The role of public services and taxes in attracting ‘foreign’ direct investment

2008 ◽  
pp. 135-158
Author(s):  
Li Zhang ◽  
Timothy Goodspeed ◽  
Jorge Martinez-Vazquez
Keyword(s):  
Direct Investment ◽  
Public Services

scholarly journals The Role of E-Government in Promoting Foreign Direct Investment Inflows

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (141) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Al-Sadiq
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Information Diffusion ◽  
Public Services ◽  
Panel Data Analysis ◽  
Public Agencies ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
The Public

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has helped accelerate the digitization of public services. The lockdown initiated by most governments to curb the spread of the coronavirus forced most public agencies to switch to online platforms to continue providing information and services to the public. It is widely recognized that information diffusion and communication technology play a large role in improving the quality of public services in terms of time, cost, and interface with the public, business, and other agencies. Potentially, e-government could enhance a country’s locational advantages and attract more Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows. This hypothesis is tested empirically using an unbalanced panel data analysis for 178 host countries over the period 2003-2018. The results suggest that e-government stimulates the inflow of FDI.

Economic Actors' Lobbying Influence on the Prospects for War and Peace

2013 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 863-888 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen G. Brooks
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
Economic Globalization ◽  
Economic Incentives ◽  
Special Interests ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Government

AbstractPolitical scientists and economists have long been interested in the role of special interests in the policymaking process. In the past few years, a series of important new books have argued forcefully that the lobbying activities of economic actors have an important influence on the prospects for war and peace. All of these analyses claim that whether economic actors enhance or decrease the likelihood of conflict ultimately depends on the domestic political balance between economic actors who have a strong vested interest in pushing for peace versus those that do not. I advance two contrary arguments. At least among the advanced states, I posit there are no longer any economic actors who will be favorable toward war and who will lobby the government with this preference. All of the identified mechanisms that previously contributed to such lobbying in these states have been swept away with the end of colonialism and the rise of economic globalization. In particular, I show that the current structure of the global economy now makes it feasible for foreign direct investment to serve as an effective substitute for conquest in a way that was not possible in previous eras. My second argument concerns those economic actors in advanced states with a preference for peace. I posit that it has become unnecessary for them to directly lobby the government to avoid war on economic grounds because economic globalization—the accumulation of decisions by economic actors throughout the globe—now has sufficiently clear economic incentives for leaders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document