WHY IS THERE A LACK OF EVIDENCE ON KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVERS FROM FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT?
Abstract
Empirical analyses of knowledge spillovers from foreign direct investment (FDI) offer mixed results; they find positive, neutral and negative FDI spillover effects. This lack of evidence mainly comes from the results of firm‐level panel data analysis. This is important since this approach seems to be the most appropriate for estimating FDI spillovers. The paper takes a look at recent substantive and methodological developments in FDI spillover analysis, which have brought some more optimistic results with regard to FDI spillovers, and can help in further development in this field. The main substantive development relates to the introduction of a broad variety of sources of firm heterogeneity (foreign affiliates as well as local firms) in the analysis. Others include differentiation between vertical (inter‐industry) and horizontal (intra‐industry) spillovers, and host country absorptive capacity for knowledge spillovers. Methodological developments relate to distinguishing between technological/knowledge and productivity spillovers, improvement of modelling and estimation methods, and an increased amount and quality of data.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The ability of local firms to benefit from either intentional or unintentional knowledge flows is a function of their absorptive capacities.
“The ability of local firms to benefit from either intentional or unintentional knowledge flows is a function of their absorptive capacities”
From Innovation in and from emerging economies: New insights and lessons for international business research (2021) · cites this paper as Rojec & Knell, 2018
Cites
“A Model of Growth: Through Creative Destruction”
Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/2951599 · Cited by 7,529 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Anand, J., McDermott, G., Mudambi, R., & Narula, R. (2021) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/s41267-021-00426-1 · Cited by 251 · see citing works
Amendolagine, V., Presbitero, A. F., Rabellotti, R., & Sanfilippo, M. (2019) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.08.010 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Hinane El-Kadi, T. (2024) · The Information Society · doi:10.1080/01972243.2024.2317060 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“Vertically, backward and forward linkages help the diffusion of skills, knowledge, and technology as they provide demonstration effects and training to local firms (Blomstrom and Kokko 2001; Liu, Wang, and Wei 2009; Rojec and Knell 2017).”
Background
- Authors
- Rojec, M., & Knell, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Ljubljana (SI)
- Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Rojec, Matija
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Surveys
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-04-03
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 579-612
- ISSN
- 0950-0804 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6419
- OpenAlex
- W2604455386
- Cited by
- 127
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 13.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Economic Surveys (publishedVersion)
- BIBSYS Brage (BIBSYS (Norway)) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › International Business and FDI
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Global trade and economics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Keywords
- knowledge spillovers, foreign direct investment, firm heterogeneity, foreign affiliates, vertical spillovers, horizontal spillovers, absorptive capacity, productivity spillovers, technology spillovers, firm-level panel data
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review