后冲突转型国家的FDI研究
|
摘要
后冲突转型国家目前在世界上是一个独特的群体,虽然该类国家国内在不同程度上存在着一些不稳定因素,但是总体形势正在不断改善。这些国家都面临着“如何吸引FDI促进经济发展”的难题。目前看来,该领域的的理论研究和实证检验都是一个新的研究领域,现有的研究相对较少。因此,本文将对这一问题进行探索。
本文认为,外商直接投资(FDI)可作为后冲突转型国家振兴经济的主要方式之一,因为它将有助于此类国家扩大资本存量,加速技术进步、增加就业机会、进一步吸引外来援助等各种有形和无形的收益。在经济全球化的背景下,外商直接投资无疑还将有利于后冲突转型国家实现长期的经济稳定,从而实现与国际市场接轨。最为重要的是,通过外商直接投资,后冲突转型国家能够逐步实现自行增长,走上独立自主的社会发展之路。
随着国内政治形势的逐步好转和稳定,对于外商投资者而言,大部分后冲突转型国家均提供了具有吸引力的高收益机会,同时也包含着一些独有的投资风险,诸如国有化、政策的连续和稳定性、贪污腐败等政治及经济风险。为了消除外商投资者在这方面存在的种种顾虑,后冲突转型国家政府通常会制定相应的法律和政策,以便确保和激励外商投资者的投资。与此同时,外商投资企业或跨国公司出于对自身利益的考虑,也会选择不同的资本进入和盈利模式。以这些问题为背景,本文的一个特点就在于,构建了一个关于后冲突转型国家和跨国公司之间的博弈模型。
把后冲突转型国家政府与跨国公司(外商投资企业)作为参与博弈的双方,该博弈模型为文章提供了一个基本的理论分析框架；其中,转型国家调整结构的意愿和效果与跨国公司FDI战略存在着某种相关性。具体地说,东道国在其政治目标的实现与招商引资之间存在着某种替代关系,而跨国公司的目的则是选择最恰当的资本进入方式进入东道国,如跨国并购或者新设投资(或称“绿地投资”)等。该博弈模型存在两个均衡：第一个均衡是(FT, AQ),即东道国致力于快速的经济结构调整,颁布和实施市场化政策,跨国公司则选择在现有政策下通过跨国并购进入市场,这个均衡总可在产业结构调整过程中形成。第二个均衡是(GD, NP)。即东道国选择渐进的改革方式,跨国公司则更多地通过设立新厂,直接转移技术和管理知识。博弈模型体现了东道国政府和跨国公司之间的相互适应过程。
实证分析部分。本文运用1980-2009年的36个后冲突转型国家的宏观经济面板数据,对该类国家的政府政策与外商直接投资之间的相关性进行了实证分析。由此得到的结果表明,东道国国内生产总值的增长速度、基础设施、政治稳定、贸易开放政策等是外商直接投资的主要决定因素。
尼泊尔是一个典型的后冲突转型国家。本文利用尼泊尔1980-2009年宏观经济面板数据及国内的相关政策变量,对尼泊尔利用外资数量进行了回归检验,结果显示出外商直接投资与尼泊尔国内宏观经济变量和开放政策之间存在高度的相关关系。
总之,本文将理论研究与后冲突国家现实将结合,采用博弈模型与实证检验的分析方法,对后冲突转型国家吸引FDI理论和现实进行了初步的探索,得出了一些研究结论。限于文章相关模型的拓展难度和后冲突国家资料和数据有限,很多研究还欠深入,尚需要进一步探索。
The post-conflicting and transitional countries are viewed as a kind of some special ones in today's world. While there remains some degree of political instability, hopefully they are in the phase of the peace and development now. For those nations, how to attract more FDI represents a meaningful but challenging question. And, as we see, such a topic has received little attention for economists yet. Realizing the very importance of FDI, this dissertation will examine and explore that the role of FDI in the post conflict transactional economy.
FDI is one of the main ways for post-conflict countries to increase economy, as it can help these countries to increase their stock of capital, accelerate technology advancement, generate employment, and bring about other visible or invisible benefits such as foreign assistance. FDI is also conducive for the long-term economic stability of post-conflict countries, creating conditions for their integration with world market, which is extremely important in the context of economic globalization. Most importantly, the ultimate goal of encouraging FDI is to help post-conflict countries realize independent economic growth and embark on a road of independent social development.
With improving political situation, post-conflict countries will provide highly profitable investment opportunities, making them appealing in the eyes of most foreign investors. But there is a widespread concern over some political and economic risks specific to these countries, such as the uncertainties in nationalization, the inconsistency and instability of policies, serious bribery and corruption, just to name a few. In order to eliminate the concerns of foreign investors, post-conflict countries have made regulations and policies correspondingly to encourage investment. In the mean time, for the sake of their own interests, foreign investment enterprises (or multinational corporations) will also make a comparison among different model of entry of capital and different business modes to find the way that suits them best. Considering these facts, this paper develops a game model between post-conflict countries and multinational corporations.
Taking post-conflict countries and multinational corporations as two game players, the proposed game model provides a basic theoretical framework for the paper, in which the will of the nations in transition to restructure and the effect of restructuring is somewhat correlated with the FDI strategy adopted by multinational corporations. Specifically speaking, on the part of host countries, there is a substitution relationship between the realization of their political goals and the encouragement of investment, while on the part of investors, their aim is to enter the target country with most appropriate entry mode of capital, such as the cross-border acquisitions, the newly created investment (also referred as "Greenfield Investment"), etc. The proposed game model can reach two equilibriums. The first equilibrium (FT, AQ) is a state where host countries actively issue and implement relevant market policies to realize rapid economic restructuring, while multinational corporations enter the host country through cross-border acquisition in compliance with current policies. This equilibrium is to be reached in the process of industry restructuring. The second equilibrium (GD, NP) means a state where host countries adopt progressive reforming mode, while multinational corporations prefer to directly transfer technology and management knowledge through establishing new plants. The game model represents the mutually adaptation process between post-conflict countries and multinational corporations.
Drawing on the panel data of 36 post-conflict countries from 1980-2009, the paper carries out an empirical analysis of these macroeconomic data and the correlation between governmental policies and FDI. The analysis results show that the major factors affecting FDI are the growth rate of GDP, the infrastructure construction, the political stability, the opening degree of trade, etc. of host countries.
Nepal, the motherland of the author, is one of the post-conflict country. The paper utilizes the macroeconomic panel data of Nepal from 1980 to 2009 and relevant policy variables to conduct a regression test of Nepal's introduction of foreign investment. The test results suggest a high correlation between the amount of FDI with Nepal's macroeconomic variables and the opening policies.
Combining theoretical analysis with the reality of post-conflict countries, the paper constructs a game model and adopts empirical approaches to make preliminary exploration into the theory and practice of post-conflict countries'introduction of FDI. However, due to the difficulty in extending the proposed model and the limited access to the material and data concerning post-conflict countries, the explanation given in this paper is not sufficient enough, thus requiring further exploration.
本文认为,外商直接投资(FDI)可作为后冲突转型国家振兴经济的主要方式之一,因为它将有助于此类国家扩大资本存量,加速技术进步、增加就业机会、进一步吸引外来援助等各种有形和无形的收益。在经济全球化的背景下,外商直接投资无疑还将有利于后冲突转型国家实现长期的经济稳定,从而实现与国际市场接轨。最为重要的是,通过外商直接投资,后冲突转型国家能够逐步实现自行增长,走上独立自主的社会发展之路。
随着国内政治形势的逐步好转和稳定,对于外商投资者而言,大部分后冲突转型国家均提供了具有吸引力的高收益机会,同时也包含着一些独有的投资风险,诸如国有化、政策的连续和稳定性、贪污腐败等政治及经济风险。为了消除外商投资者在这方面存在的种种顾虑,后冲突转型国家政府通常会制定相应的法律和政策,以便确保和激励外商投资者的投资。与此同时,外商投资企业或跨国公司出于对自身利益的考虑,也会选择不同的资本进入和盈利模式。以这些问题为背景,本文的一个特点就在于,构建了一个关于后冲突转型国家和跨国公司之间的博弈模型。
把后冲突转型国家政府与跨国公司(外商投资企业)作为参与博弈的双方,该博弈模型为文章提供了一个基本的理论分析框架；其中,转型国家调整结构的意愿和效果与跨国公司FDI战略存在着某种相关性。具体地说,东道国在其政治目标的实现与招商引资之间存在着某种替代关系,而跨国公司的目的则是选择最恰当的资本进入方式进入东道国,如跨国并购或者新设投资(或称“绿地投资”)等。该博弈模型存在两个均衡：第一个均衡是(FT, AQ),即东道国致力于快速的经济结构调整,颁布和实施市场化政策,跨国公司则选择在现有政策下通过跨国并购进入市场,这个均衡总可在产业结构调整过程中形成。第二个均衡是(GD, NP)。即东道国选择渐进的改革方式,跨国公司则更多地通过设立新厂,直接转移技术和管理知识。博弈模型体现了东道国政府和跨国公司之间的相互适应过程。
实证分析部分。本文运用1980-2009年的36个后冲突转型国家的宏观经济面板数据,对该类国家的政府政策与外商直接投资之间的相关性进行了实证分析。由此得到的结果表明,东道国国内生产总值的增长速度、基础设施、政治稳定、贸易开放政策等是外商直接投资的主要决定因素。
尼泊尔是一个典型的后冲突转型国家。本文利用尼泊尔1980-2009年宏观经济面板数据及国内的相关政策变量,对尼泊尔利用外资数量进行了回归检验,结果显示出外商直接投资与尼泊尔国内宏观经济变量和开放政策之间存在高度的相关关系。
总之,本文将理论研究与后冲突国家现实将结合,采用博弈模型与实证检验的分析方法,对后冲突转型国家吸引FDI理论和现实进行了初步的探索,得出了一些研究结论。限于文章相关模型的拓展难度和后冲突国家资料和数据有限,很多研究还欠深入,尚需要进一步探索。
The post-conflicting and transitional countries are viewed as a kind of some special ones in today's world. While there remains some degree of political instability, hopefully they are in the phase of the peace and development now. For those nations, how to attract more FDI represents a meaningful but challenging question. And, as we see, such a topic has received little attention for economists yet. Realizing the very importance of FDI, this dissertation will examine and explore that the role of FDI in the post conflict transactional economy.
FDI is one of the main ways for post-conflict countries to increase economy, as it can help these countries to increase their stock of capital, accelerate technology advancement, generate employment, and bring about other visible or invisible benefits such as foreign assistance. FDI is also conducive for the long-term economic stability of post-conflict countries, creating conditions for their integration with world market, which is extremely important in the context of economic globalization. Most importantly, the ultimate goal of encouraging FDI is to help post-conflict countries realize independent economic growth and embark on a road of independent social development.
With improving political situation, post-conflict countries will provide highly profitable investment opportunities, making them appealing in the eyes of most foreign investors. But there is a widespread concern over some political and economic risks specific to these countries, such as the uncertainties in nationalization, the inconsistency and instability of policies, serious bribery and corruption, just to name a few. In order to eliminate the concerns of foreign investors, post-conflict countries have made regulations and policies correspondingly to encourage investment. In the mean time, for the sake of their own interests, foreign investment enterprises (or multinational corporations) will also make a comparison among different model of entry of capital and different business modes to find the way that suits them best. Considering these facts, this paper develops a game model between post-conflict countries and multinational corporations.
Taking post-conflict countries and multinational corporations as two game players, the proposed game model provides a basic theoretical framework for the paper, in which the will of the nations in transition to restructure and the effect of restructuring is somewhat correlated with the FDI strategy adopted by multinational corporations. Specifically speaking, on the part of host countries, there is a substitution relationship between the realization of their political goals and the encouragement of investment, while on the part of investors, their aim is to enter the target country with most appropriate entry mode of capital, such as the cross-border acquisitions, the newly created investment (also referred as "Greenfield Investment"), etc. The proposed game model can reach two equilibriums. The first equilibrium (FT, AQ) is a state where host countries actively issue and implement relevant market policies to realize rapid economic restructuring, while multinational corporations enter the host country through cross-border acquisition in compliance with current policies. This equilibrium is to be reached in the process of industry restructuring. The second equilibrium (GD, NP) means a state where host countries adopt progressive reforming mode, while multinational corporations prefer to directly transfer technology and management knowledge through establishing new plants. The game model represents the mutually adaptation process between post-conflict countries and multinational corporations.
Drawing on the panel data of 36 post-conflict countries from 1980-2009, the paper carries out an empirical analysis of these macroeconomic data and the correlation between governmental policies and FDI. The analysis results show that the major factors affecting FDI are the growth rate of GDP, the infrastructure construction, the political stability, the opening degree of trade, etc. of host countries.
Nepal, the motherland of the author, is one of the post-conflict country. The paper utilizes the macroeconomic panel data of Nepal from 1980 to 2009 and relevant policy variables to conduct a regression test of Nepal's introduction of foreign investment. The test results suggest a high correlation between the amount of FDI with Nepal's macroeconomic variables and the opening policies.
Combining theoretical analysis with the reality of post-conflict countries, the paper constructs a game model and adopts empirical approaches to make preliminary exploration into the theory and practice of post-conflict countries'introduction of FDI. However, due to the difficulty in extending the proposed model and the limited access to the material and data concerning post-conflict countries, the explanation given in this paper is not sufficient enough, thus requiring further exploration.
引文
[1]Acharya, R. (1991). Investment Opportunities in Nepal. [J] Udyog Banaijya Magazine,25(2). Kathmandu Nepal
[2]Agrawal, P. (2000). Economic Impact of Foreign Direct Investment in South Asia Bombay. [M] Indira Gandhi Institute of Development
[3]Ajami, R.A.,& Bar N. R. (1984). Utilizing Economic Indicators in Explainning Foreign Direct Investment in the US. [J] Management International Reiview, 24(4)
[4]Aliber, R.Z. (1970). Theory of Direct Foreign Investment. [M]. In C.P Kindleberger (Ed), The International Corporation Cambrige, MA:MIT Press. 16-50
[5]Andersen,O. (1993). On the Internationlization Process of Firms:A Critical Analysis. [J]. Journal of International Business,,24(2):209-232
[6]Arellano, M.,& Bond, S. R. (1991). Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data:Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equation. [J]. Review of Economic Studies,58(2):27-297
[7]Arellano, M.,&, Bover O. (1995). Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error Components Models. [J]. Journal of Econometrics,68(1): 29-51
[8]Aryan, Ramesh C. (1995). Foreign Investment and Techonology Transfer. The Nepal Experience. [J] The Economic Journal of Nepal Kathmandu CEDECON. Tribhuvan University
[9]Barry, F.,& Gorg, F.,& McDowell, A. (2003). Outward FDI and the Investment Development path of a Late-Industrializing Economy:Evidence from Ireland. Regional Studies,37(4):341-49.
[10]Bhagawati, J. N.,& Dinopoulos, E.,& Kong, K.Y. (1992). Quid Pro Quo Foreign Investment. American Economic Review,1992(5).186-190
[11]Binh & Haughton. (2002). Trade Liberalization and Foreign Direct Investment in Vietnam. [J]. ASEAN Economic Bulletin
[12]Bista, R. B. (2005). FDI in Nepal. [J]. Kathmandu:Center for Integrated Development Studies (CIDS)
[13]Blomstr, M.,& A, Kokko. (2002). The Economics of Foreign Direct Investment Incentives. [R]. Working Paper 9489, NBER Working Paper Series
[14]Brett, E.A. (2006). State Failure and Success in Ugenda and Zimbabwe:The Logic of Political Decay and Reconstruction in Africa. [J]. Crisis State Programe Working Paper, N.1-78. Crisis State Research Center. School for Economic London,
[15]Brewer, T. (1993). Government Policies, Market Imperfections and Foreign Direct Investment. [J]. Journal of International Business Studies,24(1) First Quarter
[16]Brinkerhoff, D.W. (2005) Rebuilding Goveranance in Post-Conflict Societes; Core Concept and Cross Cutting Themes. [M]. Public Administration and Development,25(1)3-14
[17]Brown, J.R.,& Dev. D.S.,& Zhou, Z. (2003). Broadening the Foreign Market Entry Modedecision:Separating Ownership and Control. [J]. Journal of International Business Studies,34,473-488.
[18]Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. [M]. Me Graw-Hill
[19]Carbonnier, G. (2003). Undoing War Economices:A Prerequisite for Peaces. [J]. Refugees Survey,22(4),165-170
[20]Central Bureau of Stastics. (2009). Statistical Year Book of Nepal 2009. [DB]. Central Bureau of Statistics, Nepal Government
[21]Central Department of Economics. (2004). Nepalease Economy:Towards Building a Strong Economic Nation-State. [M].1st ed. Central Development of Economics and New Hira Books Enterprises. Kathmandu
[22]Chakrabat, A. (2001). The Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: Sensitivity Analysis of Cross-Country Regressional. [J]. Kyklos,54(1)
[23]Changky, C. (2004). Foreign Direct Investment and Income Convergence. [J]. Applied Economics,36:1045-1049
[24]Chen, H. (1996). Regional Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in Maill and China. [J]. Journal of Economic Studies,23 (2):18-30
[25]Collier, P. (1999). On the Economic Consequences of Civil War. [J]. Oxford Economic Paper,51 (1):168-183
[26]Dango, M. (2003). Problem and Prospect of FDI in Nepal. [D]. MA Thesis submitted to the CEDECON, TU, Kathmandu Nepal
[27]Devereux, M,& P. Grifiith. (1998). Taxes and Creation of Production: Evidence from a Panel of US Multinationals. [J]. Journal of Public Economics, 68(3)
[28]Djankov, S.,& Hart, O.,& T, Nenova. (2002). Efficiency Insolvency, Background Papers for Doing Business in 2003. [R]. Report of Private Sector Advisory Services. World Bank, Washington DC
[29]Dunning, J.H. (1994). Re-evaluating the Benefits of Foreign Direct Investment. [M]. Transnational Corporations,3(1):23-51.
[30]Dunning, J. H.,& R, Narula. (1996). Foreign Direct Investments and Governments. [M]. Routledge, New York
[31]Dunning, J. H. (1981). International Production and the Multinational Enterprise. [M] George Allan and Unwin. London
[32]Dunning, J. H. (1977). Trade, Location of Economic Activity and MNE:A Search for an Eclectic Approach. [J] Ohlin, B. P.,& Hesselborn, O.,& Wijkman, P. M. (Eds) The International Allocation of Economic Activity,395-431. Macmillan. London.
[33]ECLAC. (2003b), The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Patterns of Specialization in the Caribbean.[k] LC/CAR/G.718,16January,2003 b Port-of-Spain:Sub-Regional Headquarters for the Caribbean, Caribbean Development and Cooperation Committee.
[34]Emery, J.,& Spence, M T.,& Wells, L X,& Buehrer, T. (2000). Administrative Barriersto Foreign Investment:Reducing Red Tape in Africa. [J]. International Finance Corporation. Discussion Papers. Washington D. C.
[35](2003). FDI in Land-Locked Developing Countries at a Glance. [M].112 p. UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2003/5
[36](2002). FDI in Least Developed Countries at a Glance. [M].136 p. UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/6.http://www.unctad.org/en/does//iteiia6_en.pdf.
[37]Feng, K.C.,& Iizaka, H.,& Tong, S. (2002 June). Foreign Direct Investment in China:Policy, Trend and Impact. [A]. Paper presented in the conference "China's Economy in the 21st Century".2002, June 24-25. Hong Kong
[38](2007). Financial Year Book. [M] Ministry of Finance
[39](1998). Foreign Investment Act 1992. [DB]. FNCCI. Kathmandu
[40](1998) Industrial Enterprises Act 1992. [DB]. FNCCI. Kathmandu
[41]Maihath, G. J.,& Samuelson, L. (2006) Repeated Games and Reputation-Long run Relationships. [M]. Oxford University Press
[42]Ghironi, F.,& Melitz, M.J. (2005). International Trade and Macroeconomic Dynamics with Heterogeneous Firms. [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2005(3):865-915
[43]Grossman, G. M.,& Helpman, E.,& Szeidl, A. (2006). Optimal Intergation Strategies for the Multination Firm. [J]. Journals of International Economics, 2006(70):216-238.
[44]Hansen, H.,& Tarp, F. (2001). Aid and Growth regression. [J]. Journal of Development Economics, (2001) 64:547-570
[45]Harris, J.,& Selten, R. (1998). A general theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games. [M]. Cambridge:MIT Press
[46]Hartzell, C.,& Hoddie, M.,& Rothchild, D. (2001). Stabilizing the Peace After Civil War:An Investigation of Some Key Variables. [J]. International Organization,183-208
[47]Hines, J. R. Altered States, "Taxes and the Location of Foreign Direct Investment in America." [J]. American Economic Review, Vol.86,1996
[48]Hirshleifer, J. (1995). Theorizing about Conflict. Handbook of Defense Economics, (Vol 1),165-89. Hartly, K.,& Sandler, T.,&, Elsevier, S. B.V. (ed)
[49]Holland, D.,& Pain, N. (1998). The Diffusion of Innovations in Central and Eastern Europe Study of the Determinants and Impact of Foreign Direct Investment. [A]. NIESR, Discussion Paper No.137, National Institute of Social and Economic Research. London.
[50]Horst, T. (1972). The Industrial Composition of US Exports and Subsidiary Sales to the Canadian Market. [J]. American Economic Review, (1972) 62:37-45.
[51]Huang, Y. (2003). Selling China:Foreign Direct Investment during the Reform Era. [M]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
[52]Im, K.S.,& Presan, M. H.,& Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels". [J]. Journal of Econometrics,2003(115):53-74
[53]Kojima, K. (1982). Macroeconomic Versus International Business Approach to Direct Foreign Investment. [J]. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics,23(1) 1-19
[54]Kojima, K.,& Ozawa, T. (1984). Micro and Macro Economic Model of Direct Foreign Investment:Toward a Synthesis. [J]. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics,25(1):1-20
[55]Kojima, K.,& Ozawa, T. (1984). Toward a Theory of Industrial Restructuring and Dynamic Comparative Advantage. [J]. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, 26(2):135-145
[56]Krugman, P.R. The New Theories of International Trade and Multinational Enterprise. [M]. In CP Kindleberger & D B Audretsch (Eds). The Multinational Corporation in The 1980s,57-70. Cambridge MA MIT presses.
[57]Lipsey, R. E. (2003). Foreign Direct Investment and the Operations of Multinational firms:Concepts, history and Data. [M]. In E.K. Choi and J. Harrigan (Eds.). Handbook of International Trade,287-319, Blackwell Publishing. Oxford
[58]Lipsey, R. E.,& Weiss, M.Y. (1984). Foreign Production and Exports of Individual Firms. [J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics,66:304-308
[59]Peterson, L. E. (2004). Bilateral Investment Treaties and Development Policy-Making. [J]. International Institute for Sustainable Development, USD/SDC Papers
[60]Markusen, J.R. (2002). Multinational Firms and the Theory of International Trade. [M]. Cambridge. Mass. The MIT Press
[61]Measures of Restrictions on FDI in Services in Developing Countries. Sales No. E.06.II.D.13.P.56
[62]Ministry of Finance. (2006,2007,2008,2009). Economic Survey. Kathmandn. [M]. Ministry of Finance, Nepal
[63]National Planning Commission. (2007). Tenth Five Years Plan (2002-2007) Kathmandu:National Planning Commission. [M]. Three Years Interim Plan (2007-2010) Kathmandu. National Planning Commission
[64]Nepal Rastra Bank. (2007). Quarterly Economic Bulletin. [J]. Nepal Rastra Bank. Kathmandu
[65]Nordas, H.K., (2001). South Africa:A Developing Country and Net Outward Investor. [A] SNF Working Paper
[66]Person, P. (2007). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence and the Study of Politics. [J]. The American Political Science Review Vol.94, No 2:251-267.
[67]Banga, R. (2003). Impact of Government Policies and Investment Agreements on FDI Inflows. [R]. Working paper. Indian Council For Research On International Economics Relations
[68]Shapiro, D.,& Globerman, S. (2001). National Infrastructure and Foreign Direct Investment. [M]. Mimeo. Simon Fraser University
[69]Central Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Statical Year Book. [DB] Central Bureau of Statistics. Nepal
[70]Gurr. T. R. (1970). Why Men Rebel. [M]. Princeton University Press. Princeton Press
[71]Thomse, S. (1999). Southeast Asia:The Role of Foreign Direct investment Policies in Development. [A]. Working Papers on International Investment. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Paris.
[72]Tiwari, B. N. (2006). Readings in The Millennium Development Goals: Challenges for Attaining the MDGs in Nepal. [J]. Central Department of Economics. Tribhuvan University. Kathmandu
[73]United Nations. (1996). Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment, Current Studies. [J]. UNCTAD Paper, Series A, No.30. United Nations. New York and Geneva
[74]Bulcke, V. D, et al. (2003). European Union Direct Investment in China. Routledge. London
[75]Vermon, R. (1974). Location of Economic Activities. [M]. In JH Dunning, George Allen & Unwin (Ed), Economic Analysis and Multinational Enterprise, 89-114. London
[76]Vernon, R. (1979). The Product Cycle Hypothesis in a New International Environment. [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economic and Statistics 41,255-267
[77]Vernon, R. (1996). International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1996,80,190-207
[78]Villela, L.,& Barreix, A. (2002). Taxation and Investment Promotion, Background Note for Global Economic Prospects 2003. [M]. Washington: Inter American Development Bank
[79]Walmsley, T. L.,& Hertel, T.W.,& Ianchovichina, E. (2006). Assessing the Impact of China's WTO Accession on Investment. [J]. Pacific Economic Review,11(3),315-339.
[80]Greene, W. H. (1993). Econometric Analysis. [M]. Macmillan Publishing Company
[81]World Bank. (2003). Nepal Country Assistance Strategy (2004-2007). [M]. Kathmandu.
[82]Yong, P. H. (1998). Individual Strategy and Social Structure:an Evolutionary Theory of Institutions. [M]. Page 66-68. Princeton University Press
[83]Yueting, T. (2000). Foreign Direct Investment, Exports, and Firm Performance in Southeast Asia. [D] Phd. Thesis. University of California San Diego
[84]D.诺思著,厉以平译,(2007).经济史上的结构和变革.[M].商务印书馆,2007
[85]J.伊特韦尔等主编,(1996).新帕尔格雷夫经济学大辞典.[M].经济科学出版社,1996
[86]Metcalfe著,冯健译,(2007).创造性毁灭[M].人大出版社,2007
[87]R.吉尔平著,宋新宁等译,(2007).世界政治中的战争与变革.[M].世纪出版集团,2007
[88]T.斯坎隆著,杨伟清等译,(2008).宽容之难[M].人民出版社,2008
[89]阿瑟·刘易斯,(1983).经济增长理论.[M].北京：商务印书馆,1983
[90]巴巴拉·斯托林斯,(1996).外国资本在经济发展中的作用.[M].上海：上海远东出版社,1996
[9l]陈艳莹、王丽丽,(2009).政府规模与FDI：基于多国面板数据的实征研究[J],中南财经政法大学学报。2009(2)
[92]程瑞声,(2003).论和平解决克什米尔问题的途径.[J].当代亚太,2003,(11)
[93]道格拉斯·诺思,(2003).制度变革的经验研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2003
[94]方苑,(2009)FDI对福建省环境质量影响的实证析.[J].中国林业经济。2009(5)
[95]菲利普·科特勒,(2001).国家营销.[M].北京：华夏出版社,2001
[96]纲纳·缪尔达尔,(2001).亚洲的戏剧[M].北京：首都经济贸易大学出版社,
[97]葛公文,(2003)FDI对我国劳动力就业序争影响[J].世界地理研究。2003(6)
[98]胡再勇,(2006).影响FDI的决定烂因素[J].外交评论。2006(3)
[99]江小涓,(2000).内资不能代替外资.[J].国际贸易,2000,(3)
[100]姜义平,(2008).提升FDI对自主创新积极作用的对策研究[J].企业科技与发展。”2008(10)
[101]金相郁、朴英姬,(2006).中国外商直接投资的区位决定因素分析.[J].南开经济研究2006(2)：56-82
[102]李锋、赵曙东、安礼伟,(2004).集聚经济、商务成本与FDI的流入：理论分析与来自长江三角洲地区的经验征据[J].南京社会科学,2004(5)
[103]李国平、杨开忠,(2000).外商对华直接投资的争产业与空间转移特征及真机制研究[J].地理科学,2000(2)
[104]李琼,(2003).转型期我国社会冲突研究综述[J].学术探索,2003,(10)
[105]李学彦,(2004).技术约束下的两缺口理论与我国的个资流入.[J].国际金融研究,2004(11)
[106]林华,(2000).社会矛盾和社会冲突——拉美的挑战和对策.研讨会召开 [J].拉丁美洲研究,2006,(01)
[107]刘济东、蔡来兴,(2002).国际资本流入与国内经济增长[J].外国经济与管理,2000,(2)Countries, The World Economy (August,2000).
[108]鲁明泓,(2000).国际直接投资区位决定因素[M].南京：南京大学出版社,2000：23-35
[109]骆永民、伍文中,(2005).基础设施投资效率对RFI影响力的空间计量分析.[J].广东商学院学报,2005(2)
[110]马荣升,(2005).美国南亚战略建构下的克什米尔政策.[J].国际论坛,2005,(04)
[111]莽丽,(2003).产业集群——吸引FFDI的新取向.[J].天津商学院学报。2003(9)
[112]毛敏,(2005).关于我国吸引FDI政策的思考[J].武汉大学学报。2005(11)
[113]潘镇、潘持春、制度、(2004).政策与外商直接投资的区位分布——来自中国各地区的经验征据[J].南京师大学报[J],2004(3)
[114]邱斌、唐保庆,(2005).无锡‘日资高地’形成原因及其不足的分析[J].国际贸易问题,2005(5)
[115]荣鹰,(2006).印巴关系中的宗教和民族因素初探.[J].国际问题研究,2006,(02)
[116]荣鹰,(2001).印度十年经济改革回顾与展望.[J].国际问题研究,2001(6)
[117]申阳, (2000).讨论社会冲突的类型及其影响.[J].学术交流,2000,(02)
[118]汪立鑫,(2008).新政治经济学研究专题.[M].复旦大学经济学院,2008
[119]汪秋明、陈明全,(2007).我国东西部外商直接投资区位选择比较分析.[J].南京财经大学学报,2007(5)
[120]王芳芳、郝前进,(2010).地方政府吸引FDI的环境政策分析.中国人口、资源与环境,2010(6)
[121]王铋,(2004).外商直接投资区域分布的决定因素—基于空间计量学的实证研究[J].经济科学,2004(5)
[122]王佐,(2006).以积极的方式应对社会冲突.[J].科学决策,2006,(01)
[123]魏后凯、贺灿飞、王新,(2001).外商在华直接投资动机与区位因素分析.[J].经济研究,2001(2)
[124]魏后凯、贺灿飞、王新,(2002).中国外商投资区位决策与公共政策.[M].北京：商务印书馆,2002：156-162
[125]吴丰,(2000).外商直接投资的聚集效应与西部利用外次资分析[J].国际经贸探索,2000(1)
[126]项飞,(2005).后发国家有效吸收外资的政策探讨.[J].南京政治学院学报,2002,(05)
[127]谢识予、朱弘鑫,(2005).高级计量经济学[M].复旦大学2005
[128]杨晓明、田澎、高园,(2005).FDI区位选择因素研究-对我国三大经济圈及中西部地区有实证研究[J].财经研究,2005(11)
[129]尹翔硕,(2005).国际贸易教程.[M].复旦大学2005(293-330)
[130]尹翔硕、李春顶,(2007).内外经济平衡中存在的矛盾[J].国际经贸探索2007(7)
[131]应千伟、杨全发,(2004).吸引FDI对东道国福利的影响.[J].世界经济文汇2004(5)
[132]张斌盛,(2006).中国FDI技术吸收能力实证研究.[D].博士学位论文,
[133]张军、郭为,(2004).外商为什么不以汀单而以FDI的方式进入中国[J].财贸经济,2004(1)
[134]赵葆珉,(2008夕.均势外交与美国中东政策的困境.[J].阿拉伯世界研究,2008,(02)
[135]朱劲松,(2001).外商直接投资在中国资本形成的效应.[J].亚太经济,2001,(03).
[136]邹璇,(2005).迎娶FDI入渝的决定性因素及对策建议.[J].重庆工商大学学报,2005(12)
[2]Agrawal, P. (2000). Economic Impact of Foreign Direct Investment in South Asia Bombay. [M] Indira Gandhi Institute of Development
[3]Ajami, R.A.,& Bar N. R. (1984). Utilizing Economic Indicators in Explainning Foreign Direct Investment in the US. [J] Management International Reiview, 24(4)
[4]Aliber, R.Z. (1970). Theory of Direct Foreign Investment. [M]. In C.P Kindleberger (Ed), The International Corporation Cambrige, MA:MIT Press. 16-50
[5]Andersen,O. (1993). On the Internationlization Process of Firms:A Critical Analysis. [J]. Journal of International Business,,24(2):209-232
[6]Arellano, M.,& Bond, S. R. (1991). Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data:Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equation. [J]. Review of Economic Studies,58(2):27-297
[7]Arellano, M.,&, Bover O. (1995). Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error Components Models. [J]. Journal of Econometrics,68(1): 29-51
[8]Aryan, Ramesh C. (1995). Foreign Investment and Techonology Transfer. The Nepal Experience. [J] The Economic Journal of Nepal Kathmandu CEDECON. Tribhuvan University
[9]Barry, F.,& Gorg, F.,& McDowell, A. (2003). Outward FDI and the Investment Development path of a Late-Industrializing Economy:Evidence from Ireland. Regional Studies,37(4):341-49.
[10]Bhagawati, J. N.,& Dinopoulos, E.,& Kong, K.Y. (1992). Quid Pro Quo Foreign Investment. American Economic Review,1992(5).186-190
[11]Binh & Haughton. (2002). Trade Liberalization and Foreign Direct Investment in Vietnam. [J]. ASEAN Economic Bulletin
[12]Bista, R. B. (2005). FDI in Nepal. [J]. Kathmandu:Center for Integrated Development Studies (CIDS)
[13]Blomstr, M.,& A, Kokko. (2002). The Economics of Foreign Direct Investment Incentives. [R]. Working Paper 9489, NBER Working Paper Series
[14]Brett, E.A. (2006). State Failure and Success in Ugenda and Zimbabwe:The Logic of Political Decay and Reconstruction in Africa. [J]. Crisis State Programe Working Paper, N.1-78. Crisis State Research Center. School for Economic London,
[15]Brewer, T. (1993). Government Policies, Market Imperfections and Foreign Direct Investment. [J]. Journal of International Business Studies,24(1) First Quarter
[16]Brinkerhoff, D.W. (2005) Rebuilding Goveranance in Post-Conflict Societes; Core Concept and Cross Cutting Themes. [M]. Public Administration and Development,25(1)3-14
[17]Brown, J.R.,& Dev. D.S.,& Zhou, Z. (2003). Broadening the Foreign Market Entry Modedecision:Separating Ownership and Control. [J]. Journal of International Business Studies,34,473-488.
[18]Tilly, C. (1978). From Mobilization to Revolution. [M]. Me Graw-Hill
[19]Carbonnier, G. (2003). Undoing War Economices:A Prerequisite for Peaces. [J]. Refugees Survey,22(4),165-170
[20]Central Bureau of Stastics. (2009). Statistical Year Book of Nepal 2009. [DB]. Central Bureau of Statistics, Nepal Government
[21]Central Department of Economics. (2004). Nepalease Economy:Towards Building a Strong Economic Nation-State. [M].1st ed. Central Development of Economics and New Hira Books Enterprises. Kathmandu
[22]Chakrabat, A. (2001). The Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: Sensitivity Analysis of Cross-Country Regressional. [J]. Kyklos,54(1)
[23]Changky, C. (2004). Foreign Direct Investment and Income Convergence. [J]. Applied Economics,36:1045-1049
[24]Chen, H. (1996). Regional Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in Maill and China. [J]. Journal of Economic Studies,23 (2):18-30
[25]Collier, P. (1999). On the Economic Consequences of Civil War. [J]. Oxford Economic Paper,51 (1):168-183
[26]Dango, M. (2003). Problem and Prospect of FDI in Nepal. [D]. MA Thesis submitted to the CEDECON, TU, Kathmandu Nepal
[27]Devereux, M,& P. Grifiith. (1998). Taxes and Creation of Production: Evidence from a Panel of US Multinationals. [J]. Journal of Public Economics, 68(3)
[28]Djankov, S.,& Hart, O.,& T, Nenova. (2002). Efficiency Insolvency, Background Papers for Doing Business in 2003. [R]. Report of Private Sector Advisory Services. World Bank, Washington DC
[29]Dunning, J.H. (1994). Re-evaluating the Benefits of Foreign Direct Investment. [M]. Transnational Corporations,3(1):23-51.
[30]Dunning, J. H.,& R, Narula. (1996). Foreign Direct Investments and Governments. [M]. Routledge, New York
[31]Dunning, J. H. (1981). International Production and the Multinational Enterprise. [M] George Allan and Unwin. London
[32]Dunning, J. H. (1977). Trade, Location of Economic Activity and MNE:A Search for an Eclectic Approach. [J] Ohlin, B. P.,& Hesselborn, O.,& Wijkman, P. M. (Eds) The International Allocation of Economic Activity,395-431. Macmillan. London.
[33]ECLAC. (2003b), The Impact of Foreign Direct Investment on Patterns of Specialization in the Caribbean.[k] LC/CAR/G.718,16January,2003 b Port-of-Spain:Sub-Regional Headquarters for the Caribbean, Caribbean Development and Cooperation Committee.
[34]Emery, J.,& Spence, M T.,& Wells, L X,& Buehrer, T. (2000). Administrative Barriersto Foreign Investment:Reducing Red Tape in Africa. [J]. International Finance Corporation. Discussion Papers. Washington D. C.
[35](2003). FDI in Land-Locked Developing Countries at a Glance. [M].112 p. UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/2003/5
[36](2002). FDI in Least Developed Countries at a Glance. [M].136 p. UNCTAD/ITE/IIA/6.http://www.unctad.org/en/does//iteiia6_en.pdf.
[37]Feng, K.C.,& Iizaka, H.,& Tong, S. (2002 June). Foreign Direct Investment in China:Policy, Trend and Impact. [A]. Paper presented in the conference "China's Economy in the 21st Century".2002, June 24-25. Hong Kong
[38](2007). Financial Year Book. [M] Ministry of Finance
[39](1998). Foreign Investment Act 1992. [DB]. FNCCI. Kathmandu
[40](1998) Industrial Enterprises Act 1992. [DB]. FNCCI. Kathmandu
[41]Maihath, G. J.,& Samuelson, L. (2006) Repeated Games and Reputation-Long run Relationships. [M]. Oxford University Press
[42]Ghironi, F.,& Melitz, M.J. (2005). International Trade and Macroeconomic Dynamics with Heterogeneous Firms. [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2005(3):865-915
[43]Grossman, G. M.,& Helpman, E.,& Szeidl, A. (2006). Optimal Intergation Strategies for the Multination Firm. [J]. Journals of International Economics, 2006(70):216-238.
[44]Hansen, H.,& Tarp, F. (2001). Aid and Growth regression. [J]. Journal of Development Economics, (2001) 64:547-570
[45]Harris, J.,& Selten, R. (1998). A general theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games. [M]. Cambridge:MIT Press
[46]Hartzell, C.,& Hoddie, M.,& Rothchild, D. (2001). Stabilizing the Peace After Civil War:An Investigation of Some Key Variables. [J]. International Organization,183-208
[47]Hines, J. R. Altered States, "Taxes and the Location of Foreign Direct Investment in America." [J]. American Economic Review, Vol.86,1996
[48]Hirshleifer, J. (1995). Theorizing about Conflict. Handbook of Defense Economics, (Vol 1),165-89. Hartly, K.,& Sandler, T.,&, Elsevier, S. B.V. (ed)
[49]Holland, D.,& Pain, N. (1998). The Diffusion of Innovations in Central and Eastern Europe Study of the Determinants and Impact of Foreign Direct Investment. [A]. NIESR, Discussion Paper No.137, National Institute of Social and Economic Research. London.
[50]Horst, T. (1972). The Industrial Composition of US Exports and Subsidiary Sales to the Canadian Market. [J]. American Economic Review, (1972) 62:37-45.
[51]Huang, Y. (2003). Selling China:Foreign Direct Investment during the Reform Era. [M]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
[52]Im, K.S.,& Presan, M. H.,& Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels". [J]. Journal of Econometrics,2003(115):53-74
[53]Kojima, K. (1982). Macroeconomic Versus International Business Approach to Direct Foreign Investment. [J]. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics,23(1) 1-19
[54]Kojima, K.,& Ozawa, T. (1984). Micro and Macro Economic Model of Direct Foreign Investment:Toward a Synthesis. [J]. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics,25(1):1-20
[55]Kojima, K.,& Ozawa, T. (1984). Toward a Theory of Industrial Restructuring and Dynamic Comparative Advantage. [J]. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, 26(2):135-145
[56]Krugman, P.R. The New Theories of International Trade and Multinational Enterprise. [M]. In CP Kindleberger & D B Audretsch (Eds). The Multinational Corporation in The 1980s,57-70. Cambridge MA MIT presses.
[57]Lipsey, R. E. (2003). Foreign Direct Investment and the Operations of Multinational firms:Concepts, history and Data. [M]. In E.K. Choi and J. Harrigan (Eds.). Handbook of International Trade,287-319, Blackwell Publishing. Oxford
[58]Lipsey, R. E.,& Weiss, M.Y. (1984). Foreign Production and Exports of Individual Firms. [J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics,66:304-308
[59]Peterson, L. E. (2004). Bilateral Investment Treaties and Development Policy-Making. [J]. International Institute for Sustainable Development, USD/SDC Papers
[60]Markusen, J.R. (2002). Multinational Firms and the Theory of International Trade. [M]. Cambridge. Mass. The MIT Press
[61]Measures of Restrictions on FDI in Services in Developing Countries. Sales No. E.06.II.D.13.P.56
[62]Ministry of Finance. (2006,2007,2008,2009). Economic Survey. Kathmandn. [M]. Ministry of Finance, Nepal
[63]National Planning Commission. (2007). Tenth Five Years Plan (2002-2007) Kathmandu:National Planning Commission. [M]. Three Years Interim Plan (2007-2010) Kathmandu. National Planning Commission
[64]Nepal Rastra Bank. (2007). Quarterly Economic Bulletin. [J]. Nepal Rastra Bank. Kathmandu
[65]Nordas, H.K., (2001). South Africa:A Developing Country and Net Outward Investor. [A] SNF Working Paper
[66]Person, P. (2007). Increasing Returns, Path Dependence and the Study of Politics. [J]. The American Political Science Review Vol.94, No 2:251-267.
[67]Banga, R. (2003). Impact of Government Policies and Investment Agreements on FDI Inflows. [R]. Working paper. Indian Council For Research On International Economics Relations
[68]Shapiro, D.,& Globerman, S. (2001). National Infrastructure and Foreign Direct Investment. [M]. Mimeo. Simon Fraser University
[69]Central Bureau of Statistics. (2007). Statical Year Book. [DB] Central Bureau of Statistics. Nepal
[70]Gurr. T. R. (1970). Why Men Rebel. [M]. Princeton University Press. Princeton Press
[71]Thomse, S. (1999). Southeast Asia:The Role of Foreign Direct investment Policies in Development. [A]. Working Papers on International Investment. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Paris.
[72]Tiwari, B. N. (2006). Readings in The Millennium Development Goals: Challenges for Attaining the MDGs in Nepal. [J]. Central Department of Economics. Tribhuvan University. Kathmandu
[73]United Nations. (1996). Incentives and Foreign Direct Investment, Current Studies. [J]. UNCTAD Paper, Series A, No.30. United Nations. New York and Geneva
[74]Bulcke, V. D, et al. (2003). European Union Direct Investment in China. Routledge. London
[75]Vermon, R. (1974). Location of Economic Activities. [M]. In JH Dunning, George Allen & Unwin (Ed), Economic Analysis and Multinational Enterprise, 89-114. London
[76]Vernon, R. (1979). The Product Cycle Hypothesis in a New International Environment. [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economic and Statistics 41,255-267
[77]Vernon, R. (1996). International Investment and International Trade in the Product Cycle. [J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics,1996,80,190-207
[78]Villela, L.,& Barreix, A. (2002). Taxation and Investment Promotion, Background Note for Global Economic Prospects 2003. [M]. Washington: Inter American Development Bank
[79]Walmsley, T. L.,& Hertel, T.W.,& Ianchovichina, E. (2006). Assessing the Impact of China's WTO Accession on Investment. [J]. Pacific Economic Review,11(3),315-339.
[80]Greene, W. H. (1993). Econometric Analysis. [M]. Macmillan Publishing Company
[81]World Bank. (2003). Nepal Country Assistance Strategy (2004-2007). [M]. Kathmandu.
[82]Yong, P. H. (1998). Individual Strategy and Social Structure:an Evolutionary Theory of Institutions. [M]. Page 66-68. Princeton University Press
[83]Yueting, T. (2000). Foreign Direct Investment, Exports, and Firm Performance in Southeast Asia. [D] Phd. Thesis. University of California San Diego
[84]D.诺思著,厉以平译,(2007).经济史上的结构和变革.[M].商务印书馆,2007
[85]J.伊特韦尔等主编,(1996).新帕尔格雷夫经济学大辞典.[M].经济科学出版社,1996
[86]Metcalfe著,冯健译,(2007).创造性毁灭[M].人大出版社,2007
[87]R.吉尔平著,宋新宁等译,(2007).世界政治中的战争与变革.[M].世纪出版集团,2007
[88]T.斯坎隆著,杨伟清等译,(2008).宽容之难[M].人民出版社,2008
[89]阿瑟·刘易斯,(1983).经济增长理论.[M].北京：商务印书馆,1983
[90]巴巴拉·斯托林斯,(1996).外国资本在经济发展中的作用.[M].上海：上海远东出版社,1996
[9l]陈艳莹、王丽丽,(2009).政府规模与FDI：基于多国面板数据的实征研究[J],中南财经政法大学学报。2009(2)
[92]程瑞声,(2003).论和平解决克什米尔问题的途径.[J].当代亚太,2003,(11)
[93]道格拉斯·诺思,(2003).制度变革的经验研究[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2003
[94]方苑,(2009)FDI对福建省环境质量影响的实证析.[J].中国林业经济。2009(5)
[95]菲利普·科特勒,(2001).国家营销.[M].北京：华夏出版社,2001
[96]纲纳·缪尔达尔,(2001).亚洲的戏剧[M].北京：首都经济贸易大学出版社,
[97]葛公文,(2003)FDI对我国劳动力就业序争影响[J].世界地理研究。2003(6)
[98]胡再勇,(2006).影响FDI的决定烂因素[J].外交评论。2006(3)
[99]江小涓,(2000).内资不能代替外资.[J].国际贸易,2000,(3)
[100]姜义平,(2008).提升FDI对自主创新积极作用的对策研究[J].企业科技与发展。”2008(10)
[101]金相郁、朴英姬,(2006).中国外商直接投资的区位决定因素分析.[J].南开经济研究2006(2)：56-82
[102]李锋、赵曙东、安礼伟,(2004).集聚经济、商务成本与FDI的流入：理论分析与来自长江三角洲地区的经验征据[J].南京社会科学,2004(5)
[103]李国平、杨开忠,(2000).外商对华直接投资的争产业与空间转移特征及真机制研究[J].地理科学,2000(2)
[104]李琼,(2003).转型期我国社会冲突研究综述[J].学术探索,2003,(10)
[105]李学彦,(2004).技术约束下的两缺口理论与我国的个资流入.[J].国际金融研究,2004(11)
[106]林华,(2000).社会矛盾和社会冲突——拉美的挑战和对策.研讨会召开 [J].拉丁美洲研究,2006,(01)
[107]刘济东、蔡来兴,(2002).国际资本流入与国内经济增长[J].外国经济与管理,2000,(2)Countries, The World Economy (August,2000).
[108]鲁明泓,(2000).国际直接投资区位决定因素[M].南京：南京大学出版社,2000：23-35
[109]骆永民、伍文中,(2005).基础设施投资效率对RFI影响力的空间计量分析.[J].广东商学院学报,2005(2)
[110]马荣升,(2005).美国南亚战略建构下的克什米尔政策.[J].国际论坛,2005,(04)
[111]莽丽,(2003).产业集群——吸引FFDI的新取向.[J].天津商学院学报。2003(9)
[112]毛敏,(2005).关于我国吸引FDI政策的思考[J].武汉大学学报。2005(11)
[113]潘镇、潘持春、制度、(2004).政策与外商直接投资的区位分布——来自中国各地区的经验征据[J].南京师大学报[J],2004(3)
[114]邱斌、唐保庆,(2005).无锡‘日资高地’形成原因及其不足的分析[J].国际贸易问题,2005(5)
[115]荣鹰,(2006).印巴关系中的宗教和民族因素初探.[J].国际问题研究,2006,(02)
[116]荣鹰,(2001).印度十年经济改革回顾与展望.[J].国际问题研究,2001(6)
[117]申阳, (2000).讨论社会冲突的类型及其影响.[J].学术交流,2000,(02)
[118]汪立鑫,(2008).新政治经济学研究专题.[M].复旦大学经济学院,2008
[119]汪秋明、陈明全,(2007).我国东西部外商直接投资区位选择比较分析.[J].南京财经大学学报,2007(5)
[120]王芳芳、郝前进,(2010).地方政府吸引FDI的环境政策分析.中国人口、资源与环境,2010(6)
[121]王铋,(2004).外商直接投资区域分布的决定因素—基于空间计量学的实证研究[J].经济科学,2004(5)
[122]王佐,(2006).以积极的方式应对社会冲突.[J].科学决策,2006,(01)
[123]魏后凯、贺灿飞、王新,(2001).外商在华直接投资动机与区位因素分析.[J].经济研究,2001(2)
[124]魏后凯、贺灿飞、王新,(2002).中国外商投资区位决策与公共政策.[M].北京：商务印书馆,2002：156-162
[125]吴丰,(2000).外商直接投资的聚集效应与西部利用外次资分析[J].国际经贸探索,2000(1)
[126]项飞,(2005).后发国家有效吸收外资的政策探讨.[J].南京政治学院学报,2002,(05)
[127]谢识予、朱弘鑫,(2005).高级计量经济学[M].复旦大学2005
[128]杨晓明、田澎、高园,(2005).FDI区位选择因素研究-对我国三大经济圈及中西部地区有实证研究[J].财经研究,2005(11)
[129]尹翔硕,(2005).国际贸易教程.[M].复旦大学2005(293-330)
[130]尹翔硕、李春顶,(2007).内外经济平衡中存在的矛盾[J].国际经贸探索2007(7)
[131]应千伟、杨全发,(2004).吸引FDI对东道国福利的影响.[J].世界经济文汇2004(5)
[132]张斌盛,(2006).中国FDI技术吸收能力实证研究.[D].博士学位论文,
[133]张军、郭为,(2004).外商为什么不以汀单而以FDI的方式进入中国[J].财贸经济,2004(1)
[134]赵葆珉,(2008夕.均势外交与美国中东政策的困境.[J].阿拉伯世界研究,2008,(02)
[135]朱劲松,(2001).外商直接投资在中国资本形成的效应.[J].亚太经济,2001,(03).
[136]邹璇,(2005).迎娶FDI入渝的决定性因素及对策建议.[J].重庆工商大学学报,2005(12)