The World Economy
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Developing inland China: The role of coastal foreign direct investment and exports

Puman Ouyang

Research Institute of Economics and Management, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

Search for more papers by this author
Shunli Yao

Institute for Applied International Trade, Beijing, China

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 19 July 2017
Citations: 1

Paper previously circulated as ARTNeT Working Paper No 138. The authors thank an anonymous referee for helpful comments.

Get access to the full version of this article. View access options below.
Institutional Login
Loading institution options...
Log in to Wiley Online Library

If you have previously obtained access with your personal account, please log in.

Purchase Instant Access
    • View the article PDF and any associated supplements and figures for a period of 48 hours.
    • Article can not be printed.
    • Article can not be downloaded.
    • Article can not be redistributed.
    • Unlimited viewing of the article PDF and any associated supplements and figures.
    • Article can not be printed.
    • Article can not be downloaded.
    • Article can not be redistributed.
    • Unlimited viewing of the article/chapter PDF and any associated supplements and figures.
    • Article/chapter can be printed.
    • Article/chapter can be downloaded.
    • Article/chapter can not be redistributed.

Abstract

The design of China's foreign direct investment (FDI) and export promotion policies has intrinsic elements not helpful with the original policy intent to generate spillovers to the wide Chinese economy. Applying panel estimation models to Chinese provincial‐level data for 1993–2008, we examine the impacts of China's coastal FDI and exports on its inland regions. We find that the coastal FDI has overall positive inter‐regional impacts, while the coastal exports do not. Cooperative joint ventures generate positive impacts, but little for wholly foreign‐funded enterprises and even negative for equity joint ventures. The inter‐regional impacts do not exhibit any significance and robustness across exporters' ownership status. We attribute these counter‐intuitive findings to the protectionist behaviours of state‐owned enterprises in equity joint ventures and the prevalence of processing exports.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.