How is India doing in this respect, compared to China, which achieved remarkable success through a similar strategy?
In 1980, China's FDI inflows ($57 million) were less than three-quarters of India's inflows ($79 million).2 By 2014, China's FDI inflows ($129 billion) outstripped India's ($34 billion) by almost four times.3 Measures of inward FDI stock tell the same story: by 2014, India's ($252 billion) was about a quarter of China's ($1,085 billion) and, for that matter, of Singapore's ($912 billion).4
More From This Section
The three key FDI determinants explain the story:
- China's economy and infrastructure grew much faster than India's, making China much more attractive to foreign investors and initiating a virtuous cycle: FDI contributes to growth, and growth attracts FDI. It is indicative that foreign affiliates generate over half of China's exports.
- This combined with a progressively more welcoming FDI framework: China ranks higher than India on the World Bank's "doing business" index, the World Economic Forum's "global competitiveness" index and the Milken Institute's "global opportunity" index.5
- China established an extensive investment-promotion infrastructure, with investment promotion agencies (IPAs) at all levels of government, to attract FDI and provide various aftercare services to foreign investors. Increasingly, red carpet replaced red tape, while, simultaneously, efforts were made to improve FDI's contribution to China's development.
How to realise this potential? What can India learn from China's experience?
- As always, the economic determinants are fundamental. As India promotes growth and improves its infrastructure, it too can initiate a virtuous cycle.
- This needs to be supported by quickly improving the regulatory setting. The Make-in-India campaign recognises this, promising a growing economy alongside a more welcoming investment climate. (On the OECD's "regulatory restrictiveness" index, India is already assessed as being somewhat less restrictive than China toward FDI - although it remains considerably more restrictive than the OECD average.7)
- India's investment-promotion infrastructure needs to be strengthened.
- Establish a powerful, unified central IPA, reporting directly to the prime minister. Functions should include systematically attracting FDI (and especially FDI-exhibiting sustainability characteristics), targeting investors in sectors important to India's development, providing aftercare services, boosting investor trust and perception, and undertaking policy advocacy. Since, in the end, all investment is local, strong IPAs are also desirable at the state level. Proper coordination between the central and state IPAs - admittedly, a challenge - is essential to ensure follow-up and avoid incentive wars among states. As in China, these measures would establish the institutional infrastructure for attracting FDI and benefitting from it. Regular reports to the prime minister should detail progress made.
1 Government of India, "Make in India" website http://makeinindia.com/about
2 UNCTAD STAT database http://unctadstat.unctad.org
3 Ibid
4 Ibid
6 A T Kearney, FDI Confidence Index website http://atkearney.com/ideas-insights
7 See http://oecd.org/investment/fdiindex.htm
"Karl Sauvant and Daniel Allman, 'Can India emulate China in attracting and benefitting from FDI?', Columbia FDI Perspectives, No. 168, February 29, 2016. Reprinted with permission from the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment (www.ccsi.columbia.edu)"