The Direct Effects of Trade Liberalization on Foreign Direct Investment: A Partial Equilibrium Analysis

Author(s):  
Michael J. Ferrantino ◽  
H. Keith Keith Hall
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volodymyr Olefir ◽  

The benefits and costs of the implementation of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) between Ukraine and the EU have been studied. The study aimed to find out to what extent the implementation of DCFTA has helped increase exports and attract foreign direct investment into Ukraine’s economy. A comparison method was used to conduct the study. The period of implementation of the DCFTA (2016-2020) was compared with the period before the implementation of the DCFTA (2010- 2014). Due to trade liberalization, exports of Ukrainian goods to the EU and imports of goods from the EU to Ukraine have increased. Trade liberalization has not contributed to further attracting foreign direct investment from the EU to Ukraine’s economy. The urgent task of the Government of Ukraine is to create a business regulatory environment according to European standards and protect foreign investment.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-26
Author(s):  
Sumaira Alvi ◽  
Imran Sharif Chaudhry ◽  
Fatima Farooq ◽  
Noreen Safdar

The present research endeavors to evaluate whether trade liberalization, foreign direct investment inflows and environmental quality affect the economic growth in Pakistan and China. These have crucial role in the economies and pragmatic for formulating economic growth policies. The secondary data is used for all the variables. The ARDL bounds testing approach to cointegration is applied to evaluate the determinants included in the model for both countries. The results of the research conclude that trade liberalization and foreign direct investment both have positive impact on economic growth while environmental pollution has negative impact on economic growth in long-run.


2005 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Beck

Abstract:Progressives have advocated reforms of rules governing corporations to achieve greater distributive justice, but Maitland (2001) has argued that corporate rules are distributively neutral and that changing the rules will have no long run impact on distributive justice. These different conclusions stem from the use of two different methods of economic analysis, partial equilibrium and general equilibrium models. A change in the rules governing corporations in a “large” sector of the economy is appropriately analyzed using a general equilibrium analysis, supporting the conclusion that changes in the rules may affect distributive justice in the long run. However, a partial equilibrium analysis of a change in the rules of corporations affecting a “small” part of the economy such as a single firm or even all firms in a small state supports the claim that such changes cannot affect distributive justice.


2002 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nguyen Nhu Binh ◽  
Jonathan Haughton

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document