Foreign Direct Investment In Development And Growth Strategies Economics Essay

5.1 Introduction

Increasingly, foreign direct investing is assumed to play a outstanding function in the development and growing schemes of developing and emerging states. Advocates of foreign direct investing such as development establishments, economic experts, faculty members and policy shapers argue that foreign direct investing ensures efficient allotment of resources as compared to other signifiers of capital influxs, cut downing dependance on accretion of debt as a beginning of development funding. In add-on, heightening human capital, enterpriser accomplishments, and economic growing through engineering spillover, creates employment. The prevalent economic experience of the far – East Asiatic states particularly China and India has farther strengthened the strong belief that foreign direct investing is a critical component in contracting the resource spread and guaranting accelerated economic growing. Thus, in the face of their growing challenges, a figure of states are now prosecuting domestic policies that are geared at pulling more foreign direct investing.

Presently, there is a pool of both theoretical and empirical literature sing the construct of foreign direct investing and its relationship with economic growing. In peculiar, a bipartisan interaction has been discussed in the literature of FDI-growth relationship. On one manus, FDI is being seen, by many, as an of import component in the solution to the job of scarce local capital and overall low productiveness in many developing states ( De Mello, 1999 ; Eller, et. Al, 2005 ) . Hence, the flow of foreign direct capital is argued to be a possible growth-enhancing participant in the receiving state. This position is challenged by many writers. For illustration, Carkovic and Levine ( 2002 ) show that there is no robust impact from FDI on growing if country-specific degree differences, endogeneity of FDI influxs and convergence effects are taken into history. In add-on, Akinlo ( 2004 ) shows that both private capital and lagged foreign capital have no statistically important consequence on the economic growing. He concluded that the consequences seem to back up the statement that extractive FDI might non be growing heightening every bit much as fabrication FDI.

On the other manus, acknowledging the importance of FDI to growing, economic growing itself has been identified often as an of import determiner, from among the assorted determiners, of FDI influx into the host states. Rapid growing of an economic system might pull more FDI by multi-national companies ( MNCs ) , as they locate new net income chances ( Hansen and Rand, 2006 ) . Therefore, two strands of research have emerged: one that discusses the effects of FDI on economic growing and the other recognizes these effects and later attempts to place the determiners of FDI flow to the receiving states. The possibility of a bipartisan causality between the two variables identifies a 3rd line of research in the FDI literature, but of a lesser magnitude ( Choe, 2003 ) .

In this chapter, we do non mean to assume how each of the two variables affects the other. Rather, our intent is to analyze the causality relationship between foreign direct investing ( FDI ) influxs and Egypt ‘s end product where GDP is used as a placeholder ( step ) for end product. This survey is different from the old literature on many evidences. First, to the best of our cognition, this is the first effort to look into the causal FDI-growth relationship in Egypt. Second, we employ a different econometric attack from old surveies, viz. the heterogenous panel analysis, where we allow for heterogeneousness of kineticss in the Egyptian sector panel. Third, the chapter seeks to lend significantly to the above literature by following another methodological attack ( besides Granger causality ) , viz. the Toda-Yamamoto trial for causality. Finally, the survey is really critical particularly to policy shapers and development spouses because it enables them to originate, develop and pull off long term economic schemes based on empirical grounds. The chapter is organised as follows. Section 2 discusses briefly FDI and economic growing in Egypt. In Section 3, we reviewed the causal relationship between FDI and growing. In subdivision 4, the theoretical account, informations, and empirical consequences are presented and discussed. Section 5 concludes.

5.2 Foreign Direct Investment and economic growing in Egypt

Foreign direct investing ( FDI ) inflows to low-income states has non merely received much promotion in the past two decennaries due to its economic importance, but its overall flow to these states has besides significantly increased in both comparative and absolute footings. However, merely a few sub-Saharan African states have been successful in pulling important FDI influxs. Globally Africa ‘s portion of FDI to universe FDI influxs rose from 2.3 per centum in 2001 to 5 per centum in 2008 ( UNCTAD, 2002, 2009 ) ,

Egypt has a checkered history of economic and political development which reflects in the fickle influxs of FDI, alterations in political and policy government and uneven growing forms. The Government of Egypt recognizes the importance of private investing for economic growing. National policy aims aimed at accomplishing private-sector led, outward-oriented economic growing. These aims will be achieved through keeping a stable macroeconomic environment by guaranting financial and pecuniary subject. Second, by beef uping pecuniary policy tools, thereby raising the rate of economic growing. Third, opening the economic system to foreign investors and prosecuting the procedure of denationalization. Fourth, making a business-friendly environment, through the constitution of a comprehensive and crystalline set of concern ordinances, bettering the institutional and regulative environment for investing. Finally, developing capital markets, by increasing competition in the fiscal sector and beef uping fiscal market establishments and the Capital Market Authority.

These policies were adopted chiefly to change by reversal economic diminution, and ease the attractive force of value-added FDI influxs to Egypt. Analysiss of available grounds reveal that the acceptance of these policies has had some grade of success in many countries, including the lowering of rising prices ; publicity of an environment of fiscal stableness ; riddance of the licensing demand ; remotion of duty barriers that prohibit FDI influxs ; get rid ofing exchange controls ; and cut downing chances for the foreign exchange black market. In malice of these reform successes, there are still serious challenges that hamper the monolithic attractive force of FDI inflows into Egypt as compared to other developing states.

The historical tendency of FDI influxs in Egypt can be shown in three chief stages. The first stage started during the mid 1970s, with the gap of the economic system. By international criterions, Egypt received comparatively high flows of FDI during the 1970, as seen in table 1 which shows the top 10 developing economic systems in pulling FDI since 1970 ( UNIDO, 1996 ) . From this position, the comparative lag of FDI influxs to the Egyptian economic system during the 1980s and existent diminution in the degree of these influxs during the first half of the 1990s, can be explained by the stagnancy and diminution in growing rates of the economic system during 1980- 95.

The 2nd stage of comparatively high FDI influxs started during the mid -1990s. Many economic perceivers have explained this moving ridge in connexion with the oncoming of the denationalization plan in Egypt. As explained in a recent reappraisal of the Egyptian economic system

Table 5.1 Average one-year FDI influxs to 10 Largest LDC receivers, 1970-1994.

( Millions of Dollars )

Host state or country


Host state or country


Host state or country




























Taiwan Province of China




United arab republic


Hong Kong


Dutch east indies


Dutch east indies




Hong Kong


Hong Kong


United arab republic



















Beginning: UNIDO, Industrial Development Global Report, 1996.

The ability of Egypt to pull foreign capital has been greatly facilitated by advancement in denationalization during 1998. That twelvemonth, harmonizing to the Ministry of Finance, Egypt attracted 40 per centum more FDI than the twelvemonth earlier. In this connexion the Central Bank of Egypt studies that net foreign direct investing in Egypt rose to $ 1.07 million during 1997/98 compared to $ 770 million during the old twelvemonth. The dramatic point here is that FDI inflows to Egypt did non mirror the developments in universe FDI flows except in the 1990s decennary, as before this FDI inflows to Egypt were more related to domestic and regional economic/ political conditions instead than to the roars and flops of the universe FDI influxs.

The 3rd stage started at the 2000s. The flow of foreign direct investing to Egypt decreased as it reached 509 million dollars compared with the twelvemonth 2000 as a consequence of September 11th events. After that, the flow of foreign direct investing to Egypt increased till it reaches 10.04 billion dollars in 2006. This addition may be attributed to the success of the economic reform plan, diminishing rising prices rate, in add-on, local exchange and involvement rates became stable.

When we analyse the sectoral composing, we note that the fabrication sector enjoys top precedence with a 45 % portion of FDI the period. The portion of the fabrication sector is non merely the major constituent of FDI, but besides has been speed uping since the twelvemonth 1992. This tendency comes against the international form of the diminishing portion of FDI influxs to the fabrication sector, every bit good as the worsening portion of the fabrication sector from FDI influxs to developing and emerging markets, particularly during the 1990s and the 2000s. However the 45 % portion of the fabrication sector from entire FDI in Egypt is in line with the norm of the development states which was 41 % over the period 2000-03. This figure is good above the 18 % and the 24 % norm of developed states and the universe over the same period.

5.3 Literature Review

Many empirical surveies tackle the issue of the way of causality between FDI and end product growing. A figure of empirical surveies have been undertaken to set up robust consequences with respect to the causal relationship of foreign direct investing to economic growing, its impact and determiners. The consequences of the surveies show varied grounds with some bespeaking that foreign direct investing causes economic growing, others demoing the contrary relationship and in some instances there is no reported relationship.

In the beginning, some surveies find that causality runs from FDI to growing, an illustration of this type of survey is Blomstrom et Al ( 1992 ) , which examines the causality way between FDI influxs and growing through examining alterations over consecutive five- twelvemonth periods in order to find lines of influence and their timing. They find that growing rates of GDP per capita over five- twelvemonth periods are associated with direct investing flows ratios in predating and current five- twelvemonth periods but ne’er with FDI in the undermentioned periods. Therefore they conclude that causality runs from FDI to growing and non frailty versa.

Zhang ( 2000 ) examines cointegration and causality between FDI and growing for 11 developing states in East Asia and Latin America covering the period 1970-1995. His trials indicate cointegration and long-term Granger-causality from FDI to GDP for five states. One out of the six states without cointegration exhibits short-term Granger causality from FDI to growing. Similarly, Ramirez ( 2000 ) indicate for the period 1960-1995 that FDI Granger-causes GDP in Mexico, both in the short and in the long tally.

Campos and Kinoshita ( 2002 ) , trial for the possibility of rearward causality between FDI and growing utilizing the granger- causality model. Their consequences show that lagged FDI is a weak forecaster of current FDI degrees and that lagged per capita FDI is a bad forecaster of current degrees of per capita FDI. The statistical insignificance of lagged per capita growing imply that growing does non Granger-cause FDI or per capita FDI in passage economic systems between 1990 and 1998. This is a really of import consequence because it weakens concerns that may originate from the possibility that fast turning states attract more FDI. This does non look to be the instance during the passage. Similarly, the consequences by Xiaohui et Al. ( 2002 ) use quarterly informations for China from 1981 to 1997 and happen cointegration every bit good as bi-directional short-term and long-term causality between FDI and GDP.

Cuadros et Al. ( 2004 ) , utilizing quarterly informations from 1980 to 2000, find cointegration between FDI and GDP for two out of three Latin American states, where in these two states long-term and short-term causality runs from FDI to GDP.

Hansen and Rand ( 2006 ) analyse the Granger-causal relationships between FDI and GDP in a sample of 31 developing states for the period 1970-2000. Using calculators for heterogenous panel informations they find cointegration between FDI and GDP every bit good as between the portion of FDI in gross capital formation and GDP. Their empirical grounds indicates that FDI has a permanent impact on GDP, whereas GDP has no long-term impact on FDI. They besides find that a higher ratio of FDI in gross capital formation has positive effects on GDP.

Similarly, Thiam Hee Ng ( 2006 ) analysed the Toda-Yamamoto version of the Granger causality trial for the influxs of foreign direct investing in eight East Asiatic economic systems and productiveness growing. The consequences show that merely two states reveal grounds of a one-way causality between influxs of foreign direct investing and entire factor productiveness growing. Similarly, there is besides small grounds that influxs of foreign direct investing cause proficient alteration or efficiency alteration in the sample economic systems.

Second, other surveies find the causality way to run from growing to FDI, like the survey of Nonnemberg and Cardoso ( 2001 ) , which contributes to the argument on the causality between FDI and growing by executing an econometric theoretical account based on panel informations analysis for 38 developing states ( including passage economic systems ) for the 1975- 2000 period to carry on a causality trial between FDI and GDP. They find strong grounds of the being of causality in sense that GDP taking to FDI, but non frailty versa. Nair-Reichert and Weinhold ( 2001 ) trial causality for cross-country panels, utilizing informations from 1971 to 1995 for 24 states. Like de Mello, they emphasise heterogeneousness as a serious issue and, hence, use what they refer to as the assorted fixed and random ( MFR ) coefficient attack in order to prove the impact of FDI on growing. They find that FDI on norm has a important impact on growing, although the relationship is extremely heterogenous across states.

Choe ( 2003 ) , who investigated the causality relationship between foreign direct investing and economic growing, found that the causality relationship was bi-directional but with a higher inclination for increased economic growing to pull more foreign direct investing. This implies that if there is a unidirectional causality from economic growing to FDI so national income growing can be treated as a accelerator in pulling influxs of FDI. Conversely, if the unidirectional causality runs from FDI to economic growing, this would strongly propose that FDI non merely stimulates the economic growing rate, but besides leads to fixed capital formation and employment augmentation ( Borensztein, De Gregorio, and Lee 1998 ; Zhang 2001 ) . If a bi-directional causality exists between these variables, so both FDI and economic growing would hold a reinforcing causal relationship.

In add-on, other surveies find the causality way to run from growing to FDI and from FDI to growing like the survey by Kasibhatla and Sawhney ( 1996 ) in the United States found a unidirectional causal relationship from economic growing ( GDP ) to foreign direct investing. Xiaohui et Al. ( 2002 ) use quarterly informations for China from 1981 to 1997 and happen cointegration every bit good as bi-directional short-term and long-term causality between FDI and GDP. Basu et Al. ( 2003 ) use cointegration and causality trials to analyze the issue of bipartisan causality between these two variables utilizing a panel of 23 developing states over the period 1978-1996. Leting for single state and clip fixed effects every bit good as country-specific cointegration vectors they find a cointegrating relationship between FDI and GDP. Their consequences indicate bidirectional causality between these two variables for comparatively unfastened economic systems. For comparatively closed economic systems long-run causality chiefly runs from growing to FDI, connoting that growing and FDI are non reenforcing under restrictive trade governments.

Chowdhury and Mavrotas ( 2006 ) take a somewhat different path by proving for Granger causality utilizing the Toda and Yamamoto ( 1995 ) specification, thereby get the better ofing possible pretesting jobs in relation to trials for cointegration between series. Using informations from 1969 to 2000, they find that FDI does non Granger-cause GDP in Chile, whereas there is bi-directional Granger causality between GDP and FDI in Malaysia and Thailand. Paula Neto et Al ( 2008 ) investigates whether aggregative foreign direct investing ( FDI ) , transverse boundary line amalgamations and acquisitions ( M & A ; A ) and Greenfield investings affects economic growing based on a panel information of 53 states over the period 1996-2006. Both causality trials and individual growing equations are applied to analyze this relationship. The grounds suggests that there is bidirectional causality between FDI, and growing, while economic growing farmer causes Greenfields, but the contrary is non true.

Based on a method introduced by Toda and Yamamoto ( 1995 ) for proving Granger causality in the presence of nonstationary clip series, Mousumi D. et Al ( 2008 ) examined the causality between foreign direct investing ( FDI ) and economic growing for 66 developing states, taking into account their interaction with exports and technological alteration. The chief findings were that FDI causes growing in several of the development states, but the mechanism through which this works differs across states and rearward causality from growing to FDI exists for many states.

Chakraborty and Nunnenkamp ( 2008 ) trial Granger causality between industry specific FDI and end product informations within a panel cointegration model. It turns out that the growing effects of FDI vary widely across sectors. FDI stocks and end product are reciprocally reenforcing in the fabrication sector, whereas any causal relationship is absent in the primary sector. Most strikingly, they find lone ephemeral effects of FDI on end product in the services sector. However, FDI in the services sector appears to hold promoted growing in the fabrication sector through cross-sector spillovers.

Finally, on the other manus, other surveies find no causality De Mello ( 1999 ) looks at causing from FDI to growing in 32 states of which 17 are non-OECD states. First he focuses on the time-series facets of FDI and growing, happening that the long-term consequence of FDI on growing is heterogenous across states. Second, de Mello complements his time-series analysis by supplying grounds from panel informations appraisals. In the non-OECD sample he finds no causing from FDI to growing based on fixed effects arrested developments with country-specific intercepts, and a negative short-term impact of FDI on GDP utilizing the average group calculator. Carkovic and Levine ( 2002 ) utilizing panel informations from 72 developed and developing states performed both a cross subdivision Ordinary Least Square and the Generalized Method of Moments ( GMM ) analysis and found that there is no robust nexus from foreign direct relationship to economic growing.

We can therefore reason from the literature reappraisal that, as was found in all literature on FDI, there is no consensus as to the way of causality between FDI and growing. The available grounds suggests that causality tallies from growing to FDI every bit good as the other manner unit of ammunition.

Data and Econometric Approach

5.4.1 The Entire Economy Econometric Approach

While a turning literature has recognized the theoretical possibility of bipartisan feedbacks between FDI and economic growing along with their long-term and short-term kineticss, no empirical probes in the context of the Egyptian economic system have found to research the issue of cointegration every bit good as the long-term and short-term dimensions of the causal relationship between FDI and growing.

To measure the causal links between the referred variables, we estimate a vector mistake rectification theoretical account that emanates from the cointegrated relationship between the variables. We apply a panel cointegration model that allows for heterogeneousness across 10 sectors. Two inquiries are of peculiar importance: ( 1 ) is there a long-term steady province relationship between FDI and end product for all of the 10 sectors in our panel for the whole economic system? ( 2 ) Given the being of a cointegrated relationship, can we accurately place the causal effects between FDI and end product by unknoting the short-term kineticss of the long-term relationship?

Our empirical probe sing the association between FDI and end product follows the three measure process suggested by Basu et Al. ( 2003 ) . We begin by proving for nonstationarity in the two variables of FDI stocks and end product in our panel. Prompted by the being of unit roots, we use the panel cointegration technique developed by Pedroni ( 2004, 1999 ) to prove for a long-term cointegrated relationship between the two variables in the 2nd measure of our appraisal. Given the grounds of cointegration in the long-term FDI-growth relationship across the panel, we use an mistake rectification theoretical account to bring out Granger causality in the relationship in the concluding measure of our appraisal.

Our analysis is restricted to the bivariate relationship between FDI and growing. This restriction is reasonably common in the relevant literature. The bivariate attack has been used in several recent surveies on the causal links between FDI and end product, including Chowdhury and Mavrotas ( 2006 ) , Frimpong and Oteng-Abayie ( 2006 ) , and Hansen and Rand ( 2006 ) . The penchant for bivariate attacks in the relevant literature is to avoid the complications ensuing from indirect causality once the alleged subsidiary variables are accounted for in a multivariate model ( Dufour & A ; Renault, 1998 ) . For illustration, KoA?nya ( 2004, p. 79 ) considers it ”a clear advantage ” that ”in a bivariate system no-causality for one period in front implies no-causality at, or up to, any skyline. ” Furthermore, the useable sample size tends to shrivel well when proving for causality in a multivariate system ( KoA?nya, 2004, p. 88 ) . Hence, we follow the criterion bivariate attack. The of import part to the bing literature is instead that we account for the heterogeneousness of the FDI-growth nexus across sectors by using a panel cointegration model. In this manner, we aim at placing the precise way of causality between these two variables, instead than placing the comparative importance of assorted possible determiners of growing. Data Description and Beginnings

The empirical analysis in this portion is based on a balanced panel consisting of 10 sectors ( Agriculture ; Industry ; Petroleum ; Electricity and public-service corporations ; Construction ; Transportation, Suez Canal & A ; communicating ; Banking, Finance, Trade & A ; insurance ; Tourism ; Government Social & A ; Personal Services ; Others ) over a period of 24 old ages from 1983 to 2006 with a sum of 240 observations.. The informations contain information on foreign direct investing, gross domestic merchandise. First, the informations for foreign direct investing was collected from the General Authority for Investment ( GAFI ) . Second, the information for gross domestic merchandise was collected from the Ministry of Economic Development.

Empirical findings Panel Unit Root Test

Panel unit root trials are traditionally used to prove for the order of integrating ( stationarity ) in the variables of the information set. It has become well-known that the traditional Augmented Dickey-Fuller ( ADF ) -type to trials of unit root suffer from the job of low power in rejecting the nothing of stationarity of the series, particularly for short-spanned informations. From among different panel unit root trials developed in the literature, Levin, Lin and Chu ( LLC ) and Im, Pesaran and Shin ( IPS ) are the most popular. Both of the trials are based on the ADF rule. However, LLC assumes homogeneousness in the kineticss of the autoregressive coefficients for all panel members. In contrast, the IPS is more general in the sense that it allows for heterogeneousness in these kineticss. Therefore, it is described as a “ Heterogeneous Panel Unit Root Test ” . It is peculiarly sensible to let for such heterogeneousness in taking the slowdown length in ADF trials when enforcing unvarying slowdown length is non appropriate. In add-on, incline heterogeneousness is more sensible in the instance where cross-sector informations is used. In this instance, heterogeneousness arises because of differences in grade of development in each sector. As a consequence, the trial developers have shown that this trial has higher power than other trials in its category, including LLC.

We employed the Levin, Lin and Chu, and Im, Pesaran and Shin trials to analyze the incorporating order of the variables under consideration. The consequences of the unit root trials for the variables in their degrees and first differences are reported in Table 2. GDP, FDI, stands for the logarithms of entire end product, and foreign direct investing severally. Heterogeneous Panel Cointegration

The construct of cointegration was foremost introduced into the literature by Granger ( 1980 ) . Cointegration implies the being of a long-term relationship between economic variables. The rule of proving for cointegration is to prove whether two or more incorporate variables deviate significantly from a certain relationship ( Abadir and Taylor, 1999 ) . In other words, if the variables are cointegrated, they move together over clip so that short-run perturbations will be corrected in the long-run. This means that if, in the long-term, two or more series move closely together, the difference between them is changeless. Otherwise, if two series are non cointegrated, they may roll randomly far off from each other ( Dickey et. al. , 1991 ) .

With verification on the incorporate order of the two variables of involvement, the inquiry is that they might or might non hold a common stochastic tendency, or, they might or might non be cointegrated. We resolve this inquiry by looking for a long-term relationship between end product and FDI utilizing the panel cointegration technique. Acknowledging the defects of traditional processs ( two-step trial by Engle and Granger, 3-step Engle and Yoo ) this survey utilized the heterogenous panel cointegration trial developed by Pedroni ( 1997, 1999 ) which, in add-on to utilizing panel informations thereby get the better ofing the job of little samples, allows different single cross-section effects by leting for heterogeneousness in the intercepts and inclines of the cointegrating equation.

Pedroni ‘s method includes a figure of different statistics for the trial of the nothing of no cointegration in heterogenous panels. The first group of trials is termed “ within dimension ” . It includes the panel-v, panel rho ( R ) , which is similar to the Phillips, and Perron ( 1991 ) trial, panel non-parametric ( pp ) and panel parametric ( adf ) statistics. The panel non-parametric statistic and the panel parametric statistic are correspondent to the single-equation ADF-test. The other group of trials is called “ between dimensions ” . It is comparable to the group average panel trials of Im et Al. ( 1997 ) . The “ between dimensions ” trials include four trials: group-rho, group-pp, and group-adf statistics. The specific cointegration relationship we estimate has the undermentioned signifier:

( 1 )

Where ( i = 1, 2, 10 ) refers to sector specific effects, refers to clip effects, and is the estimated residuary bespeaking divergences from the long-term steady province relationship. With a nothing of no cointegration, the panel cointegration trial is basically a trial of unit roots in the estimated remainders of the panel. If in Eqn. ( 1 ) is found to be stationary, or consistent with I ( 0 ) , one may claim that cointegration exists between FDI stocks and end product. All of the seven statistics under different theoretical account specifications are reported in Table 5.3. Most of the statistics for all different theoretical account specifications suggest rejection of the nothing at the 1 % degree. We, hence, conclude that the two unit root variables of end product and FDI are cointegrated in the long tally. Put otherwise, FDI and GDP in Egypt are positively associated with each other. Test of causality:

With the avowal that end product and FDI stocks are cointegrated, we test for Granger causality in the long-term relationship utilizing an mistake rectification theoretical account. As proposed by Engle and Granger ( 1987 ) , and demonstrated by Granger et Al. ( 2000 ) , the causality trial itself is a two-stage appraisal procedure. The first measure relates to the appraisal of the residuary from the cointegrated relationship shown in Eqn. ( 1 ) . Integrating the residuary as a right manus side variable, the dynamic mistake rectification theoretical account is estimated at the 2nd measure for pulling illations on Granger causality. Following these stairss, the dynamic mistake rectification theoretical account of our involvement has the undermentioned signifier:

( 2 )

Where K refers to the optimum slowdown length for each sector in the panel. Before the theoretical account is estimated, it is necessary decide on the slowdown length. The maximal slowdown length for the theoretical account is set at 1, and the Akaike Information Criterion is used to choose the appropriate slowdown length. This is an of import measure before gauging the theoretical account as the pick of slowdown length could act upon the consequences obtained from the Granger causality trial. The consequences of the slowdown length choice procedure are shown in table 5.4

However, differencing introduces a simultaneousness job because lagged endogenous variables in the right manus side are correlated with the new differenced mistake term. In add-on, heteroskedasticity is expected to be present because, in the panel informations, heterogenous mistakes might be with different panel members. To cover with these jobs, instrumental variable process is traditionally used in gauging the theoretical account, which produces consistent estimations of the parametric quantities. Assuming that the, and are serially uncorrelated, the 2nd or more lagged values of and may be used as instruments in the instrumental variable appraisal ( Easterly et. al. , 1997 ) . A widely used calculator for the system in ( 2 ) is an instrumental variable calculator, the panel Generalized Method of Moments ( GMM ) calculator, proposed by Arellano and Bond ( 1991 ) . This method has been shown to bring forth more efficient and consistent calculators compared with other processs. The two coefficients and represent velocities of accommodation along the long-term equilibrium way ; while can be interpreted as exposing the long-term effects of end product on FDI, can be taken to connote the long-term effects of FDI on end product. Following Engle and Granger ( 1987 ) , for the sector in the panel, the being of cointegration between the referred variables indicates causal links among the set of variables as manifested by |+ | & gt ; 0. Consequently, neglecting to reject: = 0 for all I, i = 1, 2, 10, implies that end product does non Granger causes FDI for any of the sectors included in the panel for the long tally. Conversely, neglecting to reject: = 0 for all I, i = 1, 2, 10, implies that FDI does non Granger cause end product in any of the sectors in the panel in the long tally. The set of coefficients and gaining control interim effects and reflect the accommodation procedure between the associated set of variables in response to a random daze. Consequently, neglecting to reject: = 0 for all I and K, ( one = 1,2, . . . , 10, k = 1,2, . . . , K ) , implies that end product does non Granger cause FDI for any of the sectors included in the panel in the short tally ; and neglecting to reject: = 0 for all I and K, ( one = 1,2, . . . , 10, k = 1,2, . . . , K ) , implies that FDI does non Granger cause end product for any of the sectors included in the panel in the short tally. Following conventional process, we use a I‡A? trial to prove the referred sets of long-term and short-term hypotheses. The consequences of these trials are shown in Table 5.5. As is evident from the tabular array, the nothing of no short-term causality and no long-term causality is rejected for one of the additive causal links tested within the cointegrated theoretical account. For the short tally, one of the hypotheses of no causality ( from end product to FDI ) are rejected at the 10 % degree bespeaking strong one directional nexus between end product and FDI. For the long tally, the hypothesis of no causality from end product to FDI is rejected at the 1 % degree ; the hypothesis of no causality from FDI to end product is accepted at the different important degrees.