Abstract

As globalization accelerates, the influence of innovative foreign capital on economic development and employment level becomes more significant. However, the impact of FDI on the standard of welfare and economic development is controversial. The demand to promote or target innovative FDI has increased as it has been seen as an innovative tool to stimulate regions’ economic growth or intervene in economic structure changes by orienting it in the most favourable way for the host country. Interest in attracting foreign direct investment has increased since the 1980s as it is one of the external financing sources for both developing and developed countries. However, scientists still argue whether the impact of foreign capital on economic growth is positive or negative. Some researchers state that inward FDI is limited to a short-term positive impact. In contrast, others maintain that the performance of multinational corporations cannot harm the host country at all, and FDI only positively influences economic growth. Modern economic science questions whether it is worthwhile for the state to interfere with the market and stimulate the identified target business sectors with the help of innovative FDI policy. In this way, even significant market flaws are revealed, and some companies are doomed to fail. The benefits of FDI are obvious: the creation of new jobs, «know-how», and the tendency to increase exports. In this sense, the host country should attract specific MNCs motivated towards expanding business through research and development. The article proposes a targeted, complex, innovative FDI policy while applying the ANP method. The methods applied in this research include Analytic Networking Method based on the SWOT approach. The ANP has been chosen as a qualitative method based on the experts’ opinion, allowing determining the best or several alternatives. The findings & value added of the study demonstrated that to gain a competitive advantage, Latvia should attract more innovative FDI into the service business area, followed by manufacturing. The research contributes to the internalization theory while emphasizing the importance of promoting innovative FDI.

Keywords: Analytic Networking Method, criteria system, Innovations, FDI policy, Latvia, SWOT.

JEL Classification: C61, F12, M48.

Cite as: Simelyte, A., & Tvaronaviciene, M (2022). Innovative Foreign Direct Investment Policy: Latvia’s Case Marketing and Management of Innovations, 3, 139-148. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2022.3-12

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Aghasafari, H., Karbasi, A., Mohammadi, H., & Calisti, R. (2020). Determination of the best strategies for development of organic farming: A SWOT–Fuzzy Analytic Network Process approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 277, 124039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
2. Arsic, S., Nikolic, D., Mihajlovic, I., Fedajev, A., & Živkovic, Ž. (2018). A New Approach Within ANP-SWOT Framework for Prioritisation of Ecosystem Management and Case Study of National Park Djerdap, Serbia. Ecological Economics, 146, 85-95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Beshir, F. (2022). The ongoing political crises and their impact on micro and small enterprises: a case study of Ethiopia. Insights into Regional Development, 4(3), 48-60. [CrossRef]
4. Brodzicki, T. (2016). Does variety matter? Export pattern of Poland prior and after the accession to the EU. International Economics Letters, 4(2), 103-118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Buhaichuk, K., Varenia, N., Khodanovych, V., Kriepakova, M., & Seredynskyi, V. (2021). Mechanism of formation of innovation security and activation of innovation activity of corporations. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues 8(3), 402-419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Burchardi, K.B., Chaney, T., & Hassen, T.A. (2019). Migrants, Ancestors, and Foreign Investments. Review of Economic Studies, 86, 1448–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Burinskas, A., Holmen, R. B., Tvaronaviciene, M., Simelyte, A., Razminiene, K. (2021). FDI, technology & knowledge transfer from Nordic to Baltic countries. Insights into Regional Development, 3(3), 31-55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Busse, M., Königer, J., & Nunnenkamp, P. (2010). FDI promotion through bilateral investment treaties: more than a bit? Review of World Review, 146, 147–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Cabelkova, I., Strielkowski, W., & Mirvald, M. (2015). Business influence on the mass media: a case study of 21 countries. Transformations in Business & Economics, 14(1), 65-75. [Google Scholar]
10. Calabrò, A., Chrisman, J.J. & Kano, L. (2022). Family-owned multinational enterprises in the post-pandemic global economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 53, 920–935 [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Cieślik, A., Michałek, J., & Mycielski, J. (2016). Globalisation, international trade, and human development: a case of Central and Eastern Europe. Czech Journal of Social Sciences, Business and Economics, 5(2), 6-15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Coppola, A., Maggiori, M., Neiman, B., Schreger, J. (2021). Redrawing the Map of Global Capital Flows: The Role of Cross-Border Financing and Tax Havens. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 136(3), 1499–1556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Grencíkova, A., Navickas, V., Kordos, M., & Húževka, M. (2021). Slovak business environment development under the industry 4.0 and global pandemic outbreak issues. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(4), 164-179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
14. Gruzina, Y., Firsova, I., & Strielkowski, W. (2021). Dynamics of human capital development in economic development cycles. Economies, 9(2), 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Gumpert, A., Henrike Steimer, H., Antoni, M. (2022). Firm Organisation with Multiple Establishments. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137(2), 1091–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Hilkevics, S., & Hilkevics, A. (2017). The comparative analysis of technology transfer models. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 4(4), 540-558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Hoshi, T., & Kiyota, K. (2019). Potential for inward foreign direct investment in Japan. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 52, 32–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Ighoshemu, B. O., & Ogidiagba, U. B. (2022). Poor governance and massive unemployment in Nigeria: as causes of brain drain in the Buhari administration (2015-2020). Insights into Regional Development, 4(2), 73-84. [CrossRef]
19. Jukss, V. (2021). Peculiarities of employee professional development in the world, European Union and Latvia. Insights into Regional Development, 3(4), 80-100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
20. Kaliyeva, T., Sembiyeva, L., Zhagyparova, A., Orozonova, A., Tazhbenova, G., & Tulegenova, Zh. (2020). Debt and investments: analysis of selected countries. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(2), 1267-1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
21. Karpenko, L., Izha, M., Chunytska, I., Maiev, A., & Hunko, K. (2021). The growth of the country’s economic security level based on the investment infrastructure development projects. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(4), 713-729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Khalatur, S., Khaminich, S., Budko, O., Dubovych, O., & Karamushka, O. (2020). Multiple system of innovation-investment decisions adoption with synergetic approach usage. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(4), 2745-2763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
23. Khan, H., Shaheen, I., Ahmad, M., Bakhshaliev, E., Khan, H. U., & Kabir, A. (2020). Energy infrastructure and foreign direct investment in China. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(1), 233-248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
24. Kucera, J., & Fiľa, M. (2022). R&D expenditure, innovation performance and economic development of the EU countries. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 9(3), 227-241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Li, J., Van Assche, A., Li, L., & Qian, G. (2022). Foreign direct investment along the Belt and Road: A political economy perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 53, 902–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Lisin, E., & Strielkowski, W. (2014). Modelling new economic approaches for the wholesale energy markets in Russia and the EU. Transformations in Business & Economics, 13(2B), 566-580. [Google Scholar]
27. Liu, E. (2019). Industrial Policies in Production Networks. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(4), 1883–1948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Liu, G., Zheng, S., Xu, P., & Zhuang, T. (2019). An ANP-SWOT approach for ESCOs industry strategies in Chinese building sectors. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 93(October), 90-99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Lu, J., Ren, L., Yao, S., Qiao, J., Strielkowski, W., & Streimikis, J. (2019). Comparative review of corporate social responsibility of energy utilities and sustainable energy development trends in the Baltic states. Energies, 12(18), 3417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
30. Magableh, G. M., & Mistarihi, M. Z. (2022). Applications of MCDM approach (ANP-TOPSIS) to evaluate supply chain solutions in the context of COVID-19. Helyion, 8(3), e09062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Mazzanti, M., Mazzarano, M., Pronti, A., & Quatrosi, M. (2020). Fiscal policies, public investments and wellbeing: mapping the evolution of the EU. Insights into Regional Development, 2(4), 725-749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
32. Mehmood, F., Antique, M., Bing, W., Khan, H., & Henna, H. (202). Infrastructure and sectoral FDI in China: an empirical analysis, Insights into Regional Development, 3(2), 160-175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
33. Milewicz, W. (2020). The influence of foreign investors on the development of Polish enterprises – a case study of the BPH bank. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(2), 829-839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
34. Nurpeisova, A., Mauina, G., Niyazbekova, Sh., Jumagaliyeva, A., Zholmukhanova, A., Tyurina, Yu., Murtuzalieva, S., & Maisigova, L. (2020). Impact of R&D expenditures on the country’s innovative potential: a case study. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(2), 682-697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
35. Park, J., & Yoon, W. (2022). A foreign subsidiary’s largest shareholder, entry mode, and divestitures: the moderating role of foreign investment inducement policies. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 28(3), 100197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Radavicius, T., & Tvaronaviciene M. (2022). Digitalisation, knowledge management and technology transfer impact on organisations’ circularity capabilities. Insights into Regional Development, 4(3), 76-95. [CrossRef]
37. Rausser, G., Strielkowski, W., Bilan, Y., & Tsevukh, Y. (2018). Migrant remittances and their impact on the economic development of the Baltic States. Geographica Pannonica, 22(3), 165-175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Saaty, T. L. (2006). Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes. European Journal of Operational Research, 168(2), 557–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Setzler, B., & Tintelnot, F. (2021). The Effects of Foreign Multinationals on Workers and Firms in the United States. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 136(3), 1943–1991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
40. Shmarlouskaya, H., Shalupayeva, N., Danilevica, A., Betlej, A., & Aleksejeva, L. (2021). Foreign direct investment as a factor of trade development: cases of selected countries. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 9(2), 384-401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. Strielkowski, W., Tarkhanova, E., Baburina, N., & Streimikis, J. (2021). Corporate Social Responsibility and the Renewable Energy Development in the Baltic States. Sustainability, 13(17), 9860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
42. Vujanović, N., Radosević, S., Stojcić, N., Hisarciklilar, M., & Hashih, I. (2022). FDI spillover effects on innovation activities of knowledge using and knowledge creating firms: Evidence from an emerging economy. Technovation, 118, 102512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
43. Yu Li, R., Yan, K.L, Yao, N., Tian, K., Xia, S., Yang, X., & Xiong, Y. (2022). Abandoning innovation projects, filing patent applications and receiving foreign direct investment in R&D. Technovation, 114, 102435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
44. Zhai, W. (2014). Competing back for foreign direct investment. Economic Modelling, 38, 146–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
45. Zhu, B., Z. Xu, Z., Zhang, R., & M. Hong, M. (2015). Generalised analytic network process. European Journal of Operational Research 244(1), 277–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
46. Zhu, K., Zhao, S., Yang, S., Liang, C., & Gu, D. (2016). Where is the way for rare earth industry of China: An analysis via ANP-SWOT approach. Resources Policy 49, 349-357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
47. Zumente, I., & Bistrova, J. (2021). Do Baltic investors care about environmental, social and governance (ESG)? Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(4), 349-362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]