【正文】 ns we get a much narrower set of transition countries than the one used by Campos and Kinoshita (2020). Let us begin by exploring time series data for each country, and crosssection data for each year by observing simple relationships between the growth of gross domestic product (rGDP), and the ratio of foreign direct investment and gross domestic product (FDI), the latter representing also a kind of ‘revealed’ liberalization of capital account. The average FDI in the 1994–2020period was percent ranging between percent in Estonia and percent in Slovenia, while the growth of GDP by percent a year was ranging between percent in Poland and percent in Czech Republic. Growth was most stable in Slovenia and most unstable in Lithuania. Correlation coefficients between growth and corresponding FDI are negative in seven out of the eight countries and positive in Lithuania。 the oute was mixed. Blomstr246。 secondly, a foreign corporate presence is associated with positive externalities. The almost desperate efforts of many countries to attract as much FDI as possible indirectly support the theory. However, substantial gains of inward FDI for the host countries have been much more asserted than confirmed by empirical evidence. The results of a rapidly growing number of empirical studies on the relation between FDI and economic growth differ, although most studies start with essentially the same benchmark crosscountry growth model. The differences in the sets of the countries included, sample periods, data, and estimation techniques hamper parisons across the studies (Edison et al. 2020). In many studies dealing with subsets of the countries, FDI or FDI in bination with some other factor or factors, is positively related to growth, while several studies (Rodrik 1998, Grilli and MilesiFerretti 1995, Kraay 2 1998) have found no significant relationship between FDI and growth. Most studies have stressed the differences among the sets of countries included regarding their trade policies, institutional characteristics, or level of development. More than two decades ago Bhagwati (1978) suggested that the impact of FDI on growth depends on the trade policy of a host country。 1 本科畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯 外文題目 : Dose foreign direct investment always enhance economic growth ? 出 處： KYKLOS,491508 作 者 : Joze Mencinger 原 文： Does Foreign Direct Investment Always Enhance Economic Growth? Joze Mencinger Introduction For international financial institutions, politicians, and the vast majority of economists foreign direct investment (FDI) appears to be a sort of panacea for every economic problem in the emerging market economies。 its positive impact on economic growth has acquired the status of conventional fact. Economic theory namely suggests that unfettered international capital flows foster efficient allocation of resources, which by itself should promote growth. The economic benefits of FDI are considered to be twofold. First, FDI can help countries if domestic savings are insufficient to finance economic expansion。 in exportpromoting countries FDI would increase growth, while it would have no impact in a country with an import substitution trade policy. His hypothesis was tested by Balasubramanayam, Salisu and Sapsford (1996)。m, Lipsey and Zejan (1994) found that FDI only promotes growth in hi gherine developing countries. Empirical studies on the subject have therefore not refuted the statement that ‘in general, the results of these studies indicate that the size of inward FDI stocks or flows, relative to GDP, is not related in any consistent way to rates of growth’ (Lipsey 2020, p. 55). A sizable literature on FDI in transition economies can be loosely divided into the studies dealing with the determinants of FDI and those dealing with the impacts of FDI on economic performance. Most of the studies used microeconomic data and dealt with microeconomic issues (Barrel and Holland 2020, Bevan and Estri 2020, Konings 2020, Damija