外文翻譯--外商直接投資怎樣影響經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)

1、<p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯</p><p>　　外文題目： How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth </p><p>　　出 處： Journal of International Economics 45(1998) 115-135 </p><p>　　作

2、 者： E.Borensztein,J.De Gregorio,J-W.Lee </p><p>　　How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth?</p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　We te

3、st the effect of foreign direct investment (FDI) on economic growth in a cross-country regression framework, utilizing data on FDI flows from industrial countries to 69 developing countries over the last two decades. Our

4、 results suggest that FDI is an important vehicle for the transfer of technology, contributing relatively more to growth than domestic investment. However, the higher productivity of FDI holds only when the host country

5、has a minimum threshold stock of human capital. Thus, F</p><p>　　一、Introduction</p><p>　　Technology diffusion plays a central role in the process of economic development. In contrast to the trad

6、itional growth framework, where technological change was left as an unexplained residual, the recent growth literature has highlighted the dependence of growth rates on the state of domestic technology relative to that o

7、f the rest of the world. Thus, growth rates in developing countries are, in part, explained by a ‘catch-up’ process in the level of technology. In a typical model of technolog</p><p>　　Technology diffusion c

8、an take place through a variety of channels that involve the transmission of ideas and new technologies. Imports of high-technology products, adoption of foreign technology and acquisition of human capital through variou

9、s means are certainly important conduits for the international diffusion of technology. Besides these channels, foreign direct investment by multinational corporations (MNCs) is considered to be a major channel for the a

10、ccess to advanced technologies by deve</p><p>　　The purpose of this paper is to examine empirically the role of FDI in the process of technology diffusion and economic growth in developing countries.We motiv

11、ate the empirical work by a model of endogenous growth, in which the rate of technological progress is the main determinant of the long-term growth rate of income. Technological progress takes place through a process of

12、‘capital deepening’ in the form of the introduction of new varieties of capital goods. MNCs possess more advanced ‘knowle</p><p>　　We test the effect of FDI on economic growth in a framework of cross-country

13、</p><p>　　regressions utilizing data on FDI flows from industrial countries to 69 developing</p><p>　　countries over the last two decades. Our results suggest that FDI is in fact an important ve

14、hicle for the transfer of technology, contributing to growth in larger</p><p>　　measure than domestic investment. Moreover, we find that there is a strong complementary effect between FDI and human capital,

15、that is, the contribution of</p><p>　　FDI to economic growth is enhanced by its interaction with the level of human</p><p>　　capital in the host country. However, our empirical results imply tha

16、t FDI is more</p><p>　　productive than domestic investment only when the host country has a minimum</p><p>　　threshold stock of human capital. The results are robust to a number of alternative&l

17、t;/p><p>　　specifications, which control for the variables usually identified as the main determinants of economic growth in cross-country regressions. This sensitivity</p><p>　　analysis along the

18、lines of Levine and Renelt (1992) shows a robust relationship</p><p>　　between economic growth, FDI and human capital.</p><p>　　We also investigate the effect of FDI on domestic investment, name

19、ly, whether</p><p>　　there is evidence that the inflow of foreign capital ‘crowds out’ domestic investment. In principle, this effect could have either sign: by competing in product and financial markets MNC

20、s may displace domestic firms; conversely, FDI may support the expansion of domestic firms by complementarity in production or by increasing productivity through the spillover of advanced technology. Our results are supp

21、ortive of a crowding-in effect, that is, a one-dollar increase in the net inflow of FDI is ass</p><p>　　Thus, it appears that the main channel through which FDI contributes to economic growth is by stimulati

22、ng technological progress, rather than by increasing total capital accumulation in the host economy.</p><p><b>　　二、 Data</b></p><p>　　There are several sources for data on foreign di

23、rect investment. Two IMF publications provide data on net and gross foreign direct investment (International Financial Statistics, and Balance of Payments Statistics, respectively). Net FDI refers to inflows net of outfl

24、ows, and gross FDI refers only to inflows, that is, foreign direct investment into the country. An OECD publication (Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Developing Countries) tallies gross FDI originated in O

25、ECD member c</p><p>　　In the first place, it seems more appropriate to use gross data because we are interested in the effects of foreign direct investment in the host country via transfer</p><p&g

26、t;　　of knowledge and other spillover effects; in addition, we would not expect the</p><p>　　outflow of foreign direct investment to involve a similar negative growth effects</p><p>　　for the sou

27、rce country (loss of knowledge). In the second place, in our framework,</p><p>　　foreign direct investment flows from industrialized to developing countries to close</p><p>　　the technological g

28、ap. Foreign direct investment taking place between countries</p><p>　　with roughly the same level of technological development may respond to a large</p><p>　　extent to other factors, including

29、global firm strategy and market penetration, or to</p><p>　　allow firms to circumvent trade restrictions and offset other advantages accorded</p><p>　　to domestic producers. This type of foreign

30、 direct investment flows may not be</p><p>　　expected to display higher than average productivity. For this reason we focus only</p><p>　　on foreign direct investment received by developing coun

31、tries. And furthermore,</p><p>　　since flows of foreign direct investment between developing countries may also</p><p>　　respond to factors other than the technological gap, we also exclude thos

32、e flows.</p><p>　　Therefore, the OECD measure of foreign direct investment, while having a partial coverage, appears to be the most appropriate for our purposes. These data are</p><p>　　availabl

33、e on a yearly basis from 1970. National accounts data, such as the growth rate of income, initial income and government consumption, are all taken from Summers and Heston (release 5.5 of June 1993) which provides data up

34、 to 1989. This allows us to consider a 20-year period for the empirical investigation. The growth rate measure is the average annual rate of per capita real GDP over each decade, 1970–79 and 1980–89. Government consumpti

35、on is measured by the average share of real governme</p><p>　　For the human capital stock variable we use the initial-year level of average years of the male secondary schooling constructed by Barro and Lee

36、(1993). According to Barro and Lee (1994), this measure of educational attainment is the one most significantly correlated with growth. Data for the other explanatory variables, such as the domestic investment rate, the

37、foreign exchange parallel market premium and the measures of political instability and financial development are also taken from Barro </p><p>　　三、 Conclusions</p><p>　　There is a good a priori

38、case to presume that FDI is more productive than domestic investment. As Graham and Krugman (1991) argue, domestic firms have better knowledge and access to domestic markets; if a foreign firm decides to enter</p>

39、<p>　　the market, it must compensate for the advantages enjoyed by domestic firms. It is</p><p>　　most likely that a foreign firm that decides to invest in another country enjoys</p><p>　　

40、lower costs and higher productive efficiency than its domestic competitors. In the</p><p>　　case of developing countries in particular, it is likely that the higher efficiency of</p><p>　　FDI wo

41、uld result from a combination of advanced management skills and more</p><p>　　modern technology; FDI may be the main channel through which advanced</p><p>　　technology is transferred to developi

42、ng countries.</p><p>　　Different types of economic distortions, however, may jeopardize the role of</p><p>　　FDI as a means for advanced technology transfer. For example, because of</p>&

43、lt;p>　　protectionist trade policies, FDI may be the only way to gain access to domestic markets by firms that would otherwise have been exporters to the host country.</p><p>　　Similarly, governments may o

44、ffer a set of incentives to foreign investors to</p><p>　　stimulate the inflow of FDI, with the objective of increasing foreign exchange</p><p>　　reserves or of developing certain sectors consid

45、ered strategic from an industrial</p><p>　　policy viewpoint. These policies may result in a flow of FDI that does not respond</p><p>　　to higher efficiency but only to profit opportunities creat

46、ed by distorted incentives.</p><p>　　These considerations make the empirical evaluation of the performance of FDI an</p><p>　　appealing question. We investigated these issues in a sample that co

47、mprises FDI</p><p>　　flows from industrial country into developing countries</p><p>　　The most robust finding of this paper is that the effect of FDI on economic growth is dependent on the level

48、 of human capital available in the host economy. There is a strong positive interaction between FDI and the level of educational attainment (our proxy for human capital). Notably, the same interaction is not significant

49、in the case of domestic investment, possibly a reflection of differences of technological nature between FDI and domestic investment. We also found some evidence of a crowd</p><p>　　Some caution must be exer

50、cised, however, in the interpretation of the size of the</p><p>　　effect on economic growth of FDI. Our data measures the international flow of</p><p>　　resources for foreign direct investment,

51、as recorded in balance of payments statistics. This is, however, only part of the resources invested by a multinational firm, because some part of the investment may be financed through debt or equity issues raised in th

52、e domestic market. Thus, our measure of FDI underestimates the total value of fixed investment made by a multinational firm and the coefficients on FDI may be proportionally overestimated. To the extent that this bias in

53、 the measure of FDI</p><p>　　Finally, the results of this paper suggest some directions for further research. The results suggest that the beneficial effects on growth of FDI come through higher efficiency r

54、ather than simply from higher capital accumulation. This suggests the possibility of testing the effect of FDI on the rate of total factor productivity growth in recipient countries. In addition, given the robustness of

55、the effect of interactions between human capital and FDI, it might be interesting to explore the effec</p><p><b>　　譯 文：</b></p><p>　　外商直接投資怎樣影響經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)</p><p><b>　　

56、摘要</b></p><p>　　我們利用過(guò)去二十年里從工業(yè)國(guó)家到69個(gè)發(fā)展中國(guó)家的外商直接投資數(shù)據(jù)流動(dòng)，通過(guò)多個(gè)國(guó)家回歸框架測(cè)試了外商直接投資（FDI）對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響。我們的研究結(jié)果表明，外商直接投資是一個(gè)技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移的重要手段，相對(duì)比國(guó)內(nèi)投資對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)有更多的促進(jìn)作用。然而，外商直接投資只有當(dāng)東道主國(guó)家擁有人力資源的存量最低時(shí)才保持較高的生產(chǎn)率。因此，外國(guó)直接投資只有當(dāng)東道國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)沒(méi)有足夠的先進(jìn)技術(shù)吸

57、收能力時(shí)才對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)有貢獻(xiàn)。</p><p><b>　　一、說(shuō)明</b></p><p>　　在經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展過(guò)程中，技術(shù)擴(kuò)散扮演著一個(gè)關(guān)鍵的角色。將技術(shù)擴(kuò)散與技術(shù)的改變而拋棄的傳統(tǒng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的框架作對(duì)照，最近增長(zhǎng)的文獻(xiàn)已經(jīng)突出了增長(zhǎng)率依賴于相對(duì)于世界其他國(guó)家的國(guó)內(nèi)技術(shù)。因此，發(fā)展中國(guó)家的增長(zhǎng)速度，部分解釋為為“追趕”在技術(shù)水平的過(guò)程。在一個(gè)典型的技術(shù)擴(kuò)散模型，對(duì)一個(gè)落后國(guó)

58、家的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)速度取決于在主要國(guó)家已經(jīng)使用的新技術(shù)的采用和執(zhí)行的程度。</p><p>　　通過(guò)技術(shù)擴(kuò)散可以代替各種各樣的渠道包括思想的傳播和新技術(shù)的傳播。采用國(guó)外技術(shù)并且通過(guò)不同方法獲得的人力資源的高技術(shù)的進(jìn)口產(chǎn)品，當(dāng)然是國(guó)際技術(shù)擴(kuò)散的重要渠道。除了這些渠道外，發(fā)展中國(guó)家的跨國(guó)公司的外商直接投資被認(rèn)為是接觸新技術(shù)的主要的渠道。跨國(guó)公司是屬于最先進(jìn)的技術(shù)公司形式，被認(rèn)為是全球研究和直接投資的重要組成部分。最近的一些

59、工作研究表明，外商直接投資在發(fā)展中國(guó)家的技術(shù)進(jìn)步中扮演了一個(gè)很顯著的角色。芬德利外商直接投資的技術(shù)進(jìn)步假設(shè)是通過(guò)更先進(jìn)的技術(shù)和管理實(shí)踐感染東道國(guó)的技術(shù)增長(zhǎng)，曾被外商公司所應(yīng)用。王（1990）納入模型這一想法更符合新古典增長(zhǎng)的框架線，通過(guò)假設(shè)，再應(yīng)用到生產(chǎn)“知識(shí)”的增加是由于外國(guó)直接投資（FDI）的功能決定的。</p><p>　　本文的目的就是對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家的外商直接投資在的技術(shù)擴(kuò)散的進(jìn)步和經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長(zhǎng)所扮演的角色進(jìn)

60、行實(shí)證分析。我們進(jìn)行的實(shí)證分析是通過(guò)一個(gè)以技術(shù)的進(jìn)步作為長(zhǎng)期收入增長(zhǎng)率的主要決定因素的內(nèi)生增長(zhǎng)模型。技術(shù)進(jìn)步是通過(guò)一個(gè)“資本深化”在資本貨物新品種引進(jìn)過(guò)程中發(fā)生的形式?？鐕?guó)公司擁有更先進(jìn)的“知識(shí)”，這使他們能夠以更低的成本推出新的資本貨物。然而，這種更先進(jìn)技術(shù)的應(yīng)用也需要東道國(guó)的經(jīng)濟(jì)存在一個(gè)人力資本不夠的水平。對(duì)一個(gè)發(fā)展中國(guó)家來(lái)說(shuō)東道國(guó)人力資源的存量限制他吸收資本，就如尼爾森和費(fèi)爾普斯（1966）還有伯克利坦納和森柏格爾（1994）所說(shuō)

61、。因此這個(gè)模型強(qiáng)調(diào)了在東道主國(guó)家引進(jìn)先進(jìn)技術(shù)和吸收人力資源這兩個(gè)角色，作為經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的決定因素和建議實(shí)際調(diào)查的外商直接投資和人力資源的生產(chǎn)力提高過(guò)程的互補(bǔ)。對(duì)于一些不同的規(guī)格而言，通常控制作為跨國(guó)回歸經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的主要確定因素的變量，經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)、FDI和人力資本之間的結(jié)果是互補(bǔ)的。這個(gè)根據(jù)Levine and Renelt（1992）的敏感分析，顯現(xiàn)出經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)、FDI和人力資本之間的互補(bǔ)性。</p><p>　　我們利用

62、過(guò)去二十年里從工業(yè)國(guó)家到69個(gè)發(fā)展中國(guó)家的外商直接投資數(shù)據(jù)流動(dòng)，通過(guò)多個(gè)國(guó)家回歸框架測(cè)試了外商直接投資（FDI）對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響。我們的研究結(jié)果表明，外商直接投資是一個(gè)技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移的重要手段，相對(duì)比國(guó)內(nèi)投資對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)有更多的促進(jìn)作用。然而，外商直接投資只有當(dāng)東道主國(guó)家擁有人力資源的存量最低時(shí)才保持較高的生產(chǎn)率。因此，外國(guó)直接投資只有當(dāng)東道國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)沒(méi)有足夠的先進(jìn)技術(shù)吸收能力時(shí)才對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)有貢獻(xiàn)。結(jié)果是互補(bǔ)其他規(guī)格的，這對(duì)于通常作為越野回歸經(jīng)濟(jì)增

63、長(zhǎng)的主要因素確定的變量控制的。</p><p>　　我們還探討國(guó)內(nèi)投資和外國(guó)直接投資的影響，即是否有證據(jù)表明，外國(guó)資本的流入排擠了國(guó)內(nèi)投資。原則上，這種影響可能是標(biāo)志性的：在產(chǎn)品和金融市場(chǎng)上競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的跨國(guó)公司可能取代國(guó)內(nèi)企業(yè)，相反，外國(guó)直接投資可能會(huì)通過(guò)采用先進(jìn)的技術(shù)外溢生產(chǎn)力來(lái)支持國(guó)內(nèi)企業(yè)通過(guò)擴(kuò)大生產(chǎn)，增加互補(bǔ)性。我們的研究結(jié)果是支持在排擠中的作用，也就是說(shuō)，在外國(guó)直接投資凈流入一美元的增加是與投資東道國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)一

64、美元以上有關(guān)聯(lián)的，但似乎并沒(méi)有強(qiáng)烈的互補(bǔ)性。因此，看來(lái)，外國(guó)直接投資的主要渠道對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)的貢獻(xiàn)總的增長(zhǎng)是通過(guò)促進(jìn)技術(shù)進(jìn)步，而不是資本積累。</p><p><b>　　二、數(shù)據(jù)</b></p><p>　　有幾個(gè)外商直接投資的數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)源，國(guó)際貨幣基金組織出版物提供兩個(gè)凈外國(guó)直接投資和總（分別是國(guó)際金融統(tǒng)計(jì)和國(guó)際收支平衡統(tǒng)計(jì)）的數(shù)據(jù)。凈FDI是指流入量出去流出量，而毛FDI只

65、是指流入量，那就是外商直接投資進(jìn)入該國(guó)。經(jīng)合組織的出版物（地方金融流動(dòng)分布在發(fā)展中國(guó)家）的外國(guó)直接投資總額相符經(jīng)合組織成員國(guó)的起源到發(fā)展中經(jīng)濟(jì)體。這些替代品之間的選擇取決于所對(duì)應(yīng)的數(shù)據(jù)集與我們正努力去發(fā)掘的外國(guó)直接投資的效果關(guān)系更加密切。 首先，它似乎更合適使用總的數(shù)據(jù)，因?yàn)槲覀兏信d趣的是東道國(guó)的外國(guó)直接投資的影響，通過(guò)轉(zhuǎn)移知識(shí)和溢出效應(yīng)等，此外，我們也不會(huì)期望外國(guó)直接投資流出涉及類似的負(fù)增長(zhǎng)效應(yīng)在來(lái)源國(guó)（知識(shí)流失）。其次，在我

66、們的框架里，外商直接投資的流向是為了消除發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家到發(fā)展中國(guó)家的技術(shù)差距。</p><p>　　外商直接投資在國(guó)與國(guó)之間發(fā)生，在很大程度上科技發(fā)展水平相似的國(guó)家對(duì)其他要素的反應(yīng)大致相同，包括跨國(guó)公司戰(zhàn)略和市場(chǎng)占有率，或者允許公司規(guī)避貿(mào)易抵制，以及其他的給予國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)者的一些優(yōu)惠。這種類型的外商直接投資的流動(dòng)不要求高于平均生產(chǎn)率。由于這個(gè)原因，我們僅僅關(guān)注于從發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家來(lái)的外商直接投資。另外，我們不包括發(fā)展中國(guó)家間的外商

67、直接投資流動(dòng)，因?yàn)榭赡苡衅渌蛩貙?dǎo)致的技術(shù)差距。因此，經(jīng)濟(jì)合作與發(fā)展組織針對(duì)外商直接投資的措施，雖然有部分重復(fù)，但是很明顯是最合適我們的目的的。這些數(shù)據(jù)很適合從1970年開(kāi)始的每年的基礎(chǔ)上。</p><p>　　國(guó)民經(jīng)濟(jì)核算數(shù)據(jù)，如收入的增長(zhǎng)率，初始收入和政府消費(fèi)都是從薩姆斯和赫斯頓（1993.6）提供的直到1989年的數(shù)據(jù)。這允許我們考慮一個(gè)為期20年的實(shí)證調(diào)查。增長(zhǎng)率的測(cè)量的方法是每十年的國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值的平均年

68、增長(zhǎng)率：1970—1979和1980—1989.政府消費(fèi)的測(cè)量是基于真實(shí)政府消費(fèi)者真實(shí)GDP的平均份額來(lái)的。</p><p>　　由于人力資源存量的可變性我們使用初始水平下的平均年份由本和李（1993）總結(jié)。根據(jù)本和李（1994）的總結(jié)，這個(gè)措施是教育程度的一個(gè)最顯著的相關(guān)增長(zhǎng)。其他數(shù)據(jù)的解釋變量，如：國(guó)內(nèi)投資的增長(zhǎng)，外匯平行市場(chǎng)的升水和政局不穩(wěn)定的措施。同時(shí)金融的發(fā)展也是根據(jù)本和李（1994）的。</p&

69、gt;<p><b>　　三、總結(jié)</b></p><p>　　有一個(gè)很好的先例表明FDI比國(guó)內(nèi)投資更富有成效。格雷厄姆和克魯曼(1991)認(rèn)為,國(guó)內(nèi)公司對(duì)于國(guó)內(nèi)市場(chǎng)更了解，更加能夠進(jìn)入。如果一個(gè)外國(guó)公司決定進(jìn)入這個(gè)市場(chǎng)，它必須補(bǔ)償國(guó)內(nèi)公司所享有的優(yōu)勢(shì)。當(dāng)一個(gè)外國(guó)公司決定投資另一個(gè)國(guó)家時(shí)，它將比它的國(guó)內(nèi)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)者享有更低的成本和更高的生產(chǎn)效率。就對(duì)于特殊的發(fā)展中國(guó)家來(lái)說(shuō)，高效率的外

70、商直接投資很可能使先進(jìn)的管理技能和更現(xiàn)代化的技術(shù)互相結(jié)合。是先進(jìn)的技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移到發(fā)展中國(guó)家的主要的途徑。</p><p>　　不同類型的經(jīng)濟(jì)變形，無(wú)論如何，都有可能危害到外商直接投資作為先進(jìn)技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)移的一種方法的作用。舉個(gè)例子來(lái)說(shuō)，由于貿(mào)易保護(hù)政策，外商直接投資對(duì)于那些出口商來(lái)說(shuō)可能是增加進(jìn)入國(guó)內(nèi)市場(chǎng)機(jī)會(huì)的唯一的方法。同樣，政府可能會(huì)提供一系列的激勵(lì)政策來(lái)刺激外國(guó)投資者增加外商直接投資的流入，以外匯儲(chǔ)備增加以及發(fā)展一些

71、從戰(zhàn)略上考慮產(chǎn)業(yè)政策的部門作為目標(biāo)。這些政策可能導(dǎo)致外商直接投資的流通不能高效率而僅僅能獲利。這些因素使外商直接投資的表現(xiàn)的實(shí)證評(píng)價(jià)成為一個(gè)吸引人的問(wèn)題。我們通過(guò)分析外商直接投資如何從發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家進(jìn)入發(fā)展中國(guó)家來(lái)研究這些問(wèn)題。</p><p>　　這篇文章最大的發(fā)現(xiàn)是外商直接投資對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的影響取決于在主體經(jīng)濟(jì)中可利用的人力資本水平。外商直接投資跟教育程度的水平之間有強(qiáng)烈的積極互動(dòng)關(guān)系。特別是，同樣的作用在國(guó)內(nèi)投資是

72、不顯著的，可能在外商直接投資跟國(guó)內(nèi)投資之間有一種不同的自然技術(shù)反映。我們也發(fā)現(xiàn)了聚集效應(yīng)的一些相關(guān)依據(jù)，也就是國(guó)內(nèi)投資跟外商直接投資是互補(bǔ)的。這個(gè)結(jié)果，無(wú)論如何，跟我們其他的發(fā)現(xiàn)相比沒(méi)那么完善。</p><p>　　但是在解釋外商直接投資對(duì)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的規(guī)模效應(yīng)時(shí)，有一些地方必須注意的。我們計(jì)算了外商直接投資的國(guó)際資源流通的數(shù)據(jù)，并且作為保持國(guó)際收支平衡的記錄。然而，只是計(jì)算由跨國(guó)公司投入的資源部分，因?yàn)橐恍┩顿Y很可

73、能是由在國(guó)內(nèi)的債務(wù)或股票所提供的。因此，我們對(duì)外商直接投資的計(jì)算低估了由跨國(guó)公司和比例估計(jì)過(guò)高的外商直接投資利用系數(shù)所組成的固定資本總值。在一定程度上，外商直接投資數(shù)據(jù)會(huì)隨著不同的國(guó)家和時(shí)間的推移而產(chǎn)生偏差，但本質(zhì)上的結(jié)果不會(huì)受到影響。</p><p>　　總的來(lái)說(shuō)，本文的結(jié)論為進(jìn)一步的研究提供了一些方向。研究結(jié)果表明來(lái)自于高效率的外商直接投資比簡(jiǎn)單的高效率的資本積累更加有益。這個(gè)結(jié)果表明在容易接受的國(guó)家檢測(cè)外商