AEBE

1626 Words7 Pages
European Market for Foreign Direct Investment Wikipedia states foreign direct investment as a direct investment into production or business in a country by an individual or company of another country, either by building a company in the target country or by expanding operations of an existing business. Europe has historically been an attractive market for potential foreign investors. However, the beginning of 1990s witnessed a significant improvement in the investment climate backed by the recognition of benefits of the FDI. This led to the removal of obstacles and change in the policies regarding foreign direct investments. Deregulation and enhanced competition policy made M&A an option for the companies and foreign investors looked at Greenfield projects to kick things off. The European Union is one of the world’s biggest investors and it also considers FDI as an important and an essential key to promote sustained development and growth. Domestic reforms have been extremely crucial in attracting heavy investors from abroad. The main principles of the current EU-28 approach towards FDI can be summarized as follows.  To focus on long term investment and planning  To emphasize on stable employment and growth  To encourage transparency by reworking on the regulations, directives & the regulatory framework  To improve and sustain market access across any of the EU-28 states  To facilitate free movement of capital and other financial movements  To facilitate transfer of key personnel from the investing countries to stay and work in EU Each of the member states in the EU offers foreign investors a broad spectrum of investment opportunities, along with incentives, grants and subsidies. Each of the member countries in the EU ha... ... middle of paper ... .... Investments were seen in the field of Chemicals, Textiles and Electronics. Chinese and Indian enterprises have had a very diverse background on the back of the paths followed by their respective home countries. Both have followed two alternative growth paths, with a mix of both state and capitalist development. Both these countries also faced similar constraints resulting from below par development & the lack of appropriate institutions. China opted for State-owned companies and India focussed more on the family owned companies than the state owned companies. Hence, un-surprisingly, most of the Indian enterprises in the European region consists of private companies owned by family founders (Tata, Reliance or Hinduja), but on the other hand, most of the companies from the Chinese region still consists of public or semi-public companies (Saic, Cosco or State Grid).

    More about AEBE

      Open Document