Hanh2017 Article ImprovingQualityOfForeignDirec PDF
Hanh2017 Article ImprovingQualityOfForeignDirec PDF
* Correspondence:
nphanh39@gmail.com Abstract
1
Academy of Policy and
Development—APD, Hanoi, Foreign direct investment (FDI) enterprises are playing a key role in Vietnam’s
Vietnam economy. By the end of 2016, there are more than 21,398 FDI projects in force,
2
Ministry of Planning and with the total registered capital of nearly 293 billion USD. One hundred six
Investment, Hanoi, Vietnam
Full list of author information is countries and territories have invested in 19 industries in 68 provinces and cities
available at the end of the article of Vietnam. These investments have added a large amount of capital to the economy,
which has basically been used effectively, contributing to the economic growth of
Vietnam. In this context, the study focuses on the analysis of statistical data from 1988
to 2016 on the sources of funds, the number of projects, the invested sectors, and
countries invested in Vietnam; research also includes three main factors that affect the
quality of FDI attraction in Vietnam, namely resources, infrastructure, and other support
policies. In this study, the support policy factor is thought to have the greatest impact.
In addition to the use of statistical techniques, quantitative research is also applied to
three data analysis techniques, including descriptive statistics, scale reliability analysis,
and regression analysis, to verify the hypothesis. Policy implications are also proposed
in this study to improve the quality of FDI attraction in Vietnam in the coming years.
Keywords: Quality, Foreign direct investment (FDI)
Background
As one of the most critical point of economic reform policies, the Foreign Investment
Law in Vietnam was first enacted in December 1987 and then became the basic legal
framework specifying Vietnam’s point of view about opening and integration. There
are some fluctuations, but the FDI sector in particular and external economic activities
in general has shown a positive role in the achievement of growth and development of
Vietnam for nearly 30 years. According to the General Statistics Office of Vietnam
(GSO), average annual economic growth was 7.3%, and GDP per capita rose by 5.7%
over the period 1990–2004 and expanded 6.40% in the September quarter of 2016.
GDP growth rate in Vietnam averaged 6.17% from 2000 until 2016, reaching an all-
time high of 8.46% in the fourth quarter of 2007 and a record low of 3.14% in the first
quarter of 2009. Meanwhile, property rate fell from roughly 80% in 1986 to around
29% in 2002, Vietnam’s poverty rate fell from 14.2% in 2010 to 4.5% in 2015. Vietnam
aims to reduce its poverty rate 1.3–1.5% in 2016. For the past decade, Vietnam has al-
ways been among the rapidly growing economies with sharp poverty reduction in the
world [1–3].
© The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and
indicate if changes were made.
Hanh et al. International Journal of Quality Innovation (2017) 3:7 Page 2 of 16
In the first phase of opening, FDI was an effective solution to help Vietnam out of
the tricky situation of siege and embargo. In the next stage, FDI is an important
additional capital in the total investment of the whole society, contributing significantly
to the promotion of economic restructuring, the increase of production capacity, the
innovation of technology, the breakthrough in international markets, the increase in
exports, the improvement of the international balance of payments, the contribution of
state budget, the development of high-quality human resources, and the creation of
additional jobs.
FDI in Vietnam has major influence on other economic sectors, namely stimulat-
ing the domestic investment, creating the competition, promoting the innovation
and the transfer of technology, improving production efficiency, and developing the
supporting industries that all help Vietnam participate in the value chain of global
production. Today, Vietnam has become an appealing destination of many leading
corporations around the world in different fields, such as BP, Total, Toyota, Canon,
Samsung, Intel, Unilever, etc. with products of international quality, which not only
has a great contribution to consolidate the position of Vietnam on the region and
the world, but has also created the competitive motivation for the domestic
enterprises to adapt in the context of globalization. FDI also plays an active role in
supporting the process of reform of state enterprises, encouraging administrative
procedures to reform and fulfill the market economy.
Up to now, Vietnam has attracted nearly 290 billion USD in foreign direct in-
vestment (FDI) with more than 22,000 projects from 114 countries and territories
and has disbursed nearly $145 billion [4].
After nearly 30 years, FDI is distributed throughout Vietnam. Funds come primarily
from Asian countries such as Japan, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, and Singapore
(accounting for 70.6%) or from European countries such as Germany, France, the UK
(8.8%), the Americas including the USA, Canada (accounting for 7.7%), and Australia
(2.7%); the rest are other partners. The average of used FDI accounts for 25% of social
capital annually. This is an important fund to support economic development [1, 5].
FDI sector has a positive impact on the restructuring of economic sectors and
the orientation of industrialization in Vietnam. From 2000 to 2015, the percentage
of FDI in economic structure increased by 5.4%, while the public sector and the
private sector decreased respectively. FDI sector accounted for about 45% of the
total industrial production value, contributing to the formation of the key industrial
sectors including telecommunications, oil and gas, electronics, chemicals, automo-
tive, motorcycle, public information technology, steel, cement, food processing
agricultural products, footwear, garment, etc. The majority of FDI enterprises
operate in the fields of high-tech industries such as mining and oil and gas,
electronics, telecommunications, office equipment, and computers. FDI restructured
agricultural structure, diversified the types of product, improved the value of
expectedly agricultural goods, and acquired a number of advanced technologies and
high-quality international standard seeds and breeds. However, the percentage of FDI
accounted for less than 3% of the output of the agricultural industry [1, 5].
The motivation fueling the research is that the quality of FDI projects in Vietnam
also contributed to improving the quality of banking services, insurance, and auditing
with the modern methods of payment, credit, and card. FDI in the tourism sector,
Hanh et al. International Journal of Quality Innovation (2017) 3:7 Page 3 of 16
hotels, and office leasing has changed the appearance of some major urban and coastal
areas. Many recreation areas such as golf, bowling, and gambling areas created attract-
ive conditions for investors and international tourists. In Vietnam, the other areas such
as education, training, and health care did not initially attract FDI but later were
invested in several high-quality institutions, some modern hospitals and clinics which
served the needs of the high-income population and foreigners living in Vietnam.
This study will analyze the specific situation of attracting foreign direct invest-
ment in Vietnam during the period from 1988 to 2015 and propose some sugges-
tions to improve the quality of FDI attraction in Vietnam. Additionally, for the
purpose of verifying the claims, the authors of the study also applied the survey
method to collect additional opinions of company groups in assessing the factors
affecting the quality of attracting FDI projects in Vietnam with the focus on three
main factors: resources, infrastructure, and other support policies.
or precious natural resources. However, Mayer et al. [12] state that access to eco-
nomic resources is becoming more important due to the growing concerns of local
authorities on the adverse effects of FDI. Lipsey [13] also emphasized that foreign
companies want to increase long-term investment in developing countries to seek
resources while the host country considers FDI as a source of capital to improve
economic development and access to modern technology. Another factor, according
to Sullivan and Sheffrin [14], infrastructure, is defined as the whole of the product-
ive relationships that constitute the economic structure of a given society.
Khadaroo and Seetanah [8] have argued that growth in infrastructure is defined as
an indicator for higher transport performance or lower transportation costs.
Iwanow and Kirkpatrick [15] determined that when infrastructure was improved by
about 10%, the efficiency of developing country exports would be increased by 8%.
In a study on the relationship between policies and FDI, according to Prokopenko
[16] FDI inflows are influenced by a series of local government policies to improve
globalization and national competitiveness.
The research model has been established as follows (Fig. 1):
Research questions and hypotheses:
H1: The resources with a positive impact on the quality of FDI attraction in Vietnam.
H2: The infrastructure with a positive impact on the quality of FDI attraction in
Vietnam.
H3: The support policies with a positive impact on the quality of FDI attraction in
Vietnam.
in Vietnam in the period 1998–2015 by applying time series analysis techniques and
statistical method.
However, to find more bases for the statement, the authors apply the survey method
to collect ideas from the group of enterprises affected by three factors affecting the
quality of FDI attraction in Vietnam: resources, infrastructure, and support policies.
The method of data collection was done via questionnaire surveys sent to FDI enter-
prises in Vietnam. There were 500 sent questionnaires, and 485 valid answers were
collected. Based on the data collected, the authors perform a number of statistical ana-
lysis methods including the calculation of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient to test the
reliability of the research scale and the linear regression to estimate the influence of
research factors on the quality of FDI attraction in Vietnam. Mathematically, these ef-
fects can be measured through linear regression, in which the quality of FDI attraction
in Vietnam is considered to be the dependent variable and the mentioned three factors
are the independent variables. The linear regression equation was cited by Cresswell
[17] and Hair et al. [18] as follows:
QFDI ¼ W 0 þ W 1 Rs þ W 2 I þ W 3 Ps þ e
in which QFDI is the quality attracting FDI in Vietnam, Rs represents the resources,
I is the infrastructure, Ps is the support policy factor, and e is the estimated error. Data
are analyzed with the support of SPSS 20. Muijs [19] argues that SPSS is not the best
tool, but it is the most popular software in academic research.
The three-year period of 1988–1990 is considered the warm-up period. Since 1991, it
was taken over by the first FDI wave with the fast pace of FDI attraction; the annual
average increased by 50% of registered capital, by 45% of realized capital, and was
higher than the average growth rate of total social capital (23%). The registered capital
reached $31.6 billion; the realized capital was $13.37 billion, equivalent to 37.5% of the
registered capital [1, 2].
This is a recession period of FDI. The registered FDI decreased to $5590.7 million in
1997, $2012.4 million in 2000, and $4547.6 million in 2004. The annually averaged
realized capital was $2.54 billion, equivalent to 78% of the realized capital in 1997. The
registered FDI reached $23.88 billion; the realized capital was $17.84 billion, accounting
for 75% of registered capital [1, 2].
Table 1 The number of projects and registered FDI from 1988 to 2016
Year Number The The scale of Compared to the last year
of registered FDI projects
Number of The The scale
projects (million USD) (million
projects (%) registered of projects (%)
USD/project)
FDI (%)
1988 37 371.8 10.05
1989 68 582.5 8.57 183.8 156.7 85.2
1990 108 839 7.77 158.8 144.0 90.7
1991 151 1322.3 8.76 139.8 157.6 112.7
1992 197 2165 10.99 130.5 163.7 125.5
1993 269 2900 10.78 136.5 133.9 98.1
1994 343 3765.6 10.98 127.5 129.8 101.8
1995 370 6530.8 17.65 107.9 173.4 160.8
1996 325 8497.3 26.15 87.8 130.1 148.1
1997 345 4649.1 13.48 106.2 54.7 51.5
1998 275 3897 14.17 79.7 83.8 105.2
1999 311 1568 5.04 113.1 40.2 35.6
2000 371 2012.4 5.42 119.3 128.3 107.6
2001 555 3142.8 5.66 149.6 156.2 104.4
2002 808 2998.8 3.71 145.6 95.4 65.5
2003 791 3191.2 4.03 97.9 106.4 108.7
2004 811 4547.6 5.61 102.5 142.5 139.0
2005 970 6838.8 7.05 119.6 150.4 125.7
2006 987 12,004.5 12.16 101.8 175.5 172.5
2007 1544 21,347.8 13.83 156.4 177.8 113.7
2008 1557 71,726.8 46.07 100.8 336.0 333.2
2009 1208 23,107.3 19.13 77.6 32.2 41.5
2010 1240 19,886.8 15.94 102.6 85.5 83.3
2011 1091 15,618.7 13.47 88.0 74.4 84.5
2012 1287 16,348.0 12.70 117.9 104.6 94.2
2013 1530 22,352.2 14.60 118.8 136.7 114.9
2014 1843 20,230.0 11.89 120.4 91.0 81.4
2015 2120 22,757.0 11.37 115 112.0 95.6
2016* 2240 18,103.0
The total 21,290 313,552.6
This is the emerging second FDI wave. The registered FDI was $6.838 billion in 2005,
$12.004 billion in 2006, $21.347 billion in 2007, and $71.7126 billion in 2008. The
registered capital reached $111.918 billion, and the realized capital was $26.934 billion,
accounting for 24% of the registered capital, and it was 4.68 times more than the
registered capital and 1.5 times greater than the realized capital compared to the last
period [1, 2].
Registered capital reached a peak in 2008 before decreasing in recent years; however,
the realized capital was still stable, averaged at $10–11 billion. The registered capital
Hanh et al. International Journal of Quality Innovation (2017) 3:7 Page 7 of 16
reached $67.1 billion, and the realized capital was $39.28 billion, accounting for 58.5%
of the registered capital.
Over nearly 30 years of attracting foreign direct investment, the foreign direct investment
(FDI) played a significant role in economic and social development. The total amount of
the registered FDI (cumulative) reached $313,552.6 million, while the total amount of the
realized capital reached $138,692.9 million, equivalent to 44.23% by the end of 2015 [1, 2].
Until 20 November 2016, Vietnam has attracted 2240 new FDI projects with a total
registered capital of $18,103.0 billion, a 96.1% increase in the number of projects and
an 89.5% increase in the registered capital compared to the same period in 2015. At the
same time, there are 1075 projects, increasing the registered capital to the total amount
of $5075 billion [4]. The FDI projects are expected to improve human resources
quality, develop local supply systems, and increase domestic enterprises’ competitive
capability in joining global supply chains (Fig. 2).
Table 3 Nations and territories have invested the largest FDI in Vietnam
No. Investment partners Number of projects The total registered FDI (USD) The average project size
(million USD/DA)
1 Korea 4892 44,452.4 9.08
2 Japan 2830 39,176.2 13.84
3 Singapore 1497 34,168.2 23.10
4 Taiwan 2497 29,866.7 11.96
5 British Virgin Islands 603 19,209.2 0.03
6 Hong Kong 972 16,799.1 0.01
7 Malaysia 516 13,282.9 0.02
8 USA 779 11,217.9 0.01
9 China 1271 8718.7 6.85
10 Thailand 409 7011.5 0.01
Hanh et al. International Journal of Quality Innovation (2017) 3:7 Page 9 of 16
due to the world economic crisis and then increased again in 2010, but it has decreased
slightly in recent years [20, 21].
Up to now (December 2016), with 65 countries and territories having investment
projects in Vietnam, Korea is leading with a total investment of newly registered and
additional capital of 5.58 billion USD, accounting for 34% of total investment in
Vietnam; Singapore is the second with newly registered and additional capital of $1.84
billion, accounting for 11.2% of total registered capital; Japan is taking the third place
with a newly registered and additional capital of $1.7 billion, accounting for 10.3% of
total investment.
Highland was the region that attracted the least FDI with 156 projects and total regis-
tered capital of $859.9 million, about 0.32% [22] (Table 5).
Therefore, it can be seen clearly that there was a significant difference between
regions, the plains and the mountains, the wealthy places, and the poor places. FDI
projects are concentrated mainly in the Red River Delta, Southeast, and North Central
and Central Coast regions. Because most of the largest industrial areas are gathered
here and they have good infrastructure, convenient credit services, such as banking and
developed transport system, these regions are attracting many investors.
Testing the reliability of the support policies of Vietnam As Table 8 shows, the
Cronbach’s alpha value is 0.852, higher than 0.6. In addition, all attributes of this factor
have a Corrected Item-Total Correction of 0.3. Therefore, all requirements for
reliability testing are fulfilled. Among five attributes of the supportive policy factors,
the way local governments implement policies to support administrative procedures
plays a vital role in increasing the quality of attracting FDI projects into Vietnam. In
fact, when Vietnam reforms administrative procedures, it will be of particular interest
to investors.
have significant implications for attracting FDI into Vietnam. In addition, the supporting
policy factor shows the highest impact on the quality of FDI attraction as the beta of this
component is higher than that of other sectors and it can be seen that if Vietnam can
improve the practical effectiveness of policies, the quality of FDI attraction to Vietnam will
be improved by 0.324% (Table 9).
Discussion
For a period of nearly 30 years, Vietnam expects to improve the development of the en-
terprises from FDI. During that time, the quality of FDI attraction has been improved
significantly.
Attracting FDI has made a remarkable contribution to economic growth. In some
ways, it helps to improve the efficiency of domestic investing resources. Foreign direct in-
vestment is being the most dynamic fund with GDP growth higher than the national
growth rate. In 1995, GDP of foreign direct investment increased by 14.98% while the na-
tional GDP increased just only 9.54%. In 2000, 2005, and 2010, the former number and
the latter number were 11.44 and 6.79%, 13.22 and 8.44%, 8.12 and 6.78% respectively.
The contribution of FDI sector has increased gradually, from 2% GDP (1982) to 12.7%
(2000), 16.98% (2006), 18.97% (2011), 19% (2015), and 23.4% (2016) [1, 23].
FDI is playing a fundamental role on the total social investment. It contributes
significantly to Vietnam’s export and changes the structure of exports toward reducing
the share of mining products and raw materials while increasing the proportion of
manufactured goods. The enterprises from FDI have a positive impact on expanding
Vietnamese export’s market, especially to the USA and EU. This change, in some ways,
results in changing export structure by making USA become the largest market
contributing to national budget. The export revenue including crude oil from FDI en-
terprises reached only 45.2 of total turnover before 2001. However, since 2003, foreign
direct investment became a major factor boosting beyond the domestic region. It
accounts for roughly 64% of total exports in 2012. The total export turnover of FDI
enterprises in 2015 reached nearly 2008 billion US dollars and increased approximately
16.7% that is equivalent to 29.69 billion US dollars in comparison with 2014. That
accounts for 63.4% of the national export turnovers [1, 23].
Foreign direct investment helps promoting economic restructuring in Vietnam toward
industrialization and modernization. In Vietnam, FDI focuses on investing in the
industrial sector with a higher technological level of the country’s average level. The
growth rate of industry from FDI is nearly 18% on average [1, 4], and it is higher than
the growth rate of the whole industry currently. FDI plays a leading role on developing
several key industrial sectors like telecommunication, mining, oil and gas processing,
electronics, media technology, steel and cement, etc.
In addition, FDI helps in creating more jobs, improves the quality of human resources,
and changes Vietnamese labor structure. On annual average, the FDI companies gener-
ate roughly 2 million jobs directly and about 3–4 million jobs indirectly with a strong im-
pact on Vietnamese labor restructuring towards industrialization and modernization [1].
Foreign investment is an important channel for technology transfer, contributing in
raising the technological level of Vietnamese economy. Since 1993, Vietnam had 951
technology transfer contracts already approved/registered with 605 contracts from FDT
enterprises, accounting for 63.6% [1]. FDI activities help in bringing the development
of worldwide technologies into Vietnam.
It is clear that projects from FDI have a huge impact to improve competitiveness in all
three national levels, enterprise level, and product level. In fact, many Vietnamese
products are considered competitive in the US market, EU market, and Japan market.
FDI sectors help to boost the competition of other domestic sectors and the whole
national economy by boosting productivity, exports, the balance of international
payments, the level of technology, labor skills, and labor restructuring.
FDI projects have helped to improve economic management and have been a signifi-
cant contribution to Vietnamese international integration. FDI attraction has helped in
breaking our national embargo, expanding external economic relationship, joining
ASEAN, and signing several framework agreements with EU, Bilateral Trade Agreement
with the United States, the economic partnership Agreement (EPA) with Japan, etc.
Abbreviations
FDI: Foreign direct investment; FIA: Foreign Investment Agency; GSO: General Statistics Office of Vietnam; WTO: World
Trade Organization
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the General Statistics Office of Vietnam; Vietnam Foreign Investment Agency for supporting us to
complete this study.
Funding
This study was conducted without any financial support.
Authors’ contributions
NPH synthesized and analyzed quantitative research and finalized the research. DVH worked on the latest update of
FDI data. NTH collected and analyzed statistical data of FDI projects from 1988 to 2016. DTT worked for the General
Statistics Office of Vietnam; Foreign Investment Agency to get the most objective assessment. All authors read and
approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Author details
1
Academy of Policy and Development—APD, Hanoi, Vietnam. 2Ministry of Planning and Investment, Hanoi, Vietnam.
3
Phuong Dong University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Hanh et al. International Journal of Quality Innovation (2017) 3:7 Page 16 of 16
References
1. General Statistics Office (GSO) (1998-2015) Vietnam’s statistical year book. Statistical Publishing House, Vietnam
2. Foreign Investment Agency (FIA) (1998 – 2015), Situation of foreign direct investment attraction, The Ministry of
Planning and Investment. Vietnam
3. PricewaterhouseCoopers (2008-2015) Vietnam, a guide for business and investment. PricewaterhouseCoopers, Vietnam
4. Foreign Investment Agency (FIA) (2016) Vietnam gains noted economic achievements after 30 years of Doi Moi.
The Ministry of Planning and Investment, Statistical Publishing House, Vietnam
5. General Statistics Office, the investigation report on the results of production and business situation of the Vietnam
enterprises with foreign investment, stage 2000 to 2015. http://gso.gov.vn/Default.aspx?tabid=382&ItemID=14002.
Accessed 7 July 2014
6. This general definition of FDI is based on OECD, Detailed Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment,
third edition (OECD, 1996), and International Monetary Fund, Balance of Payments Manual, fifth edition (IMF,
1993). http://www.oecd.org/investment/investment-policy/2090148.pdf. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/
bopman/bopman.pdf
7. World Trade Organization (2002) Annual report 2002. WTO Publications. Printed in France VII-2002-3,000 © World
Trade Organization. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/anrep_e/anrep02_e.pdf
8. Khadaroo AJ, Seetanah B (2008) Transport and economic performance: the case of Mauritius. J Trans Econ Policy
42(2):1–13
9. Alfaro L (2003) Foreign Direct Investment and Growth: Does the Sector Malter. Harvard Business School, Mimeo,
Boston, pp 1–31
10. Blomstrom M, Wang J-Y (1992) Foreign investment and technology transfer: a simple model, published. Eur Econ
Rev 36:137–155
11. Mayer RE (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning.
[Google Books version]. University Press, Cambridge. Retrieved February 15, 2011
12. Mayer JD, Roberts RD, Barsade SG (2008) Human abilities: emotional intelligence. Annu Rev Psychol 59:507–536
13. Lipsey RE (2000), “Interpreting developed countries’ foreign direct investment”, NBER Working paper no. 7810,
National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge
14. Sullivan A, Sheffrin MS (2000) Economics: principles and tools. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, p 712
15. Iwanow T, Kirkpatrick C (2006) Trade facilitation, regulatory quality and export performance. J Int Dev 19(6):735–753
16. Prokopenko J (2000) “Globalization, competitiveness and productivity strategies” Enterprise and Management
Development Working Paper - EMD/22/E, January. International Labour Organization, Geneva. http://oracle02.ilo.
org/dyn/empent/empent
17. Creswell J (2002) Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research.
Merrill Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
18. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson, RE (2011). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Beijing: China Machine Press.
19. Muijs D (2011) Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. Sage Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA
20. Ishida M (2012) In: Lim H, Yamada Y (eds) “Attracting FDI: experiences of east Asian countries”, economic reforms
in Myanmar: pathways and prospects, BRC research report no.10. Bangkok Research Center, IDE-JETRO, Bangkok,
Thailand
21. World Bank.( 2015) The World Bank Annual Report 2015; Washington, DC. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.
worldbank.org/handle/10986/22550 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO”
22. Foreign Investment Agency (2015) Attracting foreign direct investment may 12, 2015. The Ministry of Planning
and Investment, Vietnam
23. Malesky E (2007) “Provincial Governance and Foreign Direct Investment in Vietnam”, 20 Years of Foreign
Investment: Reviewing and Looking Forward (1987–2007). Knowledge Publishing House, Vietnam