IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/mgtdec/v29y2008i7p601-607.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral approaches to optimal FDI incentives

Author

Listed:
  • M. Rosenboim

    (Department of Economics, Sapir College, Sdearot, Israel)

  • I. Luski

    (Department of Economics, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel)

  • T. Shavit

Abstract

Countries attempt to attract foreign investors by offering them a set of incentives. The most common types of foreign direct investment incentives are grants and tax relief. Although the amount of the grant is independent of future situations, the value of a tax relief depends on future profits. Our study used the behavioral approach to test experimentally the preferences of managers regarding the desired types of incentives under various conditions. We found, 'Regret Effect', 'Statues Quo Bias', and 'Insurance Effect' in subjects' decision making. A country can improve the incentives it offers by considering the various behavioral biases of the companies' managers. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Rosenboim & I. Luski & T. Shavit, 2008. "Behavioral approaches to optimal FDI incentives," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(7), pages 601-607.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:29:y:2008:i:7:p:601-607
    DOI: 10.1002/mde.1435
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/mde.1435
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/mde.1435?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pedro P. Barros & Luís Cabral, 2000. "Competing for Foreign Direct Investment," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 360-371, May.
    2. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2004. "Save More Tomorrow (TM): Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 164-187, February.
    3. Blomström, Magnus & Kokko, Ari, 2003. "The Economics of Foreign Direct Investment Incentives," EIJS Working Paper Series 168, Stockholm School of Economics, The European Institute of Japanese Studies.
    4. repec:bla:reviec:v:8:y:2000:i:2:p:360-71 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Christopher T. Taylor, 2000. "The Impact of Host Country Government Policy on US Multinational Investment Decisions," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(5), pages 635-647, May.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. David Wettstein & Israel Luski & Todd Kaplan, 2003. "Government policy towards multi-national corporations," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 6(3), pages 1-8.
    8. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    9. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:6:y:2003:i:3:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1987. "Testing for Regret and Disappointment in Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 118-129, Supplemen.
    11. Kachelmeier, Steven J & Shehata, Mohamed, 1992. "Examining Risk Preferences under High Monetary Incentives: Experimental Evidence from the People's Republic of China," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1120-1141, December.
    12. repec:bla:econom:v:55:y:1988:i:217:p:47-62 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Roszkowski, Michael J. & Snelbecker, Glenn E., 1990. "Effects of "Framing" on measures of risk tolerance: Financial planners are not immune," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 237-246.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aneta Hintošová & Terézia Barlašová, 2021. "The Role Of Investment Promotion Policy In Attracting Foreign Direct Investment: The Case Of Slovakia," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 5, pages 27-40.
    2. Magdalena Owczarczuk, 2013. "Government Incentives and FDI inflow into R&D – The Case of Visegrad Countries," Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, Centre for Strategic and International Entrepreneurship at the Cracow University of Economics., vol. 1(2), pages 73-86.
    3. Jinesh Jain & Nidhi Walia & Simarjeet Singh & Esha Jain, 2022. "Mapping the field of behavioural biases: a literature review using bibliometric analysis," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 823-855, September.
    4. Clampit, Jack & Gaffney, Nolan & Fabian, Frances & Stafford, Thomas, 2023. "Institutional misalignment and escape-based FDI: A prospect theory lens," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(3).
    5. Romualdas Ginevičius & Agnė Šimelytė, 2011. "Government incentives directed towards foreign direct investment: a case of central and eastern europe," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 435-450, May.
    6. Renz, André, 2016. "Die Relevanz von Replikationen in der experimentellen Steuerforschung: Eine Replikationsstudie zu Wahrnehmungsverzerrungen bei Subventionen," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 202, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Knetsch, Jack L., 2007. "Biased valuations, damage assessments, and policy choices: The choice of measure matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 684-689, September.
    2. Insaf Bekir & Faten Doss, 2020. "Status quo bias and attitude towards risk: An experimental investigation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(5), pages 827-838, July.
    3. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. de Meza, David & Webb, David C., 2003. "Principal agent problems under loss aversion: an application to executive stock options," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24676, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    6. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    7. Wang Xianghong, 2009. "Retail Return Policy, Endowment Effect, and Consumption Propensity: An Experimental Study," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-29, September.
    8. Andrew Royal, 2017. "Dynamics in risk taking with a low-probability hazard," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 41-69, August.
    9. van Rooij, Maarten C.J. & Kool, Clemens J.M. & Prast, Henriette M., 2007. "Risk-return preferences in the pension domain: Are people able to choose?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 701-722, April.
    10. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    11. James Alm & Carolyn J. Bourdeaux, 2013. "Applying Behavioral Economics to the Public Sector," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 206(3), pages 91-134, September.
    12. Maximilian Rüdisser & Raphael Flepp & Egon Franck, 2017. "Do casinos pay their customers to become risk-averse? Revising the house money effect in a field experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(3), pages 736-754, September.
    13. Robert Oxoby & William G. Morrison, "undated". "Asset Integration, Risk Taking and Loss Aversion in the Laboratory," Working Papers 2019-04, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 30 Jan 2019.
    14. Booij, Adam S. & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2009. "A parameter-free analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theory," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 651-666, August.
    15. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2012. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18621, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    17. van Rooij, Maarten C.J. & Kool, Clemens J.M. & Prast, Henriette M., 2007. "Risk-return preferences in the pension domain: Are people able to choose?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 701-722, April.
    18. Vieider, Ferdinand M. & Truong, Nghi & Martinsson, Peter & Pham Khanh Nam & Martinsson, Peter, 2013. "Risk preferences and development revisited: A field experiment in Vietnam," Discussion Papers, WZB Junior Research Group Risk and Development SP II 2013-403, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    19. Olapeju Comfort Ogunmokun & Oluwasoye P. Mafimisebi & Demola Obembe, 2023. "Prospect theory and bank credit risk decision-making behaviour: a systematic literature review and future research agenda," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 1-25, April.
    20. Brown, Thomas C., 2005. "Loss aversion without the endowment effect, and other explanations for the WTA-WTP disparity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 367-379, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:mgtdec:v:29:y:2008:i:7:p:601-607. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/7976 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.