New FDI to Finland 2018 FINLAND – TECHNOLOGY SUPERPOWER NEW and ACQUIRED ESTABLISHMENTS by FOREIGN OWNED COMPANIES in FINLAND 2011–2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

New FDI to Finland 2018 FINLAND – TECHNOLOGY SUPERPOWER NEW AND ACQUIRED ESTABLISHMENTS BY FOREIGN OWNED COMPANIES IN FINLAND 2011–2018 350 336 300 265 270 270 250 229 147 213 94 78 200 173 119 153 83 150 112 84 55 100 176 189 192 146 146 50 89 98 101 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 173 153 213 229 265 270 336 270 Greenfield 84 55 112 83 119 94 147 78 M&A 89 98 101 146 146 176 189 192 2 Source: Business Finland, Invest in Finland NEW & AQUIRED FOREIGN OWNED ESTABLISHMENTS BY ULTIMATE PARENT’S COUNTRY IN FINLAND 2015–2018 2015 2016 2017 2018 100 95 90 81 80 80 77 69 70 60 55 49 50 39 40 30 30 25 26 25 27 21 21 18 19 18 20 17 15 15 12 13 12 12 9 10 10 9 10 5 5 3 0 Sweden UK USA Denmark Norway Estonia Germany China Source: Business Finland, Invest in Finland 3 NEW & ACQUIRED FOREIGN OWNED ESTABLISHMENTS BY INDUSTRY IN FINLAND 2016–2018 Business Services 65 66 28 ICT 56 57 56 Health & Wellbeing 63 64 76 Retail 24 25 20 Others 37 38 16 Bioeconomy & Cleantech 15 16 62 Travel 3 4 8 Mining 112 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 2016 2017 2018 Source: Business Finland, Invest in Finland 4 112 3 4 4 4 5 NEW FDI BY FINNISH 5 6 REGIONS 2018 6 52 % of New FDI 7 lands to Capital 8 Central Ostrobothnia 1 Region Helsinki- Kainuu 1 Uusimaa 10 Päijät-Häme 2 Southern Ostrobothnia 3 141 Kanta-Häme 4 18 Kymenlaakso 4 North Karelia 4 Ostrobothnia 5 Satakunta 5 22 South Karelia 6 Southern Savo 6 Lapland 7 23 Central Finland 8 Nortern Savo 10 Central Ostrobothnia Kainuu Päijät-Häme Southern Ostrobothnia Tampere Region 18 South-West Finland 22 Kanta-Häme Kymenlaakso North Karelia Ostrobothnia Nothern Ostrobotnia 23 Satakunta South Karelia Southern Savo Lapland Uisimaa 141 Central Finland Nortern Savo Tampere Region South-West Finland Nothern Ostrobotnia Uisimaa 5 Source: Business Finland, Invest in Finland FOREIGN OWNED COMPANIES IN FINLAND 2017 Turnover 92 billion euro 4 300 companies % 255 000 jobs 17,5 of workfoce Source: Statistics Finland, next update 11,2019 6 FOREIGN OWNED FIRMS ACCOUNT FOR 1% OF ALL FIRMS IN FINLAND, BUT… 17% of employment 22% of production value 20% of gross investments in tangible goods 22% of value added Source: Study by Copenhagen Economics, 2017 7 FINLAND STOCK OF FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENTSEUR BILLION 2014-2017 90 77 80 76 75 73 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2014 2015 2016 2017 EUR billion 8 Source: Statistics Finland, next update 11/2019 FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT (INWARD) STOCK 2017 TOP 10 SOURCE COUNTRY BY EUR MILLION INWARD 30000 25 961 25000 20000 14 577 15000 12 467 10000 5 567 5000 2 169 1 975 1 509 1 444 1 311 1 111 0 Source: Statistics Finland FINLANDNUMBERONE FDIDESTINATION IN GREENFIELDINVESTMENTS IN NORDICS2017 Finland topped the Nordic FDI leaderboard in 2017 for the sixth consecutive year measured by number of projects secured, and firmly established itself as the Nordics’ leading FDI destination. Source: EY European Investment Monitor (EIM), 2018 10 FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT (OUTWARD) STOCK 2017 TOP 10 DESTINATION COUNTRY BY EUR MILLION 35000 31 746 30000 27 000 25000 20000 15000 10 125 10000 5000 3 229 2 810 2 557 2 378 2 201 2 165 2 025 0 Source: Statistics Finland .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Regions of Eastern Finland (Summary)
Summary of views on the 2nd Cohesion Report Regions of Eastern Finland, 27.8.2001 Regions of South Karelia, South Savo, Kainuu, North Karelia and North Savo Starting point: - The EU regional policy is important for the development of Eastern Finland regions. - During the period 1995-1999 Eastern Finland was covered by the Obj 6, 5b and Interreg II A programmes. Of these the Obj 6 programme area was defined in the Accession Treaty of Finland and Sweden on account of specific circumstances of sparse population. - In the present period until 2006 the South Savo, North Karelia, North Savo and Kainuu regions form an Obj 1 programme area. At the same time East Finland has an A support status according to Article 87.3 of the Treaty, allowing allocation of higher state aid. The region of South Karelia is covered by the Obj 2 programme. In addition there are two Interreg III A programmes implemented in the area. - The Eastern Finland regions consider that the additionality principle has not been followed in the implementation of the regional development programmes. - The Eastern Finland (NUTS II area) GDP has lowered by 2.3 % between 1995-1999 in comparison to the EU average, and by over 5 % in comparison to the national average. It is very likely that the GDP/capita of Eastern Finland will not exceed 75 % of EU15 average without (national) specific measures. Views on the future Cohesion Policy: - The enlargement and increase of territorial inequality means that sufficient structural policy resources are required to guarantee a stable regional development. It seems that the proposed 0.45 % of the GDP will not be enough in the enlarged Union.
[Show full text]
Outokumpu Mining Case Study
OUTOKUMPU MINING CASE STUDY Preliminary reflections 7 March 2019 1. Regional strengths of Outokumpu 2. Challenges for sustained growth 3. Policy options 4. Data appendix 2 1. Geographic location – proximity to Joensuu - 50 kilometres distance to Joensuu (average travel time of 40 minutes) and 40km to Joensuu airport (travel time 35 minutes) - 90 kilometres distance to Kuopio (average travel time of 75 minutes) - Less than 120 kilometres distance to the Russian border Population trend (1990 = 100) 120 Joensuu Outokumpu 115 110 Outokumpu is part of the largest labour 105 Regional population growth is concentrating market in North 100 in Joensuu Karelia (Joensuu). 95 90 85 80 75 2. A strong industrial sector and a high share of tradable activities Share of employed population by economic sector (2016) Finland Local labour Outokumpu market Agriculture, forestry and fishing (A) (T) 3% 8% 4% Public administration and defence, compulsory social security, 29% 32% 30% education and human health (O,P,Q) (NT) Construction (F) (NT) 7% 7% 6% Real estate (L) (NT) 1% 1% 1% Other services (R,S,T,U) (T) 5% 5% 5% Mining and quarrying, electricity and 1% 2% 4% water supply (B,D,E) (T) Manufacturing (C) (T) 13% 16% 24% Whole sale and retail trade, transportation, accommodation and food 21% 17% 14% services (G, H, I) (NT) Information and communication (J) (T) 4% 1% 1% Professional, scientific, technical and 13% 8% 10% administrative activities (M, N) (NT) Financial and insurance activities (K) (T) 2% 1% 1% • Outokumpu’s industry plays an instrumental role in the smart specialization strategy of North Karelia 3.
[Show full text]
OECD Mining Regions and Cities Case Study: OUTOKUMPU and NORTH KARELIA, FINLAND
Policy Highlights OECD Mining Regions and Cities Case Study: OUTOKUMPU AND NORTH KARELIA, FINLAND About the OECD The OECD is a unique forum where governments work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. About CFE The Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities helps local, regional and national governments unleash the potential of entrepreneurs and small and medium-sized enterprises, promote inclusive and sustainable regions and cities, boost local job creation and implement sound tourism policies. About this booklet This document summarizes the key findings of OECD (2019), OECD Mining case study: Outokumpu and North Karelia, OECD Publishing, Paris. The full publication will be available at http://www.oecd.org/regional/regional-policy/mining-regions-project.htm This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Photo credits: ©Getyyimages, @Outokumpu Mining Museum For more information: http://www.oecd.org/cfe/regional-policy/ │ 1 Introduction This policy highlight provides a summary of the first OECD Mining Regions and Cities Case Study. The Case Study focuses on the region of North Karelia and the municipality of Outokumpu in Finland.
[Show full text]
Lyme Borreliosis in Finland, 1995–2014
Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2308.161273 Lyme Borreliosis in Finland, 1995–2014 Technical Appendix Methods Case Definitions for Lyme Borreliosis (LB), Lyme Neuroborreliosis (LNB), and Lyme Arthritis (LA) Cases in Avohilmo reflect clinically diagnosed EM cases. EM can be diagnosed as a reddish/blueish skin rash often with a central clearing expanding at least up to 5 cm in diameter in several days to weeks after a tick bite. No laboratory testing is required since the rapid expansion of the rash makes it distinctive from other skin lesion (1). Moreover, borrelia serology is usually negative at the early phase of infection (2). Microbiologically confirmed LB cases are diagnosed by the detection of borrelia-specific IgG and/or IgM antibodies in serum and/or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and subsequently notified to the NIDR. In Finland, serology is based on the two-tier testing where borrelia-specific antibodies are detected by a sensitive enzyme immuno assay (EIA) followed by a more specific immunoblot. In total, eight laboratories (including both public and private units) perform LB laboratory diagnostics. We defined a LNB case as a patient diagnosed with the following ICD-10 codes: “A69.2” (Lyme borreliosis) and either “G01.9” (meningitis) and/or “G63.0” (polyneuropathy). A case of LA was defined as a patient diagnosed with “A69.2” and “M01” (arthritis in Lyme disease). LNB is clinically diagnosed as lymphocytic meningitis, radiculoneuritis, or cranial neuritis with the laboratory confirmation of the central nervous system involvement which includes CSF pleocytosis and detection of intrathecally produced borrelia-specific antibodies, or rarely amplification of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (Bbsl) DNA from the CSF sample.
[Show full text]
Preliminary Population Statistics 2017, March
Population 2017 Preliminary population statistics 2017, March Finland’s preliminary population figure 5,504,913 at the end of March New releases will not be produced on preliminary population statistics any more in 2017. Revised figures concerning 2017 will be released at a later date to be announced separately. Corrected on 16 June 2017. The corrections are indicated in red. According to Statistics Finland's preliminary data, Finland's population at the end of March was 5,504,913. During January-March Finland's population increased by 1,616 persons, which is 612 persons more than in the preliminary data the year before. The reason for the population increase was migration gain from abroad: the number of immigrants was 3,868 higher than that of emigrants. There was no natural population growth, since deaths exceeded births by 2,252 persons. Population increase by month 2014–2017* According to the preliminary statistics for January-March 2017, a total of 12,118 children were born, which is 925 fewer than in the corresponding period 2016. The number of deaths was 14,370, which is 291 lower than one year earlier. Helsinki 9.6.2017 Quoting is encouraged provided Statistics Finland is acknowledged as the source. Altogether 7,062 persons immigrated to Finland from abroad and 3,194 persons emigrated from Finland during January-March period. The number of immigrants was 828 higher and the number of emigrants 418 lower than in the previous year. 1 520 of the immigrants and 2,127 of the emigrants were Finnish citizens. According to the preliminary data, the number of inter-municipal migrations totalled 56,798 by the end of March.
[Show full text]
Chapter 1 Migration in Finland and the Context of Integration Policy
1. MIGRATION IN FINLAND AND THE CONTEXT OF INTEGRATION POLICY – 45 Chapter 1 Migration in Finland and the context of integration policy Despite rapid growth over the past 25 years, Finland’s migrant population is not large in international comparison. The foreign-born in Finland, however, come from a diverse range of countries and bring with them a concomitantly wide range of integration service needs. The increase in inflows – particularly asylum seekers – in 2015, put a strain on the Finnish integration system, which was designed to support far fewer migrants. And important changes were introduced as the system struggled to maintain efficiency in the fact of increasing demand. These changes included integration services organised into modules that could be more easily combined into a tailored package of measures and the introduction of the Social Impact Bond to harness private finance in support of integration. If effective in ensuring Finland’s migrants are well integrated in society and on the labour market, these investments will help to alleviate the ageing-related challenges the country expects in the coming years.. This chapter provides the context for the report outlining i) the integration context, and the characteristics and composition of Finland’s foreign-born population that influence their integration outcomes, as well as the labour market context and challenges this presents, before turning to ii) the recent developments in integration policy in Finland. WORKING TOGETHER: SKILLS AND LABOUR MARKET INTEGRATION OF IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR CHILDREN IN FINLAND © OECD 2018 46 – 1. MIGRATION IN FINLAND AND THE CONTEXT OF INTEGRATION POLICY Over the last quarter of a century, Finland’s foreign-born population has been growing at a compound annual rate of 6.8 %; where the foreign-born accounted for just 1% of the Finnish population in 1990, in 2016 they accounted for close to 6.5%.
[Show full text]
The Status of Semi-Natural Grasslands in the Province of South Karelia, SE Finland
Ann. Bot. Fennici 36: 181–186 ISSN 0003-3847 Helsinki 24 September 1999 © Finnish Zoological and Botanical Publishing Board 1999 The status of semi-natural grasslands in the province of South Karelia, SE Finland Olli Marttila, Juha Jantunen & Kimmo Saarinen Marttila, O., Jantunen, J. & Saarinen, K., South Karelia Allergy and Environment Institute, Lääkäritie 15, FIN-55330 Tiuruniemi, Finland Received 21 December 1998, accepted 4 May 1999 Marttila, O., Jantunen, J. & Saarinen, K. 1999: The status of semi-natural grasslands in the province of South Karelia, SE Finland. — Ann. Bot. Fennici 36: 181–186. The semi-natural grasslands were inventoried in the province of South Karelia (Fin- land) in 1992, 1993 and 1996. Altogether 89 different sites were found, covering a total area of 97 hectares. The sites were classified into five different biotopes, which com- prised a total of 115 grasslands. Three-quarters of all sites (68, 76%), covering an area of 65 hectares (67% of total), were assessed as being in danger of losing their value because of either poor management or lack of management. The results indicate that the area of semi-natural grasslands in the province is now about 250 times smaller (0.4%) than at the beginning of the 20th century. The status of these environments in South Karelia is alarming. Key words: agricultural management, grassland, grazing, mowing, pasture, semi-natural vegetation INTRODUCTION small patches on shores, mires, rocks and some larger areas on the fells in Lapland. The majority It is assumed that 30%–40% (400–500 species) of grasslands have resulted from agricultural man- of the Finnish flora has benefited from grazing agement.
[Show full text]
North Karelia As a Mining Region Eira Varis Development Director North Karelia in a Nutshell
North Karelia as a mining region Eira Varis Development director North Karelia in a nutshell Population 162 087 (2019) 13 municipalities, of which 5 towns Regional centre Joensuu Distance to Helsinki 450 km, one hour flight Distance to St Petersburg 407 km by train 89 % of land area covered by forests East and west meet 300 km frontier with Russia Over 1.2 million border crossings per year in Niirala Inland waterway connection through Saimaa canal to Russia and the Baltic Sea World-class knowledge hub Unique collaboration and expertise European Forest Institute – EFI HQ Natural Resources Institute Finland (LUKE) Finnish Forest Centre Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) Business development: Business Joensuu, regional Business Development Organisations Educational institutions Educational institutions University of Eastern Finland – UEF Karelia University of Applied Sciences Riveria Vocational Education & Training Over 20 000 students in the region High-quality R&D and business • 6 000 companies, 33 000 employers, 5,7 billion € turnover • Top business areas: metal products, machinery, forest industry and technology, bioeconomy, plastics, mining, trade and services Mineral deposits of North Karelia 13.6.2019 Strenghts and weaknesses of North Karelia +++ --- Significant natural resources Ageing population structure World-class high level expertise High unemployment but also lack of (forest bioeconomy) skilled labour force Strong cooperation between Decline of infrastructure (roads) different actors Geographical handicaps: long Russia as
[Show full text]
Between North Karelia, Finland, and Kaunas, Lithuania, from 1971 to 1987
516 Br Heart J 1992;68:516-23 EPIDEMIOLOGY Br Heart J: first published as 10.1136/hrt.68.11.516 on 1 November 1992. Downloaded from Comparison of trends in ischaemic heart disease between North Karelia, Finland, and Kaunas, Lithuania, from 1971 to 1987 Daiva Rastenyte, Veikko Salomaa, Harri Mustaniemi, Dalia Rasteniene, Regina Grazuleviciene, Zygimantas Cepaitis, Jari Kankaanpaa, Kari Kuulasmaa, Jorma Torppa, Juozas Bluzhas, Jaakko Tuomilehto Abstract Conclusions-Despite the remarkable Objective-To compare the long-term decline in the occurrence of ischaemic trends in mortality and attack rate of heart disease, it still remains the most ischaemic heart disease in North Karelia, important cause of premature mortality Finland, and in Kaunas, Lithuania, from in North Karelia. In Kaunas ischaemic 1971 to 1987. heart disease mortality and attack rate Design-Data on routine mortality increased in men. Experiences from suc- statistics were obtained from the Central cessful cardiovascular disease prevention Statistical Office of Finland and from the programmes in western countries, such Central City Archives of Kaunas. In ad- as the North Karelia Project, should be dition, data from the community based exploited to prevent an increasing myocardial infarction registers were epidemic of ischaemic heart disease in used. The registers used similar diagnos- eastern Europe. tic criteria and had operated in both areas during the entire study period. (Br Heart J 1992;68:516-23) Setting-The province ofNorth Karelia in Finland and the city of Kaunas in During the late 1950s and the early 1960s Lithuania. several western countries, including Finland, http://heart.bmj.com/ Subjects-The target populations were experienced a considerable increase in mor- the people of North Karelia and Kaunas tality and morbidity from ischaemic heart dis- aged 35-64 years.
[Show full text]
The Status, Characteristics and Potential of SMART SPECIALISATION in Nordic Regions
The status, characteristics and potential of SMART SPECIALISATION in Nordic Regions By Mari Wøien, Iryna Kristensen and Jukka Teräs NORDREGIO REPORT 2019:3 nordregio report 2019:3 1 The status, characteristics and potential of SMART SPECIALISATION in Nordic Regions By Mari Wøien, Iryna Kristensen and Jukka Teräs NORDREGIO REPORT 2019:3 Prepared on behalf of the Nordic Thematic Group for Innovative and Resilient Regions 2017–2020, under the Nordic Council of Ministers Committee of Civil Servants for Regional Affairs. The status, characteristics and potential of smart specialisation in Nordic Regions Nordregio Report 2019:3 ISBN 978-91-87295-67-6 ISSN 1403-2503 DOI: doi.org/10.30689/R2019:3.1403-2503 © Nordregio 2019 Nordregio P.O. Box 1658 SE-111 86 Stockholm, Sweden [email protected] www.nordregio.org www.norden.org Analyses and text: Mari Wøien, Iryna Kristensen and Jukka Teräs Contributors: Ágúst Bogason, Eeva Turunen, Laura Fagerlund, Tuulia Rinne and Viktor Salenius, Nordregio. Cover: Taneli Lahtinen Nordregio is a leading Nordic and European research centre for regional development and planning, established by the Nordic Council of Ministers in 1997. We conduct solution-oriented and applied research, addressing current issues from both a research perspective and the viewpoint of policymakers and practitioners. Operating at the international, national, regional and local levels, Nordregio’s research covers a wide geographic scope, with an emphasis on the Nordic and Baltic Sea Regions, Europe and the Arctic. The Nordic co-operation Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland.
[Show full text]
POKAT 2021: North Karelia's Regional Strategic Programme For
POKAT 2021 North Karelia’s Regional Strategic Programme for 2018–2021 Contents Foreword The regional strategic programme is a statutory regional devel- Sustainable Foreword 3 AIKO opment programme that must be taken into consideration by European growth and jobs Regonal Current state of North Karelia 6 the authorities. It states the regional development objectives, Territorial 2014-2020, innovations and which are based on the characteristics and opportunities spe- Cooperation structural fund experiments Focus areas of the Regional Strategic Programme 8 cific to the region in question. The programme is drawn up for a Programmes programme (Interreg) ”Small” 1. Vitality from regional networking – Good accessibility and operating environment 8 four-year period. The POKAT 2021 North Karelia Regional Stra- tegic Programme is for the period 2018–2021. regional policy Accessibility, transport routes and connections 8 National and international networks 8 The regional strategic programme describes and consolidates CBC programmes EU, national, supraregional and regional level strategies as well (external border) 2. Growth from renewal – A diverse, sustainable and job-friendly economic structure 10 as the municipal and local level strategies. Despite the multi- Europe 2020 Strategy, Forest bioeconomy 10 sectoral overall approach, the aim is for the programme to have White Paper on the Future ”Large” specific focus areas. Concrete measures are described in the ac- of Europe 2025, 7th cohesion regional policy Technology industries 10 tion plan of the strategic programme and in individual sectoral report, EU Strategy for National objectives for Stone processing and mining 10 strategies and action plans. Separate EU the Baltic Sea Region, regional development Tourism 11 POKAT 2021 is the North Karelia Regional Strategic Programme programmes for the 2018–2021 period.
[Show full text]
Ita-Suomi FI13 RIM Regional Innovation Report
Version: Final Date: 19 August 2011 Regional Innovation Monitor Regional Innovation Report (Eastern Finland/Itä-Suomi) To the European Commission Enterprise and Industry Directorate-General Directorate D – Industrial Innovation and Mobility Industries Kimmo Viljamaa Henri Lahtinen Advansis www.technopolis-group.com PREFACE The Regional Innovation Monitor (RIM)1 is an initiative of the European Commission's Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry, which has the objective to describe and analyse innovation policy trends across EU regions. RIM analysis is based on methodologies developed in the context of the INNO-Policy Trendchart which covers innovation policies at national level as part of the PRO INNO Europe initiative. The overarching objective of this project is to enhance the competitiveness of European regions through increasing the effectiveness of their innovation policies and strategies. The specific objective of the RIM is to enhance the scope and quality of policy assessment by providing policy-makers, other innovation stakeholders with the analytical framework and tools for evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of regional policies and regional innovation systems. RIM covers EU-20 Member States: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. This means that RIM will not concentrate on Member States where the Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics NUTS 1 and 2 levels are identical with the entire country (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), Malta which only has NUTS 3 regions, Slovenia which has a national innovation policy or Cyprus and Luxembourg which are countries without NUTS regions.
[Show full text]