Contribution of Official Development Assistance to Mitigation of Political Risks for Foreign Direct Investment: Measurability Constraints
Abstract
A mitigation of political risks is a pre-requisite for an effective mobilization of private capital which is expected to play an important role in financing Sustainable Development Goals. However, the issue of measuring the effect of various financial and non-financial tools on such risks has not been addressed properly on a conceptual or technical level. This article examines the question of measurability of the official development assistance (ODA)’s contribution to mitigation of political risks for foreign direct investment (FDI) and aims to stimulate an academic discussion about the constraints and the ways to overcome them.
The article shows that private businesses and official authorities of donor countries are mutually interested in using development cooperation toolkit to mitigate political risks for investments in developing countries. They can achieve this objective with both conventional ODA instruments and guarantees which have been proclaimed measurable in terms of donor effort on a grant-equivalent basis by the OECD Development Assistance Committee.
Theoretically, the risk mitigation effect of conventional ODA can be measured by correlating the volume of aid allocated to relevant sectors (with distinctive purpose codes) with the correspondent subcomponents of the most authoritative political risk indices. However, an operationalization of this idea is hindered by a strong interdependency between explanatory and response variables: high political risks in a recipient country limit considerably its aid receipts. Moreover, both parameters are influenced by various endogenous and exogenous factors, many of which can be operationalized only as dummies.
As for the guarantees for development, theoretically it might be possible to measure their direct catalytic effect (knowing the exact conditions of the guarantee coverage and the amount of private capital mobilized) and an indirect “halo” effect (calculating the share of projects covered by political risk guarantees which did not incur losses). However, both paths are hindered by the lack of statistical data of a decent quality.
All these measurability constraints point at the importance of the use of qualitative methods in exploring the article’s topic using as broad spectrum of complementary sources as possible.
Downloads
References
Baranovskii, V.G., Kvashnin, Yu.D., Taganova, N.V. (eds.), 2018. International development assistance as foreign policy tool: Foreign experience. Moscow: IMEMO Publ., https://doi.org/10.20542/978-5-9535-0548-2 (In Russian)
Bartenev, V.I., 2023a. Foreign Aid’s Effect on Political Risks for Foreign Direct Investment. MGIMO Review of International Relations, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 155-188, https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2023-5-92-155-188 (In Russian)
Bartenev, V.I., 2023b. International development cooperation and political risks for transnational business: Linking research topics. Lomonosov World Politics Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 133–163, https://doi.org/10.48015/2076-7404-2023-15-1-133-163 (In Russian)
Bertrand, O., Betschinger, M.A., 2024. Exploring the relationship between development aid and FDI from developed countries in developing countries: empirical insights from Japanese firm-level data. Journal of International Business Studies, 2024, vol. 55, pp. 782–795, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-024-00688-5
Degterev, D.A., 2012. International Development Assistance as a Tool to Promote Foreign Policy and Foreign Economic Interests MGIMO Review of International Relations, no. 2 (23), pp. 47-58. (In Russian)
Gomboin, Z.E. 2023. The PRC’s Foreign Aid to Developing Countries as a Tool to Protect Chinese Companies’ Investments against Political Risks. Far Eastern Studies. No 6, pp. 48-58. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013128120028881-0 (In Russian)
Morozkina, A.K. 2018. Bilateral official development assistance: Impact of the 2008‒2009 global financial crisis. PhD Thesis. Moscow. (In Russian)
Ali, T. et al. 2021. International projects and political risk management by multinational enterprises: insights from multiple emerging markets. International Marketing Review, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 1113–1142, https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-03-2020-0060
Asiedu, E., Jin, Y., Nandwa, B. 2009. Does foreign aid mitigate the adverse effect of expropriation risk on foreign direct investment? Journal of International Economics, vol. 78, no. 2, pp. 268–275, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2009.03.004
Bahoo, S., Alon, I., Floreani, J., Cucculelli, M. 2023. Corruption, formal institutions, and foreign direct investment: The case of OECD countries in Africa. Thunderbird International Business Review, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 461–483, https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.22361
Bandyopadhyay, S., Sandler, T., Younas, J. 2014. Foreign direct investment, aid, and terrorism // Oxford Economic Papers, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 25–50, https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpt026
Berthélemy, J. C. 2006. Bilateral donors’ interest vs. recipients’ development motives in aid allocation: Do all donors behave the same? Review of Development Economics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 179–194, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9361.2006.00311.x
Choi, W., Chung, C.Y., Wang, J. 2022. Firm-level political risk and corporate investment. Finance Research Letters, 46, 102307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2021.102307
Custer, S. et al, 2023. Tracking Chinese development finance: An application of AidData’s TUFF 3.0 Methodology. Williamsburg, VA: AidData at William & Mary. Available at: https://www.aiddata.org/data/aiddatas-global-chinese-development-finance-dataset-version-3-0 (accessed: 10.09.2024)
Dreher, A., Lang, V., Reinsberg, B. 2024. Aid effectiveness and donor motives. World Development, vol. 176, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2023.106501
Efobi, U., Asongu, S., Beecroft, I. 2018. Aid, terrorism, and foreign direct investment: Empiri-cal insight conditioned on corruption control. International Economic Journal, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 610–630, https://doi.org/10.1080/10168737.2018.1549089
Fon, R., Alon, I. 2022. Governance, foreign aid, and Chinese foreign direct investment. Thunderbird International Business Review, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 179–201. https://doi/org/10.1002/tie.22257
Godfrey, P.C., Merrill, C.B., Hansen, J.M. 2009. The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic management journal, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 425–445.
Hoeffler, A., Justino, P., 2023. Aid and fragile states. WIDER Working Paper 2023/83. Helsinki: UNU-WIDER, https://doi.org/10.35188/UNU-WIDER/2023/391-8
Institute for Economics and Peace, 2017. Measuring peacebuilding cost-effectiveness. Available at: https://ods.ceipaz.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Measuring-Peacebuilding_WEB.pdf (accessed: 10.09.2024).
Jin, Y., Zeng, Z. 2017. Expropriation and foreign direct investment in a positive economic theory of foreign aid. Economic Theory, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 139–160, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-016-097
Kennedy, C.R. 1987. Political risk management: International lending and investing under environmental uncertainty. New York: Quorum Books, 1987.
Lu, J., Huang, X., Muchiri, M. 2017. Political risk and Chinese outward foreign direct in-vestment to Africa: The role of foreign aid. Africa Journal of Management, vol. 3, no.1, pp. 82–98, https://doi.org/10.1080/23322373.2016.1275941
OECD, 2024a. Converged Statistical Reporting Directives for the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) and the Annual DAC Questionnaire. 4 September 2024. Available at: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC(2024)40/FINAL/en/pdf
OECD, 2024b. Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities. OECD International Development Statistics (database). 2024, https://doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en
OECD, 2024c. DAC and CRS List of codes. Updated on 14/06/2024. Available at: https://web-archive.oecd.org/temp/2024-06-19/57753-dacandcrscodelists.htm (accessed: 10.09.2024)
OECD, 2024d. INCAF Facts and Figures Series: ODA final data and trends for 2022 in relation to fragile and conflict-related contexts. 22 January 2024. Available at: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC/INCAF(2024)1/en/pdf (accessed: 10.09.2024)
OECD, 2022a. Report on the Implementation of the DAC Recommendation on Untying Official Development Assistance. 5 September 2022. Available at: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC(2022)34/FINAL/en/pdf (accessed: 10.09.2024)
OECD, 2022b. States of Fragility 2022. Paris, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/c7fedf5e-en.
OECD, 2023a. Peace and official development assistance. OECD Development Perspectives, No. 37. Paris: OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/fccfbffc-en.
OECD, 2023b. Private finance mobilised by official development finance interventions. OECD Development Perspectives, No. 29. Paris: OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/c5fb4a6c-en.
OECD, 2023c. Private sector instruments: treatment of credit guarantees. 6 March 2023. Available at: https://one.oecd.org/document/DCD/DAC/STAT(2022)50/REV1/en/pdf (accessed: 10.09.2024)
OECD/WTO, 2015. Aid-for-trade related CRS purpose codes by category. In: Aid for trade at a glance 2015: Reducing trade costs for inclusive, sustainable growth. Geneva: WTO, Paris: OECD Publishing. Pp.455–459, https://doi.org/10.1787/aid_glance-2015-en.
The PRS Group, 2022. The ICRG Methodology. Available at: https://www.prsgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/ICRG-Method.pdf (accessed: 10.09.2024)
US International Development Finance Cooperation, 2023. Annual Report 2023. Available at: https://www.dfc.gov/sites/default/files/media/documents/DFC%20FY23%20Annual%20Report.pdf (accessed: 10.09.2024)
Van der Veen, A., 2011. Ideas, interests and foreign aid. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, H., Yang, H., Li, F., Zhang, M. 2022. Does foreign aid reduce the country's risk of OFDI? The Chinese experience. International Studies of Economics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 238–258, https://doi.org/10.1002/ise3.20
1.jpg)
