alexa A Study on the Changing Trends in the Flow of FDI | Open Access Journals
E-ISSN: 2223-5833
Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700+ peer reviewed, Open Access Journals that operates with the help of 50,000+ Editorial Board Members and esteemed reviewers and 1000+ Scientific associations in Medical, Clinical, Pharmaceutical, Engineering, Technology and Management Fields.
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events with over 600+ Conferences, 1200+ Symposiums and 1200+ Workshops on
Medical, Pharma, Engineering, Science, Technology and Business

A Study on the Changing Trends in the Flow of FDI

Sirisha S1* and Malyadri P2

1Assistant Professor, ITM-Business School, Warangal, India

2Principal, Government Degree College, Srisailam Project, Rayalaseema University, Kurnool Dist-518 102, A.P, India

*Corresponding Author:
Sirisha S
Assistant Professor
ITM-Business School
Warangal, India
Tel:+917702877480
E-mail: sirisha@itm.edu

Received date: July 14, 2015; Accepted date: September 21, 2015; Published date: September 30, 2015

Citation: Sirisha S, Malyadri P (2015) A Study on the Changing Trends in the Flow of FDI. Arabian J Bus Manag Review 5:175.

Copyright: © 2015 Sirisha S, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Visit for more related articles at Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review

Abstract

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is considered as an engine of economic growth. Foreign investment was normally permitted only in high technology industries in priority areas and in export oriented areas. So the inflow of FDI before 1990’s was very low. During early 1990s India suffered from massive balance of payment and foreign exchange crisis, which led Indian Government to opt for liberalized economic policies in 1991. Globalization and liberalisation brings lots of new innovative products to the world, Foreign Direct Investment is the one among this, also there are number of different forms of FDI is available currently. Recently, Government of India allowed FDI in different sectors of Indian economy. Since the adoption of New Industrial Policy (NIP) and on-going reform process, (FDI) inflows have increased substantially. On this background, the paper analyses the sector wise and country wise inflows of FDI during the period 2009-2014. This paper begins by reviewing possible sources of FDI and then provides a comprehensive evaluation of the empirical evidence on sector wise FDI. This study is entirely based on secondary data. It also point out the sector-wise distribution of FDI inflow to know about which has concerned with the chief share. The present study is based on secondary data collected from different sources. The paper concludes that the Government should design the FDI policy in such a way where FDI inflows can be utilized as means of enhancing domestic production, savings and exports through the equitable distribution among states so that they can attract FDI inflows at their own level. As per the study, the sectors that attracted higher inflows were Communication services as per the CAGR and as per the share it is manufacture sector. The Luxernbourg was at highest FDI inflows as per the CAGR and as per the share it is from Mauritius.

Keywords

Foreign Institutional Investors (FII); Foreign Exchange Regulation Act; New Industrial Policy (NIP); Multinational companies

Introduction

India being a resource poor country, particularly in capital resources, was always receptive to foreign investment. The role of foreign direct investment (FDI) in stimulating economic growth is one of the controversial issues in the development literature. The great promise of foreign direct investment (FDI) by multinational corporations is that capital will stimulate dynamic growth. Beyond boosting income and employment, the hope is that manufacturing FDI will bring knowledge that indirectly effect in building skill and technological capacities of local firms, catalysing broad-based economic growth. The part played by foreign direct investment (FDI) in the development process has undergone several changes. In the 1960s, FDI was seen in most countries as a partner in the development endeavours. But the Indian government adopted a restrictive attitude towards foreign capital in late 1960s as local industries started to develop. India adopted a regime that was perceived to be restrictive towards FDI. Explicit curbs on foreign investment were imposed through the introduction of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) in 1973 by restricting foreign ownership of shares in enterprises incorporated in India. At the same time, foreign firms operating in India were subjected to “local content” and “foreign exchange balancing” rules that curbed their freedom of operation. The Industrial Licensing System under the Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951 and the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 sought to channelize their activities into high technology and export-oriented production. The limits on foreign shares fostered joint ventures with Indian entrepreneurs. Private savings financed most of India’s investment, but by the mid-1980s further growth in private savings was difficult because they were already high level. These policies continued until the policy of creeping liberalisation of the Indian economy was initiated in the 1980s. During the late 1980s India relied increasingly on borrowing from foreign sources. Increased borrowing from foreign sources in the late 1980s, which helped economic growth, led to pressure on the balance of payments. The problem became an exogence in 1990 when Iraq invaded Kuwait, and the price of oil soon doubled. The direct economic impact of the Persian Gulf conflict was exacerbated by domestic social and political developments. In the early 1990s, there was violence over two domestic issues: the reservation of a proportion of public-sector jobs for members of Scheduled Castes and the Hindu- Muslim conflict at Ayodhya. The central government fell in November 1990 and was succeeded by a minority government. The cumulative impact of these events shook international confidence in India’s economic viability, and the country found it increasingly difficult to borrow internationally. As a result, India made various agreements with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other organizations that included commitments to speed up liberalization. Thus, in the early 1990s, considerable progress was made in loosening government regulations, especially in the area of foreign trade. Many restrictions on private companies were lifted, and new areas were opened to private capital. The stable macroeconomic fundamentals, increasing size of the economy and improving investment climate has attracted multinational corporations to invest in India. An important outcome of economic reform process aimed at opening up the economy and embody globalization in 1991 has led to massive increase in Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) inflows. In fact, FDI policy reform formed part of the first package of industrial reforms in July 1991 and was reflected in the Industrial Policy announced in 1991. Amongst other sources; FDI is a major source of private capital in India. The primary reason for alluring FDI is not only the capital it brings in but along with capital it is also an important source of various technologies knows how, better managerial skills, labour training and other externalities which generate increasing return in production.

Need and Importance of the Study

The flow of FDI in Indian service sector is boosting the growth of Indian economy, this sector contributing the large share in the growing GDP of India. This sector attracting a significant portion of total FDI in Indian economy. This contribution of FDI is stimulating the economic growth or not, this knowledge thrust of research scholar creates the interest in conducting this study.

Objective

To study the flow of foreign direct investment country wise and industry wise

Research Methodology

Data collection

This study is based on secondary data. This database is constructed by pooling information and data from various sources. It includes economic survey of India, Reserve bank of India, census, different parliamentary questions, and policy papers amongst many other. Online data base of Indian Economy, journals, articles, newspapers, etc.

Tools

To evaluate the flow of FDI at both the levels i.e. country wise and sector wise the tools that are used to analyze the data are Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) and percentages.

Scope of the study

To investigate the flow of FDI data have been collected for the period 2008 to 2014.

Review of Literature

A good number of studies have investigated on FDI issues. However, the following deserve a special mentioning, since they have gone deepen in to the crux of the FDI issues [1], “Foreign Direct Investment in India: Issues and Problems”. In their discussion paper summarized that “India has the resource base, it has the entrepreneurship, has the access to the sea, a vast labor force, it has everything that coastal China has had except the interest of the Government which even today underemphasizes the role of industrial facilities, of infrastructure, of land area, of effective port facilities”. “Export Growth in India: Has FDI Played a Role?” in his discussion paper reviews that hypothesizes export as one of the channels through which FDI influences growth [2]. Using annual data for 1970-98 he finds that FDI has no significant impact on export performance and thus on growth. “Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth in India: A Production Function Analysis” in their working paper viewed that FDI stock has contributed positively to the national production [3]. The study concludes that the effect of FDI is not significant for the overall period, but during the liberal policy phase FDI plays a significant impact on production of India. “Recent Trends in FDI Flows and Prospects for India”, analyses the recent trends in FDI flows in India. He finds that FDI flows to India have not been commensurate with her economic potential and performance.

The GOI revised its computation of FDI figures in line with the best international practices, which has led to a substantial improvement in FDI figures. The quality of FDI as manifest in technological spillovers, export performance etc. is more important than its quantity [4]. “The Differential Impact of Japanese and US FDI on Exports of Indian Manufacturing”, found that FDI has not played a significant role in exports of the Indian manufacturing sector in the post reform period and concludes that FDI in India has led to export diversification [5]. “Liberalization, MNC and Productivity of Indian Enterprises”, argues in favor of using an unbalanced panel that takes into account the entry and exit of the firms. Firms with better endowments in terms of productivity and technology benefited from liberalization and MNC presence. Firms with large productivity gaps became the victims [6]. “Foreign Direct Investment in India: A Critical Analysis of FDI from 1991-2005”, reveals that while FDI shows a gradual increase and has become a staple of success in India, the progress is hollow. He finds that in the comparative studies the notion of infrastructure has gone a definitional change. FDI in sectors is held up primarily by telecommunications and power and is not evenly distributed. “Labor Conflict and Foreign Investments: An Analysis of FDI in India, in their review examined that how labor conflict, credit constraints and indicators of state’s economic health affect foreign investment.

They find that labor unrest is the most important factor in determining the effect of foreign investment. Their results indicate that labor unrest has a strong negative effect on foreign investment and also labor unrest is endogenous across Indian states [7]. “Foreign Direct Investment in India’s Retail Sector: More Bad than Good?” Discusses the retail industry in India in their study on FDI in the retail sector. They focus on the “labor displacing” effect on employment due to FDI in the retail sector. The primary task of the Government in India is still to provide livelihood and not create so called efficiencies of scale by creating redundancies [8]. “The Unequal Effects of Liberalization: Evidence from Dismantling the License Raj in India. Centre for Economic Policy Research” in their discussion paper opined that They show that more trade or FDI is associated to positive growth effects in regions and sectors that are initially close to the technological frontier. This is primarily due to higher absorptive capacities of these regions or sectors and their engagement in R&D when foreign competitors enter the market.

Although there are studies on effect of FDI on overall performance of India, there is lack of research which focuses on countrywise and sector wise FDI, which are discussed in the present article [9]. “Economic Reforms, FDI and its Economic Effects in India”, assess the growth implication of FDI in India. They find that the growth effects of FDI vary widely across sectors and only transitory effects of FDI on output in the services sector which attracted the bulk of FDI in the postreform period [10]. “India’s Suitability for Foreign Direct Investment”, analyses various determinants that influence FDI inflows to India. Analyzing the new findings it is interesting to note that India has some competitive advantage in attracting FDI inflows, like a large pool of high quality labor force. In consequence this study argues that India is an ideal investment destination for foreign investors [11]. “FDI and Globalization in India”, finds that the FDI from the Indian firms were principally addressed to the developing countries and Russia, however, the share of the industrialized countries was on the rise and the manufacturing and non-financial sectors accounted for the bulk of it [12].

Foreign direct investment (FDI) and growth of states of india VISION 2020 - Managerial Strategies and Challenge”, stated in their study that foreign direct investment (FDI) policies play a major role in the economic growth of developing countries around the world. Attracting FDI inflows with conductive policies has therefore become a key battleground in the emerging markets. The paper highlighted the trend of FDI in India after the sector-wise economic reforms [13]. Sectoral performance through inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI) found out in their study that Foreign Direct Investment has a major role to play in the economic development of the host country. Most of the countries have been making use of foreign investment and foreign technology to accelerate the pace of their economic growth. FDI ensures a huge amount of domestic capital, production level and employment opportunities in the developing countries, which a major step towards the economic growth of the country [14]. “Impact of FDI on GDP: A comparative study of China and India,” in their the study found that 1% increase in FDI would result in 0.07%increase in GDP of China and 0.02% increase in GDP of India. We also found that China’s growth is more affected by FDI, than India’s growth [15]. “Impact of foreign direct investments on indian economy”, conducted the study to find out the impact of foreign direct investments on Indian economy and concluded that Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) as a strategic component of investment is needed by India for its sustained economic growth and development through creation of jobs, expansion of existing manufacturing industries, short and long term project in the field of healthcare, education, research and development also clarified that subject to the sectorial foreign holding cap, companies will now need prior permission from Reserve bank of India (RBI) for an overall FII holding of beyond 24 per cent. After RBI permission, the companies can allow FIIs to hold more than 24 per cent after the approval for the same by their boards and shareholders. This study investigates the growth in foreign direct investment country wise and industry-wise.

Data Analysis and Discussions

Table 1 displays the FDI inflows from different countries. To indentify and examine the growth of FDI inflow Compound Annual Growth Rate has been estimated for the period of 7 years i.e from 2008- 2014. The above table shows that the annual compound growth rate of Total Foreign Investment in different countries have not been equally successful in attracting FDI. There is considerable variation in the dataset. The Compound Annual Growth rate of FDI inflow ranges from minimum of -19.53% to maximum of 65.28%. The highest FDI annual compound growth was 65.28% witnessed from Luxembourg country and the lowest FDI annual compound growth was -19.53% witnessed from United Kingdom country. According to above table analysis it reveals that ten countries showed positive CAGR in terms of FDI flow, and they are Singapore, Japan, Netherlands, Germany, UAE, France, Switzerland, Spain, South Korea and Luxernbourg. At the same time, countries like Mauritius, U.S.A., Cyprus, United Kingdom, Hong Kong SAR and Others have witnessed with negative CAGR.

Foreign Direct Investment Flows to India During the Study Period 2008-2014: Country -Wise  
(US $ million)  
  2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 CAGR(%)
Country                
Mauritius 9,518 10,165 9,801 5,616 8,142 8,059 3,695 -12.64
Singapore 2,827 3,360 2,218 1,540 3,306 1,605 4,415 6.58
U.S.A 950 1,236 2,212 1,071 994 478 617 -5.98
Cyprus 570 1,211 1,623 571 1,568 415 546 -0.61
Japan 457 266 971 1,256 2,089 1,340 1,795 21.58
Netherlands 601 682 804 1,417 1,289 1,700 1,157 9.81
United Kingdom 508 690 643 538 2,760 1,022 111 -19.53
Germany 486 611 602 163 368 467 650 4.24
UAE 226 234 373 188 346 173 239 0.8
France 136 437 283 486 589 547 229 7.73
Switzerland 192 135 96 133 211 268 356 9.22
Hong Kong SAR 106 155 137 209 262 66 85 -3.1
Spain 48 363 125 183 251 348 181 20.88
South Korea 86 95 159 136 226 224 189 11.91
Luxembourg 15 23 40 248 89 34 539 65.28
Others 2,699 3,034 2374 1184 983 1540 1,249 -10.42
Source: Reserve Bank of India, Annual Reports

Table 1: FDI inflows from different countries.

The above Table 2 shows the total amount of FDI inflows in India during 2008-2014 and it clearly reveals that, FDI inflow during the period 2008-2009 has been increased from. US $19425 Million to US $22697 Million. From the year 2008-2014, the highest share of FDI has been maintained by Mauritius and the lowest share of FDI has been maintained by Luxenbourg except in the year 2011 and 2014. During the study period of seven years Singapore contributed as the second highest share of FDI Inflow in India except in the year 2010. From the year 2008-2010 others enjoyed third place in FDI attraction receiving 13.89%, 13.37% and 10.57% of total FDI respectively. In the year 2011 and 2013 the third place is occupied by Netherlands contributing 9.49% and 9.30%. In the year 2012 and 2014 Japan occupied by third place contributing 8.90% and 11.18%.

Share of Foreign Direct Investment Flows to India During the Study Period 2008-2014: Country -Wise
(US $ million)
  2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
Country              
Mauritius 9518(49) 10165(44.79) 9801(43.64) 5616(13.59) 8142(34.69) 8059(44.07) 3695(23.02)
Singapore 2827((14.55) 3360(14.80) 2218(9.87) 1540(10.31) 3306(14.08) 1605(8.78) 4415(27.50)
U.S.A 950(4.89) 1236(5.47) 2212(9.85) 1071(7.17) 994(4.23) 478(2.61) 617(3.84)
Cyprus 570(2.93) 1211(5.34) 1623(7.23) 571(3.82) 1568(6.68) 415(2.27) 546(3.40)
Japan 457(2.35) 266(1.17) 971(4.32) 1256(8.41) 2089(8.90) 1340(7.33) 1795(11.18)
Netherlands 601(3.09) 682(3) 804(3.58) 1417(9,49) 1289(5.49) 1700(9.30) 1157(7.20)
United Kingdom 508(2.62) 690(3.04) 643(2.86) 538(3.60) 2760(11.76) 1022(5.59) 111(0.69)
Germany 486(2.50) 611(2.69) 602(2.68) 163(1.09) 368(1.57) 467(2.55) 650(4.05)
UAE 226(1.16) 234(1.03) 373(1.66) 188(1.28) 346(1.47) 173(0.95) 239(1.49)
France 136(0.70) 437(1.93) 283(1.26) 486(3.25) 589(2.51) 547(2.99) 229(1.43)
Switzerland 192(0.99) 135(0.59) 96(0.43) 133(0.89) 211(0.90) 268(1.47) 356(2.22)
Hong Kong SAR 106(0.55) 155(0.68) 137(0.61) 209(1.40) 262(1.12) 66(0.36) 85(0.53)
Spain 48(0.25) 363(1.60) 125(0.56) 183(1.22) 251(1.07) 348(1.90) 181(1.13)
South Korea 86(0.44) 95(0.42) 159(0.71) 136(0.91) 226(0.96) 224(1.22) 189(1.18)
Luxembourg 15(0.08) 23(0.10) 40(0.18) 248(1.66) 89(0.38) 34(0.19) 539(3.36)
Others 2699(13.89) 3034(13.37) 2374(10.57) 1184(7.93) 983(4.19) 1540(8.42) 1249(7.78)
Total FDI 19425(100) 22697(100) 22461(100) 14939(100) 23473(100) 18286(100) 16054(100)
Source: Reserve Bank of India, Annual Reports

Table 2: FDI inflows in India during 2008-2014.

In India there are many sectors attracting FDI inflow. India is welcoming sector wise FDI as a part of its reform policies. Among them top sectors attracted high rate of FDI. Inflow in 2008-2014 is given in the above table and the data has been analyzed by using Compound Annual Growth Rate.

It is examined in the above table that, the Compound Annual Growth Rate of FDI ranged between -52.22% to 52.33%. It has been observed from the above analysis that the FDI trends have witnessed the negative Compound Annual Growth Rate in many of the sectors. The above results in Table 3 clearly indicate that there was a highest FDI flow in communication services and lowest in cease of trading industry witnessed with a Compound Annual Growth Rate of 52.33% and -52.22% respectively.

Industry 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 CAGR (%)
              (US $ million)  
Manufacture 3,726 4,777 5,143 4,793 9,337 6,528 6,381 7.99
Construction 2,551 2,237 3,516 1,599 2,634 1,319 1,276 -9.42
Financial Services 3,850 4,430 2,206 1,353 2,603 2,760 1,026 -17.21
Real Estate Activities 1,336 1,886 2,191 444 340 197 201 -23.71
Electricity and other Energy Generation, Distribution & Transmission 829 669 1,877 1,338 1,395 1,653 1,284 6.45
Communication Services 66 2,067 1,852 1,228 1,458 92 1,256 52.33
Business Services 1,158 643 1,554 569 1,590 643 521 -10.78
Miscellaneous Services 1,901 1,458 888 509 801 552 941 -9.56
Computer Services 1,035 1,647 866 843 736 247 934 -1.46
Restaurants and Hotels 280 343 671 218 870 3,129 361 3.7
Retail and Wholesale Trade 200 294 536 391 567 551 1,139 28.21
Mining 461 105 268 592 204 69 24 -34.44
Transport 816 401 220 344 410 213 311 -12.87
Trading 176 400 198 156 6 140 1 -52.22
Education, Research and Development 156 243 91 56 103 150 107 -5.24
others 884 1,097 384 506 419 43 293 -14.59
Source: Reserve Bank of India, Annual Reports

Table 3: Foreign Direct Investment Flows to India during the Study Period 2008-2014: Sector -Wise.

Table 4 provides the descriptive statistics of the major industries used in the analysis and it shows the share of industries in the total flow of FDI. The table reports the sectorial-wise inflow of FDI to India for the period from 2008 to 2014, it reveals that FDI inflow to Manufacture Industry, Construction Industries and Financial Services sector were ranging between 6% to 40%. During this period FDI inflow to sectors namely Real Estate Activities, Communication Services, Business Services, Miscellaneous Services, Computer Services, Restaurants and Hotel Industries, Retail and Whole sale Industries, Mining industries and Transport Industries accounts for one to ten percentage only. While in to the other sectors like trading and Education, Research and Development the FDI inflows were less than one percentage. It indicates that FDI inflows have increased continuously within a span of 7 years in case of manufacturing sector except in the year 2013. The trend shows that after the economic reforms were carried out FDI was heavily concentrated in manufacturing activities, which was due to the import substitution principle. During the study period trend of FDI in Manufacture sector was highest with 39.78% in the year 2012 and FDI in trading industry was lowest with 0.01% in the year 2014.

Industry 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
              (US $ million)
Manufacture 3726(19.18) 4777(21.05) 5143(22.90) 4793(32.08) 9337(39.78) 6528(35.70) 6381(39.75)
Construction 2551(13.13) 2237(9.86) 3516(15.65) 1599(10.70) 2634(11.22) 1319(7.21) 1276(7.95)
Financial Services 3850(19.82) 4430(19.52) 2206(9.82) 1353(9.06) 2603(11.09) 2760(15.09) 1026(6.39)
Real Estate Activities 1336(6.88) 1886(8.31) 2191(9.75) 444(2.97) 340(1.45) 197(1.08) 201(1.25)
Electricity and other Energy Generation, Distribution and Transmission 829(4.27) 669(2.95) 1877(8.36) 1338(8.96) 1395(5.94) 1653(9.04) 1284(8)
Communication Services 66(0.34) 2067(9.11) 1852(8.25) 1228(8.22) 1458(6.21) 92(0.50) 1256(7.82)
Business Services 1158(5.96) 643(2.83) 1554(6.92) 569(3.81) 1590(6.77) 643(3.52) 521(3.25)
Miscellaneous Services 1901(9.79) 1458(6.42) 888(3.95) 509(3.41) 801(3.41) 552(3.02) 941(5.86)
Computer Services 1035(4.56) 1647(7.26) 866(3.86) 843(5.64) 736(3.14) 247(1.35) 934(5.82)
Restaurants and Hotels 280(1.44) 343(1.51) 671(2.99) 218(1.46) 870(3.71) 3129(17.11) 361(2.25)
Retail and Wholesale Trade 200(1.03) 294(1.30) 536(2.39) 391(2.62) 567(2.42) 551(3.01) 1139(7.09)
Mining 461(2.37) 105(0.46) 268(1.19) 592(3.96) 204(0.87) 69(0.38) 24(0.15)
Transport 816(4.20) 401(1.77) 220(0.98) 344(2.30) 410(1.75) 213(1.16) 311(1.94)
Trading 176(0.91) 400(1.76) 198(0.88) 156(1.04) 6(0.03) 140(0.77) 1(0.01)
Education, Research and Development 156(0.80) 243(1.07) 91(0.41) 56(0.37) 103(0.44) 150(0.82) 107(0.67)
others 884(4.55) 1097(4.83) 384(1.71) 506(3.39) 419(1.79) 43(0.24) 293(1.83)
Total FDI 19425(100) 22697(100) 22461(100) 14939(100) 23473(100) 18286(100) 16054(100)
Source: Reserve Bank of India, Annual Reports

Table 4: Share of Foreign Direct Investment Flows To India During The Study Period 2008-2014: Sector -Wise.

Conclusion

In the 1990’s Foreign Direct Investment became the major source of private capital flows to developing economies. Due to the sudden disappearance of commercial bank lending in 1980’s many developing nations started to offer various fiscal and financial incentives to foreign firms. It is widely believed that the extent to which FDI can affect output growth is not limited to the capital it supplies. Instead, FDI is thought of as composite bundle of capital stocks, technology know how, better managerial skills, labor training and other externalities that benefit output in several ways. Prior to early 1990’s India used to have restrictive and regulated market for foreign capital. During this period, there were various obstacles (red tapes) and procedures for approval of foreign collaborations. However in early 90’s, India faced extreme foreign exchange and balance of payments crisis which forced policy makers to opt for liberal policy regime. New Industrial Policy (NIP) in 1991 dissolved industrial licensing and market became less regulated. Due to the adoption of liberalization policies by India since 1990’s the FDI inflows have increased consistently.

FDI in India is a key driver of economic growth and economic development of India. Most governments regard attracting it as a priority, particularly in developing and transitional economies. It is given such emphasis not just because it boosts capital formation but because of its potential to enhance the quality of the capital stock. The reason for this is that in general multinationals are assumed to bring with them best practice or, as a minimum, better practice technology and management. FDI in India to various sectors can attain sustained economic growth and development through creation of jobs, expansion of existing manufacturing industries. In this piece of research, Using data country wise and sector wise for the period 2008- 2014 we find that At country level, it is found that the Luxernbourg was at highest FDI inflows as per the CAGR and as per the share it is from Mauritius. As per the study, the sectors that attracted higher inflows were Communication services as per the CAGR and as per the share it is manufacture sector. The other sectors in Indian economy the Foreign Direct Investors interest was, in fact has been quite poor.

References

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language
Post your comment

Share This Article

Relevant Topics

Article Usage

  • Total views: 10894
  • [From(publication date):
    January-2016 - Aug 19, 2017]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views : 10498
  • PDF downloads :396
 

Post your comment

captcha   Reload  Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Peer Reviewed Journals
 
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
 
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

Agri, Food, Aqua and Veterinary Science Journals

Dr. Krish

agrifoodaquavet@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Clinical and Biochemistry Journals

Datta A

clinical_biochem@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9037

Business & Management Journals

Ronald

business@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Chemical Engineering and Chemistry Journals

Gabriel Shaw

chemicaleng_chemistry@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9040

Earth & Environmental Sciences

Katie Wilson

environmentalsci@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

Engineering Journals

James Franklin

engineering@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9042

General Science and Health care Journals

Andrea Jason

generalsci_healthcare@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9043

Genetics and Molecular Biology Journals

Anna Melissa

genetics_molbio@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9006

Immunology & Microbiology Journals

David Gorantl

immuno_microbio@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9014

Informatics Journals

Stephanie Skinner

omics@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Material Sciences Journals

Rachle Green

materialsci@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9039

Mathematics and Physics Journals

Jim Willison

mathematics_physics@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

Medical Journals

Nimmi Anna

medical@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9038

Neuroscience & Psychology Journals

Nathan T

neuro_psychology@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9041

Pharmaceutical Sciences Journals

John Behannon

pharma@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001Extn: 9007

Social & Political Science Journals

Steve Harry

social_politicalsci@omicsonline.com

1-702-714-7001 Extn: 9042

 
© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version
adwords