp9wqpZFiAuj8RK46J4qIIX_wlXMdt-dgha0IIp4LwfRw-qGyKOSfX603yo0k3GoPe7VT_s9PieX7wrPMU052BMtVIKguuD9jnyf26wyb90KWWYJovL_WH03eKfVdCL4qe3lYwY5t8t3J_mv6_xG9fr7sx</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2226372692</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Jensen, Nathan M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Nathan M.</creatorcontrib><description>Foreign direct investment (FDI) is an important element of the global economy and a central component of economic development strategies of both developed and developing countries. Numerous scholars theorize that the economic benefits of attracting multinational corporations come at tremendous political costs, arguing that democratic political systems attract lower levels of international investment than their authoritarian counterparts. Using both cross-sectional and time-series cross-sectional tests of the determinants of FDI for more than 100 countries, I generate results that are inconsistent with these dire predictions. Democratic political systems attract higher levels of FDI inflows both across countries and within countries over time. Democratic countries are predicted to attract as much as 70 percent more FDI than their authoritarian counterparts. In a final empirical test, I examine how democratic institutions affect country credibility by empirically analyzing the link between democracy and sovereign debt risk for about eighty countries from 1980 to 1998. These empirical tests challenge the conventional wisdom on the preferences of multinationals for authoritarian regimes.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-8183</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-5088</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0020818303573040</identifier><identifier>CODEN: IOCMFZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Authoritarianism ; Credibility ; Cross-sectional analysis ; Democracy ; Developing countries ; Development strategies ; Economic Development ; Economic growth models ; Empirical tests ; External debt ; Fiona ; Foreign direct investment ; Foreign Investment ; Global economy ; Governance ; Government ; Gross domestic product ; Intellectuals ; International relations ; LDCs ; Linear regression ; Multinational Corporations ; Multinational enterprises ; National debt ; Political economy ; Political institutions ; Political regimes ; Political Systems ; Sovereign debt ; Time series ; Wisdom ; World Economy</subject><ispartof>International organization, 2003-07, Vol.57 (3), p.587-616</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The IO Foundation 2003</rights><rights>Copyright 2003 The IO Foundation</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-9e2853c4143745d211685a16d00bbf78f7be8999fd9d3b247ba30f2558cbbfc23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-9e2853c4143745d211685a16d00bbf78f7be8999fd9d3b247ba30f2558cbbfc23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3594838$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818303573040/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,803,27865,27923,27924,55627,58016,58249</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Nathan M.</creatorcontrib><title>Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment</title><title>International organization</title><addtitle>Int Org</addtitle><description>Foreign direct investment (FDI) is an important element of the global economy and a central component of economic development strategies of both developed and developing countries. Numerous scholars theorize that the economic benefits of attracting multinational corporations come at tremendous political costs, arguing that democratic political systems attract lower levels of international investment than their authoritarian counterparts. Using both cross-sectional and time-series cross-sectional tests of the determinants of FDI for more than 100 countries, I generate results that are inconsistent with these dire predictions. Democratic political systems attract higher levels of FDI inflows both across countries and within countries over time. Democratic countries are predicted to attract as much as 70 percent more FDI than their authoritarian counterparts. In a final empirical test, I examine how democratic institutions affect country credibility by empirically analyzing the link between democracy and sovereign debt risk for about eighty countries from 1980 to 1998. These empirical tests challenge the conventional wisdom on the preferences of multinationals for authoritarian regimes.</description><subject>Authoritarianism</subject><subject>Credibility</subject><subject>Cross-sectional analysis</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Developing countries</subject><subject>Development strategies</subject><subject>Economic Development</subject><subject>Economic growth models</subject><subject>Empirical tests</subject><subject>External debt</subject><subject>Fiona</subject><subject>Foreign direct investment</subject><subject>Foreign Investment</subject><subject>Global economy</subject><subject>Governance</subject><subject>Government</subject><subject>Gross domestic product</subject><subject>Intellectuals</subject><subject>International relations</subject><subject>LDCs</subject><subject>Linear regression</subject><subject>Multinational Corporations</subject><subject>Multinational enterprises</subject><subject>National debt</subject><subject>Political economy</subject><subject>Political institutions</subject><subject>Political regimes</subject><subject>Political Systems</subject><subject>Sovereign debt</subject><subject>Time series</subject><subject>Wisdom</subject><subject>World Economy</subject><issn>0020-8183</issn><issn>1531-5088</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkV1rFDEYhYMouNb-AMGLAcG70TfJ5Ms73brbYovWD7wMmUxmyTqTbJPZav-92d1SQZFeheQ557yHvAg9w_AKAxavvwAQkFhSoExQaOABmmFGcc1AyodotsP1jj9GT3JeAwBusJqhzYkbo01m8rZaxmuXggnWVSZ01cV2mHwoJAYzVPOYNjHtb_lN9SkOvljK-2e38qPLe8dZ6If4M1exrxYxOb8K1YlPzk6FXLs8jS5MT9Gj3gzZHd-eR-jb4v3X-Wl9_nF5Nn97XlvW8KlWjkhGbYMbKhrWEYy5ZAbzDqBteyF70TqplOo71dGWNKI1FHrCmLSFW0KP0MtD7ibFq20ZrkefrRsGE1zcZs1BACnp9wqpZFiAuj8RK46J4qIIX_wlXMdt-dgha0IIp4LwfRw-qGyKOSfX603yo0k3GoPe7VT_s9PieX7wrPMU052BMtVIKguuD9jnyf26wyb90KWWYJovL_WH03eKfVdCL4qe3lYwY5t8t3J_mv6_xG9fr7sx</recordid><startdate>20030701</startdate><enddate>20030701</enddate><creator>Jensen, Nathan M.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>MIT Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030701</creationdate><title>Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment</title><author>Jensen, Nathan M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-9e2853c4143745d211685a16d00bbf78f7be8999fd9d3b247ba30f2558cbbfc23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Authoritarianism</topic><topic>Credibility</topic><topic>Cross-sectional analysis</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Developing countries</topic><topic>Development strategies</topic><topic>Economic Development</topic><topic>Economic growth models</topic><topic>Empirical tests</topic><topic>External debt</topic><topic>Fiona</topic><topic>Foreign direct investment</topic><topic>Foreign Investment</topic><topic>Global economy</topic><topic>Governance</topic><topic>Government</topic><topic>Gross domestic product</topic><topic>Intellectuals</topic><topic>International relations</topic><topic>LDCs</topic><topic>Linear regression</topic><topic>Multinational Corporations</topic><topic>Multinational enterprises</topic><topic>National debt</topic><topic>Political economy</topic><topic>Political institutions</topic><topic>Political regimes</topic><topic>Political Systems</topic><topic>Sovereign debt</topic><topic>Time series</topic><topic>Wisdom</topic><topic>World Economy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Nathan M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>International organization</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jensen, Nathan M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment</atitle><jtitle>International organization</jtitle><addtitle>Int Org</addtitle><date>2003-07-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>587</spage><epage>616</epage><pages>587-616</pages><issn>0020-8183</issn><eissn>1531-5088</eissn><coden>IOCMFZ</coden><abstract>Foreign direct investment (FDI) is an important element of the global economy and a central component of economic development strategies of both developed and developing countries. Numerous scholars theorize that the economic benefits of attracting multinational corporations come at tremendous political costs, arguing that democratic political systems attract lower levels of international investment than their authoritarian counterparts. Using both cross-sectional and time-series cross-sectional tests of the determinants of FDI for more than 100 countries, I generate results that are inconsistent with these dire predictions. Democratic political systems attract higher levels of FDI inflows both across countries and within countries over time. Democratic countries are predicted to attract as much as 70 percent more FDI than their authoritarian counterparts. In a final empirical test, I examine how democratic institutions affect country credibility by empirically analyzing the link between democracy and sovereign debt risk for about eighty countries from 1980 to 1998. These empirical tests challenge the conventional wisdom on the preferences of multinationals for authoritarian regimes.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0020818303573040</doi><tpages>30</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0020-8183
ispartof International organization, 2003-07, Vol.57 (3), p.587-616
issn 0020-8183
1531-5088
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_60702143
source PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; HeinOnline Law Journal Library; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete
subjects Authoritarianism
Credibility
Cross-sectional analysis
Democracy
Developing countries
Development strategies
Economic Development
Economic growth models
Empirical tests
External debt
Fiona
Foreign direct investment
Foreign Investment
Global economy
Governance
Government
Gross domestic product
Intellectuals
International relations
LDCs
Linear regression
Multinational Corporations
Multinational enterprises
National debt
Political economy
Political institutions
Political regimes
Political Systems
Sovereign debt
Time series
Wisdom
World Economy
title Democratic Governance and Multinational Corporations: Political Regimes and Inflows of Foreign Direct Investment
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T14%3A49%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Democratic%20Governance%20and%20Multinational%20Corporations:%20Political%20Regimes%20and%20Inflows%20of%20Foreign%20Direct%20Investment&rft.jtitle=International%20organization&rft.au=Jensen,%20Nathan%20M.&rft.date=2003-07-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=587&rft.epage=616&rft.pages=587-616&rft.issn=0020-8183&rft.eissn=1531-5088&rft.coden=IOCMFZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0020818303573040&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3594838%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2226372692&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0020818303573040&rft_jstor_id=3594838&rfr_iscdi=true