外商直接投资行为的决定因素外文翻译.doc

本科毕业论文外文翻译外文题目： Behavioural Determinants Of foreign Direct Investment 出 处： University of Bath 作 者： Ricardo Pinheiro Alves 原文：Behavioral Determination Of Foreign Direct InvestmentPicardo Pinheiro AlvesAbstractThe paper presents a behavioural economics approach to foreign direct investment. Starting from behavioural finance theory, it uses content analysis from interviews made to Portuguese managers with investments abroad. The study presents evidence of herding, anchoring, overconfidence, mentalaccounting and other behaviour rules in firms location decisions that originate a set of determinants of FDI flows and complement the neoclassical paradigm. Moreover, it confirms the Heiner model (1983, 1985, 1989) by showing that thehigher the uncertainty faced by decision makers the more frequent will be the use of behavioural rules. The central role of uncertainty helps explain why FDI flows occur more frequently among developed countries.1.IntroductionFDI theory has been developing on a partial-equilibrium basis and its empirical analysis is often not conclusive indicating that there are many determinants of FDI decisions and their role varies with context (countries, firms and so on Blonigen, 2005). But theory seldom considers the role of managers within the decision making process. Psychologists recognize that managers, as human beings in general, have several motivational factors that are either intrinsic to their personality or shaped by their environment and may have multiple and changing objectives that are often contradictory (Frey and Eichenberger, 2001). Values are subject to choices and change with the personal experience of individuals. This change in values modifies the objectives that individuals attempt to attain (Akerlof, 1983). Given that managers have checks on their performance (from competition, shareholders, customers and employees) they often do make their choices more carefully than as if they acted as individuals. But managers are not immune to moral, cultural and other social influences usually disregarded by the economic literature.Moreover, the behavioural finance literature has shown (e.g. Shiller, 2003) that simpler decisions in equity markets or portfolio investment cannot be totally explained by a neoclassical approach. Thus, the role of managers seems suitable to provide a complementary perspective to mainstream economics,and thus an enrichment of FDI theory.The aim of this paper is to show that the behavioural approach can make a contribution to FDI theory by identifying a new set of determinants, similar to those presented in behavioural finance. These are rules of behaviour repeatedly followed by managers that motivate firms to choose exact locations in external markets This approach is better suited than what is usually assumed in economic models to show the complexity of FDI location decisions because it gives a central role to the uncertainty (risk as part of unknowns plus unknown unknowns) faced by managers. It is the purpose of this paper todisplay uncertainty in accordance with the reality of FDI location decisions. That is, to enhance the relevance of factors that go beyond the standard assumptions of neoclassical theory and to include behavioural characteristics that affect the perceptions of managers in their decision making process.Hence it is important to understand the different perceptions of managers and to understand how they impact real life FDI location decisions.The focus on uncertainty is based on the Heiner (1983, 1985, 1989) model of behaviour prediction.The use of a behavioural framework, based on the “behaviouralists” (e.g. Simon) and on economic psychology (e.g. Tversky and Kahneman), allows a better understanding of the key determinants in FDI location decisions. The central idea of the model is the higher the uncertainty the higher should be the use of behavioural rules. It was theoretically applied to FDI in Hosseini (2005) and an empirical confirmation, using data from Portuguese firms, is made in the paper.The empirical work is based on interviews and the interpretation of information through content analysis as a complement to the enormous amount of quantitative work found in the FDI literature.This is reinforced by statistical tests in order to assess the results obtained in the qualitative work. The following section briefly reviews FDI theory by pointing to its limits while section 3 details the methodology and section 4 presents empirical evidence of behavioural rules. Section 5 deals with the role of uncertainty by testing the Heiner model and the paper ends with a brief conclusion.2 Limits to FDI theoryConsider a firm deciding whether to invest abroad and where to locate its investment. A rational decision-maker attempts to maximize the present value of the difference between revenue and costs when answering these questions. For this end it must collect substantial information and by assuming a discount rate from the expected inflation, the desired rate of return and the presumed associated risk, it can calculate a net present value for the investment.The decision to invest abroad and where to locate the investment depends on the decision-makers expectations about the value of these variables for the various available alternatives. If the decision to go abroad is already made, the location of the investment, and its expected revenue and costs, becomes the relevant issue. Thus, one can consider that the two key variables for rational location decisions are revenue and costs.Economic literature has presented several explanations impacting revenue and costs for FDI to occur2.Transnational companies (TNCs), when making FDI location decisions within imperfect markets,seek to improve their revenue stream in several ways. They use specific advantages over local competitors in the host market to compensate the additional costs of investing abroad. Several specific advantages are noted: product differentiation, managerial and marketing skills, innovation and The will to minimize transactional costs and thus to be more cost-efficient is also used by the FDI literature to explain location decisions. The transactional costs approach explains the occurrence of FDI (but not its exact location) from a cost comparison between market transactions and the internal allocation of resources. Penrose (1958) and Williamson (1975, 1981) state that the bigger and more complex is the firm or the better and cheaper the legal framework and existing information channels, the lower the potential advantages of internalization (both domestic and international) and the higher the incentive to operate within the market. Buckley and Casson, Hennart and Caves (1996) further developed this approach by stating that the resulting power of market imperfections (originating in less-tradable goods such as “research and development”, knowledge or intangible assets such as brands) are an incentive for internalization and thus for the formation of TNCs. Further explanations of location decisions are mainly related with the fragmentation of production processes by single-plant firms into different stages based on different relative factor endowments and thus prices across countries (the factor proportion model, Helpman and Krugman, 1985). In this case, vertical FDI is unidirectional (from richly endowed countries to cheaper labour endowed locations). decisions require a huge amount of information, comprise different steps where a large number of small sequential decisions are made during several months or years, and the invested capital is relatively immobile and focused on the long term (Aharoni, 1999). In the meantime environmental variables are permanently changing in unpredictable ways and decision makers are themselves affected by rather different events. The process involves a lot of different people that, directly or indirectly, influence the final location. Furthermore, each FDI location decision comprises not only the“economically rational” part but also the “behavioural” part, where perceptions and other cognitive features of managers are included (Katona, 1975).Therefore, a more complete definition of FDI location decisions, as the one provided by the behavioural approach, must also consider the way the behavioural component influences a FDI location decision by recognizing the relevance of managers cognitive characteristics within the decision-making process.Moreover, a feature of most decision making situations is the existence of uncertainty or “the absence of ability to decipher all of the complexity of the environment; especially one whose very structure itself evolves over time” (Heiner, 1983, p, 569). It includes, besides risk, the known unknowns andunknown unknowns. Contrary to risk, the remaining part of uncertainty cannot be mitigated and it is not possible to assign probabilities for each alternative (Knight, 1921). However, the behaviour of all types of agents is thought to be highly influenced by uncertainty and while neoclassical economics usually play down the outcomes to which they are not able to assign a probability the behavioural approach emphasizes it. That is, it differs from expected utility theory where risk and uncertainty are often faced as being the same thing while acting as a constraint to maximization (Hirshleifer and Riley, 1992, p. 10).The behavioural approach considers how uncertainty and the extrinsic and intrinsic cognitive characteristics of managers influence the decision-making process. It fully considers the FDI decisionmaking process by giving uncertainty a central role in each step. This is very important for three reasons: First, the emphasis on rules of behaviour in this paper arises from the fact that most situations faced by decision makers are related to “nonreplicable uncertainty or even ignorance” (Heijdra, 1988,p. 83); Second because individuals usually deal with each event in a separate way before combining the outcomes and thus uncertainty is increased3 (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979). This is applicable to each different step in FDI decisions where different persons participate; Third, as Alchian (1950) proposes, because it seems more sensible to develop a model from an initial situation of uncertaintyand only then to add elements of foresight, and not to start it on a certain goal such as profit maximization and afterwards abandon it by considering uncertainty and different motives for agents behaviour. Therefore, the behavioural approach highlights uncertainty as an evolving phenomenon by focusing on the cognitive characteristics of individuals as key to the decision-making process and,thus, as the basis of the changing expectations considered by the neoclassical theory. That is, the problems faced by decision makers change with uncertainty.It is within this complexity that behavioural rules arise. Behavioural rules or heuristics are simplifying strategies to reduce complexity that systematically deviate from the predictions of unboundedprocedural rationality and are explained by uncertainty (Frey and Eichenberger, 2001). The behavioural perspective considers that managers, like any individual, when facing uncertainty are subject to errors and “anomalous” behaviour in decision making. Both may be corrected. But while errors may be a one time deviation from economic rationality explained by the limited capabilities of human beings, heuristics are sequential deviations, where intuition has a role and its own rationality, and are represented by systematic and predictable biases arising from behavioural rules. In a dynamic perspective, when agents are finally able to correct their anomalous behaviour the environment haschanged in a significant way and, because a changing context impacts the perceptions of managers,agents have to permanently re-start their personal learning process to cope with the new environmental conditions. Therefore, the behavioural approach aims to identify the relevant durable patterns of firmsbehaviour.All heuristics that are recurrent and persist during a certain period of time because they are not immediately corrected through learning or incentives due to the limits of the human being may be considered as behavioural rules (Heiner, 1983, 1989; Arrow, 1996). This includes both FDI location decisions not consistent with the strategy and others that are also inconsistent with optimization. In the first case consistent decisions imply FDI operations to be within the broader strategy of the firm. If they are not and are kept throughout the years then a behavioural rule inconsistent with rationality is observed.Generally speaking, behavioural rules are usual choices typified in accordance with their place in the time span, that is, related with past or present events or concerning expectations about future developments, and by its intrinsic or extrinsic cognitive origin. A better understanding of each firms decision making process may be obtained by using the Heiner (1983, 1985, 1989) model, where the relative rigidity faced by decision-makers is emphasized and the usual optimization assumptions of the neoclassical literature are disregarded. The behavioural approach will use some inputs from psychology, namely the so called heuristics in decision making in the presence of uncertainty.本科毕业论文外文翻译译文：外商直接投资行为的决定因素摘要本文从行为金融理论出发，结合国外投资经理的访谈内容分析介绍了外国直接投资行为的经济学研究。本研究提出了过度自信及其他行为规则心里的证据。公司的选址是决定外国直接投资流量设置的一个要素和补充新古典主义经济学的典范。此外，它证实了海纳模型，该模型（1983年，1985年，1989年）表明使用者使用更频繁的使用准则将面临更大的不确定性。不确定性的核心作用在于有助于解释为什么会出现在发达国家之间频繁的外国直接投资行为。一、引言对外直接投资理论一直在制订一个局部均衡基础，实证分析表明许多背景因素如国家、企业往往不是决定性的。但是理论认为，在决策过程中管理者作用很少。 心理学家认识到，管理人员作为一般人目标并不是固有的，其可能有多种和不断变化的目标。他们自己的个性塑造可能由与个人的亲身经历的变化或者激励因素和环境共同作用的。由于管理者对他们的性能检查（从竞争，股东，客户和员工），如果他们不是作为个人行事，他们往往能更仔细地作出选择。然而，经理们也不能幸免于道德，文化和其他社会因素的影响，而这些通常是被经济文献所忽视。此外，行为金融学的文献显示在股票市场或有价证券投资中简单的决策不能完全由新古典主义的方法所解释。因此，管理者的作用似乎能补充提供主流经济学没有考虑的情况，从而丰富对外直接投资理论。 本文的目的是要表明，该行为方法可以通过确定一套类似行为金融学的新的决定因素，提出一个对外国直接投资有贡献的理论。管理人员行为规则一再驱使企业选择在国外市场的正确位置，这种方法更适合在假定的经济模型显示情况下。由于外国直接投资选址决定的复杂性，管理人员面临的将是巨大的不确定，因为它给出了一个核心作用的不确定性（风险，作为未知）。因此，重要的是要了解管理人员的不同认识和了解它们如何影响现实生活中的决策。海纳（1983年，1985年，1989年）的行为预测模型是在一个行为的框架内使用，该模型的中心思想是不确定性因素在对对外直接投资的作用。从理论上适用于外国直接投资，这在在侯赛尼（2005年）及实证中得到确认。以下部分简要地回顾了他的局限性，而第3条给出了详细的方法，第4条提出行为规则对外直接投资理论的实证分析，第5条中的不确性通过测试海纳模型和处理完的文件的作用做一个简短的结论。 二、对外直接投资的限制考虑一个企业决定是否投资海外以及在哪里找到它的投资。 一个理性的决策者试图最大限度地提高收入与成本差异时，回答这些问题的现值。对于为此目的，必须收集假设从预期通胀，预期回报率和推定相关风险的折现率和大量的信息，它可以计算的投资净现值。 到海外投资的决定，并在那里找到投资取决于对这些变量的各种可用的替代品价值决策者的期望。 如果决定出国已经作出的投资地点，其预期收入和成本，成为相关的问题。 因此，可以认为，这两个位置的合理决策的关键变量是收入和成本。 经济文献已提出影响收入和外国直接投资的成本公司（跨国公司）的，不完善的市场内时FDI区位决策几种解释，争取在几个方面提高自己的收入来源。他们利用在东道国当地市场的竞争对手的独特优势来弥补国外投资的额外费用。 几个具体的优点是指出：产品差异化，管理和营销技能，创新和意志，以减少交易成本，从而更具成本效益也是由外国直接投资来解释文学的位置决定。交易费用的方法解释了外国直接投资从发生在市场交易和内部资源分配的成本比较（但不是它的确切位置）。