Environmental Regulation Induced Foreign Direct Investment
Tóm tắt
The last decade has witnessed a renewed interest in the relationship between environmental regulations and international capital flows. However, empirical studies have so far failed to find conclusive evidence for this so-called pollution haven or race to the bottom effect where foreign direct investment (FDI) is assumed to be attracted to low regulation countries, regions or states. In this paper we present a simple theoretical framework to demonstrate that greater stringency in environmental standards can lead to a strategic increase in capital inflows which we refer to as environmental regulation induced FDI. Our result reveals a possible explanation for the mixed results in the empirical literature and provides an illustration of the conditions under which environmental regulations in the host country can affect the location decision of foreign firms.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Baumol W, Oates WE (1975) The theory of environmental policy. J Public Econ 5:187–189
Baumol W, Oates WE (1988) The theory of environmental policy, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Brainard SL (1992) A simple theory of multinational corporations and trade with a trade-off between proximity and concentration. NBER Working Paper No. 4269, NBER
Buchanan JM (1969) External diseconomics, corrective taxes, and market structure. Am Econ Rev 59(1): 174–177
Chichilnisky G (1994) North-South trade and the global environment. Am Econ Rev 84:851–874
Cole MA, Elliott RJR, Fredriksson PG (2006) Endogenous pollution havens: does FDI influence environmental regulations? Scand J Econ 108:157–178
De Santis RA, Stahler F (2009) Foreign direct investment and environmental taxes. Ger Econ Rev 10:115–135
Dijkstra BR, Mathew AJ, Mukherjee A (2011) Environmental regulation: an incentive for foreign direct investment. Rev Int Econ 19:568–578
Eskeland GS, Harrison AE (2003) Moving to Greener Pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis. J Dev Econ 70:1–23
Fredriksson PG (1997) The political economy of pollution taxes in a small open economy. J Environ Econ Manag 33:44–58
Fredriksson PG (1999) The political economy of trade liberalization and environmental policy. South Econ J 65:513–525
Fredriksson PG, List JA, Millimet DL (2003) Bureaucratic corruption environmental policy and inbound US FDI: theory and evidence. J Public Econ 87:1407–1430
Horstmann IJ, Markusen JR (1987) Strategic investments and the development of multinationals. Int Econ Rev 28:109–121
Horstmann IJ, Markusen JR (1992) Endogenous market structures in international trade (natura facit saltum). J Int Econ 32:109–129
Hoel M (1997) Environmental policy with endogenous plant locations. Scand J Econ 99:241–259
Hillman AL, Ursprung HW (1992) The influence of environmental concerns on the political determination of international trade policy. In: Blackhurst R, Anderson K (eds) The greening of world trade issues, pp 195–220
Hillman AL, Ursprung HW (1993) The multinational firm, political competition and international trade policy. Int Econ Rev 34:347–363
Kayalica MO, Lahiri S (2005) Strategic environmental policies in the presence of foreign direct investment. Environ Resour Econ 30:1–21
Keller W, Levinson A (2002) Pollution abatement costs and foreign direct investment inflows to the US states. Rev Econ Stat 84(4):691–703
Levinson A (1996a) Environmental regulations and industrial location. In: Bhagwati J, Hudec R (eds) Fair trade and harmonization, vol 1. MIT Press, Cambridge
Levinson A (1996b) Environmental regulations and manufacturers’ location choices: evidence from the census of manufactures. J Public Econ 62:5–29
Levinson A, Taylor MS (2008) Unmasking the pollution haven effect. Int Econ Rev 49:223–254
List JA, Co CY (2000) The effects of environmental regulations on foreign direct investment. J Environ Econ Manag 40:1–20
Markusen JR, Morey ER, Olwiler N (1993) Environmental policy when market structure and plant locations are endogenous. J Environ Econ Manag 24:69–86
Markusen JR, Morey ER, Olwiler N (1995) Competition in regional environmental policies when plant locations are endogenous. J Public Econ 56:55–77
Motta M (1992) Multinational firms and the tariff-jumping argument. Eur Econ Rev 36:1557–1571
Motta M, Thisse J-F (1994) Does environmental dumping lead to delocation? Eur Econ Rev 38:563–576
Oates WE, Schwab RM (1988) Economic competition among jurisdictions: efficiency enhancing or distortion inducing. J Public Eco 35:333–354
Pearson C (1987) Multinational corporation, environment and the third world. Duke University Press, Durham
Rauscher M (1995) Environmental regulation and the location of polluting industries. Int Tax Public Financ 2:229–244
Rowthorn RE (1992) Intra-industry trade and investment under oligopoly: the role of market size. Econ J 102:402–414
Sanna-Randaccio F, Sestini R (2012) The impact of unilateral climate policy with endogenous plant location and market size asymmetry. Rev Int Econ 20(3):439–656
Sartzetakis ES (1997) Raising rivals’ costs strategies via emission permit markets. Rev Ind Organ 12:751–765
Smarzynska BK, Wei SJ (2001) Pollution havens and foreign direct investment: dirty secret or popular myth, NBER Working Paper No. 8465, NBER
Smith A (1987) Strategic investment, multinational corporations and trade policy. Eur Econ Rev 31:89–96
Solow RM (1974) The economics of resources or the resources of economics. Am Econ Rev 64(2):1–14
Ulph A, Valentini L (2001) Is environmental dumping greater when plants are footloose? Scand J Econ 103:673–688
Xing Y, Kolstad CD (2002) Do Lax environmental regulations attract foreign investment? Environ Resour Econ 21(1):1–22
Zarsky L (1999) Havens, Halos and Spaghetti: untangling the evidence about foreign direct investment and environment, foreign direct investment and the environment. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris