Keywords
transition economies
foreign direct investment
investment climate
How to Cite
Abstract
The importance of foreign direct investment in transition economies has significantly increased over the last several decades. Foreign investors are recognized as important drivers shaping the local entrepreneurial ecosystem. This paper aims to explore investors’ satisfaction with the factors previously identified as important for improving entrepreneurial ecosystems, that is, factors that both positively contribute to the development of local businesses as well as generate further foreign investment flow. Empirically we draw upon small case studies with managers of 38-42 key foreign investor companies in Latvia conducted in 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. In the first data collection wave, we identify key challenges that foreign investors face in Latvia. In the following data collection waves, we measure the development in the identified areas of concern and thus the overall entrepreneurial ecosystem of Latvia. Given that Latvia is a transition country in the advanced stage of development, the focus is on issues related to productivity and value added, including the availability of high quality labor force, the efficiency of public sector, and favorable tax regimes as well as challenges posed by unethical and illegal behavior, labor shortages, and elements of uncertainty. Our results suggest that foreign investors see a number of challenges within the all afore-mentioned areas that are important parts of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Moreover, our findings suggest that progress with regards to the improvement of certain areas such as those mentioned previously from the viewpoint of foreign investors, was relatively slow during the period of 2015-2018. Our key contribution is providing with an in- depth analysis of factors shaping the entrepreneurial ecosystem in an advanced transition economy-from the viewpoint of foreign direct investors. We explore investors’ opinions with regard to the investment climate to summarize investors’ suggestions on how the entrepreneurial ecosystem in Latvia could be further developed. Our findings provide a scope for tailor-made, targeted policy recommendations to achieve these goals.
References
Almfraji M.A., Almsafir M.K. (2014) Foreign direct investment and economic growth, literature review from 1994 to 2012 // Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 129. P. 206-213.
Anderson E., Gatignon H. (1986) Modes of entry: A transactions cost analysis and propositions // Journal of International Business Studies. Vol. 17. № 3. P. 1-26.
Anwar S., Nguyen L.P. (2011) Foreign direct investment and export spillovers: Evidence from Vietnam // International Business Review. Vol. 20. P. 177-193.
Barbosa N., Eiriz V. (2009) Linking corporate productivity to foreign direct investment: An empirical assessment // International Business Review. Vol. 18. P. 1-13.
Bevan A., Estrin S., Meyer K. (2004) Foreign investment location and institutional development in transition economies // International Business Review. Vol. 12. P. 43-64.
Blomstrom M., Kokko A. (2003) The economics of foreign direct investment incentives // Foreign Direct Investment in the Real and Financial Sector of Industrial Countries / Ed. H. Herrmann. Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, New York: Springer. P. 37-60.
CSB (2017) Statistical Yearbook of Latvia 2017. Riga: Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia.
Carkovic M., Levine R., (2002) Does Foreign Direct Investment Accelerate Economic Growth? University of Minnesota Working Paper. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
Carvalho L., Costa T., Dominguinhos P. (2010) Creating an entrepreneurship ecosystem in higher education // New achievements in technology education and development / Ed. S. Soomro. New York: InTech. P. 1-20. Режим доступа: https://www.intechopen.com/books/new-achievements-in-technology-education-and-development/creating-an-entrepreneurship-ecosystem-in-higher-education, дата обращения 23.03.2019.
Cerrato D., Crosato L., Depperu D. (2016) Archetypes of SME internationalization: A configurational approach // International Business Review. Vol. 26. P. 286-295.
Chen P., Danchi T., Jean R.B. (2016) Foreign knowledge acquisition through inter-firm collaboration and recruitment: Implications for domestic growth of emerging market firms // International Business Review. Vol. 25. P. 221-232.
Chittoor R., Sarkar M.B., Ray S., Aulakh P.S. (2009) Third-world copycats to emerging multinationals: Institutional changes and organizational transformation in the Indian pharmaceutical industry // Organization Science. Vol. 20. № 1. P. 187-205.
Choi J.J., Lee S.M., Shoham A. (2016) The effects of institutional distance on FDI inflow: General environmental institutions (GEI) versus minority investor protection institutions (MIP) // International Business Review. Vol. 25. P. 114-123.
Coe D.T., Helpman E. (1994) International R&D spillovers // European Economic Review. Vol. 39. P. 859-887.
Davidsson P. (2004) Researching Entrepreneurship. Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, New York: Springer.
De Mello L.R. (1999) Foreign direct investment-led growth: Evidence from time series and panel data // Oxford Economic Papers. Vol. 51. № 1. P. 133-151.
Devajit M. (2012) Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Indian economy // Research Journal of Management Sciences. Vol. 1. № 2. P. 29-31.
Dixon W.J., Boswell T. (1996) Dependency, disarticulation, and denominator effects: Another look at foreign capital penetration // American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 102. № 2. P. 543-562.
EBRD (2016) EBRD transition report 2015-16. Rebalancing finance. London: European Bank of Reconstruction and Development.
EBRD (2017) EBRD transition report 2016-17. Transition for all: Equal opportunities in an unequal world. London: European Bank of Reconstruction and Development.
Elango B., Pattnaik C. (2007) Building capabilities for international operations through networks: A study of Indian firms // Journal of International Business Studies. Vol. 38. № 4. P. 541-555.
Eriksson K., Johanson J., Majkgard A., Deo Sharma D. (1997) Effect of Variation on Knowledge Accumulation in the Internationalization Process // International Studies of Management and Organization. Vol. 30. № 1. P. 26-44.
Etzkowitz H. (2008) The Triple Helix: University-Industry-Government Innovation in Action. London: Routledge.
Fletcher M., Harris S. (2012) Knowledge acquisition for the internationalization of the smaller firm: Content and sources // International Business Review. Vol. 21. № 4. P. 631-647.
Fuerlinger G., Fandl U., Funke T. (2015) The role of the state in the entrepreneurship ecosystem: Insights from Germany // Triple Helix. Vol. 2. № 1. Article 3. Режим доступа: , дата обращения 14.05.2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40604-014-0015-9
Giroud A., Scott-Kennel J. (2009) MNE linkages in international business: A framework for analysis // International Business Review. Vol. 18. P. 555-566.
Gorg H., Hijzen A. (2004) Multinationals and productivity spillovers. GEP Research Paper 04/41. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.
Isenberg D.J. (2010) How to start an entrepreneurial revolution // Harvard Business Review. Vol. 88. № 6. P. 41-50.
Isenberg D.J. (2011) Introducing the Entrepreneurship Ecosystem: Four Defining Characteristics // Forbes. 25.05.2011. Режим доступа: http://www.forbes.com/sites/danisenberg/2011/05/25/introducing-the-entrepreneurshipecosystem-four-defining-characteristics/, дата обращения 17.04.2019.
Lipsey R.E., Sjoholm F. (2004) Host country impacts of inward FDI: Why such different answers? EIJS Working Paper 192. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics.
Liu Z. (2008) Foreign direct investment and technology spillovers: Theory and evidenc // Journal of Development Economics. Vol. 85. P. 176-193.
Manuchehr I., Ericsson J. (2001) On the causality between foreign direct investment and output: A comparative study // The International Trade Journal. Vol. 15. № 1. P. 1-26.
Mason C., Brown R. (2014) Entrepreneurial ecosystems and growth orientated entrepreneurship. Background paper prepared for the workshop organised by the OECD LEED Programme and the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs. Paris: OECD.
Narula R., Dunning J.H. (2000) Industrial development, globalization and multinational enterprises: New realities for developing countries // Oxford Development Studies. Vol. 28. № 2. P. 141-167.
North D. (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Popescu G.H. (2014) FDI and Economic Growth in Central and Eastern Europe // Sustainability. Vol. 6. P. 8149-8163.
Putnins T., Sauka A. (2015) Measuring the shadow economy using company managers // Journal of Comparative Economics. Vol. 43. P. 471-490.
Rivera-Batiz A.L., Oliva M. (2003) International trade, theory, strategies and evidence. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sauka A., Chepurenko A. (2017) (eds.) Entrepreneurship in transition economies. Diversity, trends and perspectives. Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, New York: Springer.
Smallbone D., Welter F. (2001) The distinctiveness of entrepreneurship in transition economies // Small Business Economics. Vol. 16. № 4. P. 249-262.
Smallbone D., Welter, F. (2006) Conceptualising entrepreneurship in a transition context // International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business. Vol. 3. № 2. P. 190-206.
Takki S., Ramstetter E.D. (2015) Exporting and foreign ownership in Indonesian manufacturing, 1990-2000 // Ekonomi dan Keuangan Indonesia. Vol. 54. № 3. P. 315-343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7454/efi.v54i3.102
Xu D., Meyer, K.E. (2013) Linking theory and context: ‘Strategy research in emerging economies' after Wright et al. (2005) // Journal of Management Studies. Vol. 50. P. 1322-1346.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.