Email:[email protected]
更廣泛的含義與美中貿(mào)易爭端
Originally, the main channel through which foreign investment entered China in recent years IJVs have yielded much of their role to wholly-foreign owned enterprises. This de-emphasis of IJVs has not deterred the Trump administration from enacting billions of dollars inretaliatory tariffs in response to Chinese investment rules, setting off the largest trade dispute in recent memory. The fact remains that IJVs are distinct from other forms of FDI in the precise ways in which they facilitate technology transfers, and so long as China seeks to close its technology gap with the West, IJVs will remain a viable option for acquiring foreign knowledge.
最初,外商投資進入中國的主要渠道是合資企業(yè),。但最近,,它們的大部分角色都轉(zhuǎn)移給了外商獨資企業(yè)。合資企業(yè)重要性的下降,,并未阻止特朗普政府對中國(“不合理的”)投資規(guī)則征收數(shù)十億美元的報復(fù)性關(guān)稅,,從而引發(fā)近年來最大的貿(mào)易爭端。事實上,,在促進技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓的方式上,,合資企業(yè)與其他形式的外商直接投資不同。只要中國還在尋求縮小與西方的技術(shù)差距,,合資企業(yè)仍將是獲取外國知識的可行選擇,。
Our work sheds light on this important issue in investment policy and unpacks an important aspect of globalization.The effects of FDI have been well-examined, but the channels of technology transfer have been little explored. Importantly, we uncover the novel (andtimely) finding that the effects arising from IJVs seem to be approximately as large as those that arise from wholly foreign-owned FDI. Whether China can be coerced to shut off this source of knowledge diffusion – and whether the unilateral retaliation enacted by the U.S. will persuade them to do it – are questions without obvious answers.