外商直接投资和技术溢出：泰国制造业的一个跨行业分析外文翻译

《外商直接投资和技术溢出：泰国制造业的一个跨行业分析外文翻译》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《外商直接投资和技术溢出：泰国制造业的一个跨行业分析外文翻译（10页珍藏版）》请在毕设资料网上搜索。

1、 出处： World Development, 2006, 34(3): 541-556 中文 3087 字 毕业论文（设计） 外文翻译 一、 外文原文 Foreign direct investment and Technology Spillover: A Cross-industry Analysis of Thai Manufacturing Foreign direct investment (FDI) has been widely recognized as a growth-enhancing factor in investment receiving (host) coun

2、tries. FDI not only brings in capital but also introduces advanced technology that can enhance the technological capability of the host country firms, thereby generating long-term and sustainable economic growth. More importantly, the technological benefit is not limited to locally affiliated firms

3、but can also spread to non-affiliated ones. The latter benefit is usually referred to as technology spillover. The expectation of gaining from technology spillover persuades many developing countries to offer various incentives in order to attract FDI. However the results of empirical research to te

4、st the validity of technology spillover are far from conclusive. Positive technology spillover from FDI has only been found in some countries.1 Overall, the findings seem to suggest technology spillover is not automatic, but depends on both country specific factors and policy environment. Foreign Pr

5、esence in Thai Manufacturing Thirdly, foreign plants are likely to be located in a highly protected industry. The average ERP2 of industries whose output shares of foreign plants are greater than 50% is 15.3%. The exception in these industries would be electrical machinery which is presumably domina

6、ted by labor-intensive assembled electronics and electrical appliances. On the other hand, regarding the industries where the share of foreign plants is less than 50%, average ERP tends to be lower at around 10.8%. In addition, the output share of foreign plants is likely to be associated with the d

7、egree of market concentration. Involvement of foreign plants in the manufacturing sector was predominately in import substituting industries such as textiles, automobiles, and chemicals up to about the late 1970s (Akira, 1989). From then on, it was directed to more export-oriented activities. To beg

8、in with, export-oriented foreign firms entered light manufacturing industries such as clothing, footwear, and toys. More recently, labor-intensive assembly activities in electronics and electrical goods industries have been the main attraction for foreign investors (Kohpaiboon, 2005). Such involveme

9、nt has closely mirrored the shift in the trade policy regime. Thailand began its first national economic development plan in 1961 with an import substitution (IS) regime to promote industrialization. Tariffs were the major instrument used to influence the countrys development path. The role of tarif

10、fs to promote the domestic industry effectively began in 1974 with the imposition of an escalating tariff structure, where the tariff rate ascended from raw materials to finished products. These changes increasingly favored the production of finished products, particularly consumer products. In 1975

11、, the range of the effective rate of protection (ERP) in the Thai manufacturing sector was between 36 to 350% (Akrasanee & Ajanant, 1986). In 1982, the variation widened from 25.2 to 1,693.4% (Chunanantathum et al. 1984). Several industries, such as textiles, tyres, furniture, automobiles, and leath

12、er products, had an extremely high ERP. There was also a high degree of variation in ERP across industries. This tariff structure remained virtually unchanged until the late 1980s, even though in 1974 the government announced a change in development strategy to an export promotion (EP) regime. Signi

13、ficant tariff reductions commenced in 1988, starting with electrical and electronic goods as well as with the inputs into these products. Comprehensive packages of tariff reform were implemented in 1995 and 1997. It involved tariff reduction and rationalization. Maximum tariffs were reduced from 100

14、% in the early 1990s to 30%. By the end of the 1990s, the tariff bands were reduced from 39 to 6 tariff rates (0, 1, 5, 10, 20 and 30%). The two low rates (0 and 1%) were for raw materials and the two top rates (20 and 30%) for finished products with the two middle rates for intermediate goods. In a

15、ddition, tariff restructuring has received renewed emphasis as an essential part of the overall economic reforms aimed at strengthening efficiency and competitiveness over the past two years. The Thai government introduced another effort to lower tariff rates, commencing in June 2003 (implemented in

16、 October 2003), followed by a fouryear period of tariff reduction from 2004 to 2008. There are around 900 items involved in the second round of tariff reductions, covering a wide range of manufacturing products. The tariff reduction in this round is mainly on intermediate products, thereby maintaini

17、ng the escalating tariff structure. The magnitude of tariff reduction is moderate, within the range of 0 to 8.9% (Athukorala et al. 2004). As a result, average tariffs declined markedly from 30.2% in 1990 to 21.3% in 1995 and further to 11% in 2005. The dispersion of ERP also narrowed over the perio

18、ds across industries. In 2003, the ERP range reduced to -27.1 to 142% (Athukorala et al. 2004).4 The changes in the tariff structure would have significantly improved the incentive to attract FDI to industries where Thailand has a comparative advantage in international production. Analytical Framewo

19、rk Technology spillover from FDI is said to take place when the presence of a foreign firm generates productivity or efficiency benefits for the host countrys local non-affiliated firms (Blomstrm & Kokko,1998). As mentioned, technology spillover from FDI is not automatic but rather conditioned on th

20、e nature of the trade policy regime across industries. A theoretical framework for examining the effect of the trade policy regime on the gains from FDI in a given host country was first presented by Bhagwati (1973) as an extension to his theory of immiserizing growth. It was further developed by Bh

21、agwati (1985, 1994)； Brecher & Diaz-Alejandro (1977)； and Brecher & Findlay (1983). A key hypothesis arising from this literature is that technology spillover tends to be smaller, or possibly even negative, under a restrictive, import substitution (IS) regime compared with a liberalizing, export pro

22、motion (EP) regime. To illustrate how technology spillover takes place as well as how the trade policy regime across industries can alter the magnitude of these spillovers as suggested by Bhagwati (1973), we use the theoretical model developed by Wang & Blomstrm (1992). In the model, there are two firms, namely an affiliate of a multinational