Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Asian Foreign Direct Investments in the Visegrad Countries: What Are Their Motivations for Coming Indirectly? Cover

Asian Foreign Direct Investments in the Visegrad Countries: What Are Their Motivations for Coming Indirectly?

Open Access
|Oct 2020

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

FDI stock of the leading Asian investors in Visegrad 3 (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland), 2017 (million USD)Source: own calculations based on OECD FDI positions by partner country BMD4: Inward FDI by immediate and by ultimate investing country and Hungary: Hungarian National Bank
FDI stock of the leading Asian investors in Visegrad 3 (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland), 2017 (million USD)Source: own calculations based on OECD FDI positions by partner country BMD4: Inward FDI by immediate and by ultimate investing country and Hungary: Hungarian National Bank

Japanese and South Korean FDI in offshore centres in percentage of the total outward FDI, 2017

Share of offshore centres in total outward FDI stock
South Korea6.4%
Japan3.5%

Details of the interviews conducted in the framework of the research

Company No.Year of establishment/acquisitionEntry modeNumber of employees at presentDate of interviews
11989greenfield2500 permanent + 500 seasonal12 April 2017
22005greenfield330 (white-collar, directly) + 2500 (blue-collar, indirectly)4 times between the winter of 2016 and April 2017
31991greenfield3000 permanent + 200 seasonalApril 2017
4One in 2009; Second in 2011; Third in 2016brownfield2400 altogetherJanuary 2017
52006brownfield850 altogetherDecember 2016
62017acquisition (the acquired plant was established through a greenfield investment)2000April–May, 2019
71998greenfield650–700May, 2019
82017brownfield260May, 2019
91997greenfield4000September, 2019
102006greenfield180December, 2019

FDI stock by leading Asian investor countries in the Visegrad countries, 2017 (million USD)

Czech RepublicHungaryPolandSlovakia
directultimatedirectultimatedirectultimatedirectultimate
Japan1907.663314.141152.563185.93887.434996.26125.16n.d.
Korea3254.713046.011979.251986.481134.811783.543535.08n.d.
China707.271096.04210.961973.42223.11826.5155.12n.d.
Hong Kong, China115.69204.41319.81207.51347.08465.0625.03n.d.
India−1.1299.51−16.042657.56103.38299.41−2.72n.d.
Singapore344.64699.07532.29−55.7284.74109.56118.49n.d.
Chinese Taipei283.531007.4647.28971.9130.76254.1418.27n.d.
Sum of 7 countries6612.369466.654226.1110927.092811.318734.483874.42n.d.
Sum of 7 countries in % of total FDI stock4.426.334.6412.011.183.666.94n.d.

Characteristics of the companies in our sample by the use of an intermediary country and type of the entry mode

CompanyHas it come directly or through an intermediary country?If it came through an intermediary country, which is that?Entry mode: greenfield or acquisition
1direct greenfield
2through intermediaryNetherlandsgreenfield
3direct greenfield
4through intermediaryCyprusacquisition
5through intermediaryNetherlandsacquisition
6through intermediaryLuxembourgacquisition
7through intermediaryHong Kong, Chinagreenfield
8through intermediarySwitzerlandacquisition
9through intermediaryNetherlandsgreenfield
10direct greenfield
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2020-0014 | Journal eISSN: 1804-8285 | Journal ISSN: 1804-6746
Language: English
Page range: 239 - 252
Published on: Oct 17, 2020
Published by: European Association Comenius - EACO
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2020 Andrea S. Gubik, Magdolna Sass, Ágnes Szunomár, published by European Association Comenius - EACO
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.