{"title":"Cross-border investment into low-carbon infrastructure","authors":"","doi":"10.1787/e82ee163-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/e82ee163-en","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"66 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140080087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Supply-chain disruptions and new investment policies in the post-COVID-19 world","authors":"","doi":"10.1787/5fcc2892-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/5fcc2892-en","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121362275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Trends, investor types and drivers of renewable energy FDI","authors":"","doi":"10.1787/4390289d-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/4390289d-en","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"2018 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121336570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Building an Investment Tax Incentives database","authors":"","doi":"10.1787/62e075a9-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/62e075a9-en","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"128 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128124311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a sudden funding squeeze manifested in major disruptions in international capital flows, the most dramatic of the wave of extreme capital flow episodes since the global financial crisis (GFC). This paper contributes to efforts to better understand this extreme episode in the context of post-GFC structural financial changes. To do so, it presents a new monthly dataset of gross capital flows for 41 countries, better suited to the identification of sudden shocks than quarterly Balance of Payments data. Leveraging on this dataset, the paper first develops a more precise identification of extreme capital flow episodes since the GFC and revisit their drivers, asking whether COVID-19 episode significantly changed recent findings of the weaker role of global factors. The answer is no. Rather, the role of global factors may have further lost explanatory power in the post-GFC period including COVID. On the other hand, pull factors such as pre-COVID vulnerabilities and country-specific and pandemic-specific factors appear key to explaining the identified cross-country heterogeneity.
{"title":"Extreme capital flow episodes from the Global Financial Crisis to COVID-19","authors":"Annamaria de Crescenzio, Etienne Lepers","doi":"10.1787/d557b9c4-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/d557b9c4-en","url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a sudden funding squeeze manifested in major disruptions in international capital flows, the most dramatic of the wave of extreme capital flow episodes since the global financial crisis (GFC). This paper contributes to efforts to better understand this extreme episode in the context of post-GFC structural financial changes. To do so, it presents a new monthly dataset of gross capital flows for 41 countries, better suited to the identification of sudden shocks than quarterly Balance of Payments data. Leveraging on this dataset, the paper first develops a more precise identification of extreme capital flow episodes since the GFC and revisit their drivers, asking whether COVID-19 episode significantly changed recent findings of the weaker role of global factors. The answer is no. Rather, the role of global factors may have further lost explanatory power in the post-GFC period including COVID. On the other hand, pull factors such as pre-COVID vulnerabilities and country-specific and pandemic-specific factors appear key to explaining the identified cross-country heterogeneity.","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125734533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper assembles a comprehensive sectoral capital flows dataset for 64 advanced and emerging economies from 2000-18. This includes direct, portfolio and other investments to and from five sectors: central banks (CB), general government (GG), banks (BKs), non-financial corporates (NFCs) and other financial corporates (OFCs) and a corresponding dataset on capital controls imposed on these sectors. The paper uses this data to examine the usefulness of a sectoral approach in assessing capital flow covariates, co-movements, and the effectiveness of capital controls. The findings show that: 1) private sectoral flows have varying sensitivities to global financial conditions and different cyclicality with respect to output growth. For instance, unlike other flows, NFCs respond to global commodity prices but not global risk aversion and, unlike banks, OFCs cut foreign investment in periods of domestic investment; 2) co-movements of resident and non-resident OFC sectoral flows add to the observed positive correlation between gross inflows and outflows; and, 3) the tightening of capital controls on NFCs and OFCs appear effective in reducing the volume of flows to these sectors.
{"title":"Analysing sectoral capital flows","authors":"Etienne Lepers, Rogelio V. Mercado","doi":"10.1787/AD9E6B1D-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/AD9E6B1D-EN","url":null,"abstract":"This paper assembles a comprehensive sectoral capital flows dataset for 64 advanced and emerging economies from 2000-18. This includes direct, portfolio and other investments to and from five sectors: central banks (CB), general government (GG), banks (BKs), non-financial corporates (NFCs) and other financial corporates (OFCs) and a corresponding dataset on capital controls imposed on these sectors. The paper uses this data to examine the usefulness of a sectoral approach in assessing capital flow covariates, co-movements, and the effectiveness of capital controls. The findings show that: 1) private sectoral flows have varying sensitivities to global financial conditions and different cyclicality with respect to output growth. For instance, unlike other flows, NFCs respond to global commodity prices but not global risk aversion and, unlike banks, OFCs cut foreign investment in periods of domestic investment; 2) co-movements of resident and non-resident OFC sectoral flows add to the observed positive correlation between gross inflows and outflows; and, 3) the tightening of capital controls on NFCs and OFCs appear effective in reducing the volume of flows to these sectors.","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"133 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133999300","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As our societies face new challenges and make new demands from policies addressing international investment, there is a new urgency to profoundly reconsider treaties addressing investment. This paper was prepared originally as background for initial inter-governmental and public discussions at the OECD about future investment treaties as well as possible alternatives. The paper surveys potential roles for treaties addressing investment in (i) contributing to sustainable development and responsible business conduct; (ii) preserving and improving investment market access and liberalisation of investment, and facilitating FDI; (iii) regulating subsidised state-owned enterprises, competition in subsidies for investment, and digitalisation; and (iv) addressing the interests of treaty-covered and other investors in reasonable legal predictability and a level playing field, together with the need for policy space and public support for treaty policy. It considers potential use of more flexible and varied remedies and implementation mechanisms. A final section briefly considers treaty policies as governments and societies confront the urgent challenge of climate change.
{"title":"The future of investment treaties - possible directions","authors":"D. Gaukrodger","doi":"10.1787/946c3970-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/946c3970-en","url":null,"abstract":"As our societies face new challenges and make new demands from policies addressing international investment, there is a new urgency to profoundly reconsider treaties addressing investment. This paper was prepared originally as background for initial inter-governmental and public discussions at the OECD about future investment treaties as well as possible alternatives. The paper surveys potential roles for treaties addressing investment in (i) contributing to sustainable development and responsible business conduct; (ii) preserving and improving investment market access and liberalisation of investment, and facilitating FDI; (iii) regulating subsidised state-owned enterprises, competition in subsidies for investment, and digitalisation; and (iv) addressing the interests of treaty-covered and other investors in reasonable legal predictability and a level playing field, together with the need for policy space and public support for treaty policy. It considers potential use of more flexible and varied remedies and implementation mechanisms. A final section briefly considers treaty policies as governments and societies confront the urgent challenge of climate change.","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123630477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the past two decades, governments worldwide have continued to liberalise restrictions on international investment with only occasional relapses. Yet, FDI liberalisation remains an unfinished agenda in various parts of the world and across sectors. This paper sheds light on their potential costs in terms of foregone investments. Applying an augmented gravity model, covering 60 advanced and emerging countries over the period 1997–2016, it estimates the elasticity of bilateral FDI positions and cross-border M&A activity to FDI restrictions as measured by the OECD FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index. Results suggest that reforms liberalising FDI restrictions by about 10% as measured by the Index could increase bilateral FDI in stocks by 2.1% on average. Effects are greater for FDI in the services sector, but even manufacturing sectors – which are typically open to FDI – are negatively affected by countries’ overall restrictiveness. Foreign equity limitations and FDI screening policies are also scrutinised.
{"title":"The determinants of Foreign Direct Investment","authors":"Fernando Mistura, Caroline Roulet","doi":"10.1787/641507ce-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/641507ce-en","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past two decades, governments worldwide have continued to liberalise restrictions on international investment with only occasional relapses. Yet, FDI liberalisation remains an unfinished agenda in various parts of the world and across sectors. This paper sheds light on their potential costs in terms of foregone investments. Applying an augmented gravity model, covering 60 advanced and emerging countries over the period 1997–2016, it estimates the elasticity of bilateral FDI positions and cross-border M&A activity to FDI restrictions as measured by the OECD FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index. Results suggest that reforms liberalising FDI restrictions by about 10% as measured by the Index could increase bilateral FDI in stocks by 2.1% on average. Effects are greater for FDI in the services sector, but even manufacturing sectors – which are typically open to FDI – are negatively affected by countries’ overall restrictiveness. Foreign equity limitations and FDI screening policies are also scrutinised.","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"112 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124098879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The post financial crisis period has been associated with increased countercyclical use of various financial policies, including residency-based measures. This paper analyses in a single analytical framework the relative effectiveness of three types of financial policies – macroprudential (foundations), currency-based (fences), and residency-based measures (fire doors). The findings in this paper are based on a granular quarterly database of adjustments in these policies that covers both advanced and emerging economies from 2000 to 2015. The results show that residency-based measures on bonds and credit reduce capital inflows but provide limited support for a credit-mitigation role. While no evidence emerges that macroprudential measures alter capital inflows, most appear effective in reducing credit growth. Currency-based measures may reduce both inflows and credit growth (particularly FX reserve requirements and FX lending regulations). These results indicate that the impact of policies needs to be analysed at a granular level and that policy makers should adopt an integrated view of the financial policy toolkit.
{"title":"The broad policy toolkit for financial stability","authors":"Etienne Lepers, C. Mehigan","doi":"10.1787/9188F06A-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/9188F06A-EN","url":null,"abstract":"The post financial crisis period has been associated with increased countercyclical use of various financial policies, including residency-based measures. This paper analyses in a single analytical framework the relative effectiveness of three types of financial policies – macroprudential (foundations), currency-based (fences), and residency-based measures (fire doors). The findings in this paper are based on a granular quarterly database of adjustments in these policies that covers both advanced and emerging economies from 2000 to 2015. The results show that residency-based measures on bonds and credit reduce capital inflows but provide limited support for a credit-mitigation role. While no evidence emerges that macroprudential measures alter capital inflows, most appear effective in reducing credit growth. Currency-based measures may reduce both inflows and credit growth (particularly FX reserve requirements and FX lending regulations). These results indicate that the impact of policies needs to be analysed at a granular level and that policy makers should adopt an integrated view of the financial policy toolkit.","PeriodicalId":256689,"journal":{"name":"OECD Working Papers on International Investment","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115177724","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：