【正文】 用 也沒(méi)有。D alliances and partnerships with . firms facilitated the flow of knowledge spillovers across international boundaries. That paper did not examine the role of FDI as a channel of knowledge spillovers. Branstetter (2020b) examined the role of FDI as a channel of knowledge spillovers from the . to Japan, but was able to do so only indirectly, by quantifying the ovement between the Ramp。 凱勒 和 也頗 以及 哈斯科爾 繼續(xù)采用 阿肯特 和 哈瑞森 發(fā)展起來(lái)的基礎(chǔ)方法論 檢驗(yàn)高級(jí)產(chǎn)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)中的 外商直接投資 ，加瓦茨克 檢驗(yàn)了立陶宛的 外商直接投資 。我使用這個(gè)框架來(lái)衡量一組日本企業(yè)在美國(guó)的外國(guó)直接投資對(duì)美國(guó)企業(yè)向那些日本投資企業(yè)以及日本投資企業(yè)對(duì)美國(guó)發(fā)明商的知識(shí)溢出。當(dāng)在技術(shù)上更先進(jìn)的外國(guó)機(jī)構(gòu)第一次進(jìn)入一個(gè)市場(chǎng)，他們的存在會(huì)侵蝕本土企業(yè)的市場(chǎng)能力，同時(shí)，介紹了新的生產(chǎn)技術(shù)和工藝，這些本土企業(yè)就可以從中得到學(xué)習(xí)。通常，就如新加坡和馬來(lái)西亞的例子，這些政策偏向于技術(shù)密集型產(chǎn)業(yè)的公司。在任何情況下，我們需要花更多的力氣通過(guò)研究來(lái)促進(jìn)我們對(duì)東道國(guó)環(huán)境的認(rèn)識(shí)，這有助于促進(jìn)外商直接投資的知識(shí)外溢以及政府政策在這個(gè)領(lǐng)域所扮演的角色。在統(tǒng)計(jì)計(jì)量上這兩個(gè)系數(shù)的差 III5 額很明顯。斯帕塔瑞奴 國(guó)籍： 美國(guó) 出處： 發(fā)展經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)期刊正在出版中 引言 盡管?chē)?guó)內(nèi)資產(chǎn)所有要求被廣大發(fā)展中國(guó)家政府廣泛地利用，近幾年來(lái)它們的影響力急劇地下降，對(duì)外商來(lái)說(shuō)越來(lái)越激烈的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)環(huán)境以及需要遵守國(guó)際條約的壓力迫使鎮(zhèn)古放松外國(guó)進(jìn)入者的限制。通常的情況時(shí)地方合作者不太會(huì)去限制員工流轉(zhuǎn)率。 與垂直效應(yīng)形成對(duì)比的是， FDI 的出現(xiàn)對(duì)在同一個(gè)部門(mén)的當(dāng)?shù)仄髽I(yè)的績(jī)效有一個(gè)負(fù)影響。D spending of . firms and the patent output of Japanese corporations. As noted in that paper, these correlations are subject to confounding influences, raising doubts about the accuracy of such indirect inference. This paper examines the role FDI plays in mediating knowledge spillovers, but it takes a pletely different methodological approach. First, in contrast to many of the aforementioned papers, I measure the impact of FDI not only on knowledge spillovers from the investing Japanese firms to ―indigenous‖ American firms but also the impact of Japanese investment on knowledge spillovers from American firms to the investing Japanese Second, I allow the impact of FDI on knowledge spillovers to depend upon the nature of the subsidiary — and I find differences in the spilloverenhancing impact of different types of subsidiaries that are consistent with recent theoretical work on multinational firms. Third, I do not follow the earlier convention of using measured changes in TFP or other revenuebased measures to infer the presence or absence of knowledge spillovers. As is well known, conventional measures of productivity can reflect market power as well as technical When technologically more advanced foreign affiliates first enter a market, their presence may erode the market power of indigenous incumbents while – at the same time – introducing new III8 production techniques and technologies from which these same incumbents learn. Real knowledge spillovers can take place, yet their effects can be masked in the data by changes in appropriability conditions. Alternatively, robust demand growth in a sector of the host country could lead to higher profits, which generates higher measured TFP growth for domestic firms while, at the same time, inducing investment by foreign firms. This paper presents an alternative empirical framework for measuring the impact of foreign direct investment on knowledge spillovers using patent citations data. I then use this framework to measure the impact of foreign direct investment in the United States by a group of Japanese manufacturing firms on knowledge flows from American firms to these investing Japanese firms and from the investing Japanese firms to American inventors. To previe