【正文】 中文 5300 字 一、 外文原文 Chinese state’s economic cooperation Related investment: An investigation of its direction and some Implications for outward investment By: Sumon Bhaumik and Catherine Yap Co Sumon Kumar Bhaumik* Brunel University, William Davidson Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and IZA – Institute for the Study of Labour, Bonn Email: Catherine Yap Co** University of Nebraska at Omaha Email: Abstract The Chinese state undertakes large scale investments in a number of countries under the auspices of economic cooperation related investment (ECI). While there are suggestions that it is an extension of China’s soft power aimed at facilitating Chinese FDI in those countries, often for access to natural resources, there is no systematic analysis of this in the literature. In this paper, we examine this investment of the Chinese state over time. Our results suggest that the pattern of investment is indeed explained well by factors that are used in the stylized literature to explain directional patterns of outward FDI. They also demonstrate that the (positive) relationship between Chinese ECI and the recipient countries? natural resource richness is not economically meaningful. Finally, while there is some support for the popular wisdom that China’s willingness to do business with a country is not strongly affected by its level of corruption, there is much weaker support, if any, for the hypotheses that China favors doing business with countries where political rights are limited. Running title: China’s economic cooperation related investments Keywords: China。 Economic cooperation related investment。 Foreign direct investment。 Natural resources。 Institutional quality Introduction 2020, Risks in Global Market The risks in the global market have been changing rapidly. The theme of the world economy in 2020 is not so much “recovery” as “adjustment”. Shocked by the global financial crisis, economies began to question and reconstruct the game rules of the global business. This trend may continue and even deepen in 2020. Although the impact of the financial woes may clear away in this year, it is hard for the global economy to go steadily up. The side effects of the crisis are far from negligible and may lead to more uncertainties in some areas, such as Europe and Africa. This report provides a guide to cope with the risks and manipulate the markets. Zhou Mi, an expert from the Ministry of Commerce of China makes an overview on the risks of investing and doing business in the global market and specifies those in major economies. He argues that the advanced economies will keep fighting for their frustrated financial systems in 2020 and their markets will revive unsteadily. Some developing economies may be the gold mines in the global market in 2020, but risks still exist, apparently or potentially. Exporters and investors will have to shun or tackle these risks so that they can benefit from these markets. A senior manager fro m Ernst amp。 Young also clarified the changes of customs policies in 2020, especially the revision of the incoterms . Along with the policy environment analysis by an expert from the Chinese Economic Diplomacy, these will help Chinese investors and exporters to adapt to the shifting rules. Until recently, the behavior and strategies of multinational enterprises (MNEs) was viewed largely through the prism of the ownershiplocationinternalization (OLI) paradigm (Dunning, 1988). An MNE was believed to be an entity that has ownership of some special capability (., technology) that it can leverage by gaining access to a resource available in another country or to an overseas market. However, rather than import the resource or export to the overseas market, the MNE might choose to internalize the process of accessing this resource or market by setting up an operation in that overseas location, because the expected profits from such internalization is higher. There is an extensive literature on both the determinants of the choice between actual market entry and alternatives like franchising, as well as the determinants of alternative entry modes like greenfield projects, crossborder acquisitions and joint ventures (JV) (see Meyer, Estrin, Bhaumik and Peng, 2020, and the references therein) The recent surge of FDI from emerging markets,2 and the consequent rise in interest about the emerging market MNEs (EMNEs), suggests that these entities do not conform to the traditional view of MNEs. Indeed, in most cases, these firms do not possess capabilities similar to developed country MNEs and that, indeed, overseas expansion is often a means to acquire such capabilities. The high profile acquisitions of IBM personal puter business by Lenovo of China and the JaguarLand Rover brands by Tata Motors of India are examples of this pursuit of capabilities. At the same time, these emerging market firms have certain characteristics that manifest their successful survival in contexts with missing institutions and markets, but those that might be detrimental for successful overseas expansion. For example, it is now well understood that family ownership and formation of business groups in emergin