Foreign Direct Investment and Development: the Mercosur Experience 7 Daniel Chudnovsky and Andrés López
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
JOSÉ LUIS MACHINEA Executive Secretary ERNESTO OTTONE Acting Deputy Executive Secretary a.i. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean econimic commission for latin america and the caribbean CEPAL R e v i e w NUMBER 92 AUGUST 2007 SANTIAGO, CHILE OSCAR ALTIMIR Director REYNALDO BAJRAJ Deputy Director The CEPAL Review was founded in 1976 and is published three times a year by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, which has its headquarters in Santiago, Chile. The Review, however, has full editorial independence and follows the usual academic procedures and criteria, including the review of articles by independent external referees. The Review is distributed to universities, research institutes and other international organizations, as well as to individual subscribers, and is also consulted extensively on the Internet. The purpose of the Review is to contribute to the discussion of socio-economic development issues in the region by offering analytical and policy approaches and articles by economists and other social scientists working both within and outside the United Nations. Accordingly, the editorial board of the Review extends its readers an open invitation to submit for publication articles analysing various aspects of economic and social development in Latin America and the Caribbean. The opinions expressed in the signed articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organization. The designations employed and the way in which data are presented do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the secretariat concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. A subscription to the CEPAL Review in Spanish costs US$ 30 for one year (three issues) and US$ 50 for two years. A subscription to the English version costs US$ 35 or US$ 60, respectively. The price of a single issue in either Spanish or English is US$ 15, including postage and handling. A subscription form can be found in the Review, just before the section “Recent ECLAC publications”, and on the ECLAC web site (www.cepal.org). The complete text of the Review can also be downloaded free of charge from the above web site. Explanatory notes The following symbols are used in tables in the Review: … Three dots indicate that data are not available or are not separately reported. (–) A dash indicates that the amount is nil or negligible. A blank space in a table means that the item in question is not applicable. (-) A minus sign indicates a deficit or decrease, unless otherwise specified. (.) A point is used to indicate decimals. (/) A slash indicates a crop year or fiscal year; e.g., 2004/2005. (-) Use of a hyphen between years (e.g., 2004-2005) indicates reference to the complete period considered, including the beginning and end years. The word “tons” means metric tons and the word “dollars” means United States dollars, unless otherwise stated. References to annual rates of growth or variation signify compound annual rates. Individual figures and percentages in tables do not necessarily add up to the corresponding totals because of rounding. United Nations publication ISSN printed version 0251-2920 - ISSN online version 1684-0348 ISBN 978-92-1-121642-4 LC/G. 2339-P Copyright © United Nations, August 2007. All rights reserved. Printed in Santiago, Chile Requests for authorization to reproduce this work in whole or in part should be sent to the Secretary of the Publications Board. Member States and their governmental institutions may reproduce this work without prior authorization, but are requested to mention the source and to inform the United Nations of such reproduction. In all cases, the United Nations remains the owner of the copyright and should be identified as such in reproductions with the expression “© United Nations 2005” (or other year as appropriate). C E P A L R E VI E W 9 2 S UMMARY Foreign direct investment and development: the MERCOSUR experience 7 Daniel Chudnovsky and Andrés López Developing competitive advantages: successful export SMEs in Argentina, Chile and Colombia 2 Dario Milesi, Virginia Moori, Verónica Robert and Gabriel Yoguel Effects of training on competitiveness in the manufacturing sector 4 Ramón Padilla and Miriam Juárez Youth employment: characteristics, tensions and challenges 61 Jürgen Weller The globalization of the health-care industry: opportunities for the Caribbean 83 Richard L. Bernal Social protection in the English-speaking Caribbean 101 Oliver Paddison Strengthening a fiscal pillar: the Uruguayan dual income tax 121 Alberto Barreix and Jerónimo Roca International migration and development: the socioeconomic impact of remittances in Colombia 141 David Khoudour-Castéras Non-sectoral agents and recent changes in Argentina’s agricultural sector 19 Clara Craviotti Referees for CEPAL Review 200-2006 171 Guidelines for contributors to the CEPAL Review 173 CEPAL Review on the Internet 174 Recent ECLAC publications 177 We inform our readers that CEPAL Review has been selected for coverage in the Social Sciences Citation Index (ssci), published by Thomson isi. AUGUST 2007 7 CEPAL REVIEW 92 • AUGUST 2007 KEYWORDS MERCOSUR Economic integration Foreign direct investment Foreign direct investment Transnational corporation Capital movements Exports and development: Imports Economic development the MERCOSUR experience Latin America Daniel Chudnovsky and Andrés López T his article analyses the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on the MERCOSUR countries in the light of key variables such as productivity, foreign trade, innovation and growth. The macroeconomic impact is not found to have been significant, whereas the microeconomic effects seem to have been more noticeable, though varied. Generally speaking, the subsidiaries of transnational corporations operate at higher levels of Daniel Chudnovsky productivity, engage in more international trade and are more innovative (1944-2007) than local companies. The indirect effects of FDI, on the other hand, are Daniel Chudnovsky was the Director less clear. The sign (positive or negative) and magnitude of productivity of the Centro de Investigaciones para la Transformación (Research spillovers to domestic competitors vary, apparently depending on the Centre for Change) (CENIT) and characteristics of the local businesses and on the markets in which a professor at the University of San Andrés and the University of they operate. Finally, only in Brazil is there evidence of spillover effects Buenos Aires, Argentina. —although those effects have been both positive and negative— on the Andrés López export activities and innovation of local companies, as well as productivity Andrés López is the current spillovers from foreign subsidiaries to their national suppliers. Director of CENIT and a professor at the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina. [email protected]. 8 C E P A L R E VI E W 92 • AUGUST 2007 I Introduction Since its creation, MERCOSUR has been one of the top The FDI boom of the 1990s was inextricably attractors of foreign direct investment (FDI) among linked to globalization. In 2000, FDI reached a record the developing countries. Between 1990 and 2004, figure of US$ 1.4 trillion globally, and although the MERCOSUR countries received almost US$ 300 investment flows subsequently dropped sharply, today billion in FDI. they still significantly exceed the averages of recent Indeed, even during their agricultural export decades. At the same time, the number of multinational period, Argentina and Brazil had adopted development corporations grew. Whereas in the early 1990s it was styles in which FDI played a very important role. This estimated that there were around 37,000, with at least role was reinforced during the final phase of import 170,000 foreign subsidiaries, by 2004 the number of substitution industrialization —from the mid-1950s to such companies had increased to nearly 70,000 and the 1970— when foreign companies, together with State- number of foreign subsidiaries had risen to 690,000. owned companies, led the transition to capital- and Almost half of those subsidiaries were located in technology-intensive industries in both countries. developing countries (UNCTAD, 2005). Although FDI flows declined considerably in the In this context, transnational companies began to 1980s as a consequence of the severe macroeconomic change their strategies, moving towards the creation of difficulties that beset the region, in the 1990s, with integrated international production systems. the improvement in the macroeconomic climate, In the second place, a fundamental change also investment flows rebounded and the region became occurred in the recipient countries of MERCOSUR, an active participant in the global FDI boom. However, which moved from semi-closed economies with strong this renewed interest by transnational companies in government presence —a characteristic of import investing in Argentina and Brazil occurred in a very substitution industrialization— to the adoption of different context from the one that had prevailed during structural reforms prompted largely by the Washington the import substitute industrialization period. consensus. These reforms sought to open up the In the first place, globalization escalated in the economy and reduce the weight of the State, a process 1990s, bringing with it growing interdependence of that had its clearest expression, in terms