FOREIGN TRADE UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS

TECHNOLOGY SPILLOVERS FROM FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT:

THE CASE OF VIETNAM
Intermediate Macroeconomics Midterm Paper

- Submitted by Group 3 ng Lan Anh (leader) .......... 1311150003

Nguyn Thy Hnh ............... 1311150043
Nguyn M Linh ................... 1316150072

Hanoi, May 2015

Contents
1.

Theory................................................................................................................................. 3
1.1.

1.1.1.

Definition .............................................................................................................. 3

1.1.2.

Types of FDI......................................................................................................... 4

1.2.
2.

Foreign Direct Investment ........................................................................................... 3

Spillover Effects of FDI ............................................................................................... 5

Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Vietnam ................................................................... 10

2.1.

Overview of Vietnams Economy ............................................................................. 10

2.2.

Recent Trends in FDI of Vietnam.............................................................................. 11

2.3.

The Roles of FDI on Vietnams Economy ................................................................ 14

3.

Researches of Technological Spillovers from FDI in Vietnam ........................................ 16

4.

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 19

5.

Appendix .......................................................................................................................... 20

6.

References ........................................................................................................................ 22

7.

Groupwork Assessment .................................................................................................... 23

1. Theory
1.1. Foreign Direct Investment
1.1.1. Definition
According to World Bank, foreign direct investment (FDI) are the net inflows of investment
to acquire a lasting management interest (10 percent or more of voting stock) in an enterprise
operating in an economy other than that of the investor. It is the sum of equity capital,
reinvestment of earnings, other long-term capital, and short-term capital as shown in the
balance of payments. (World Development Indicators, n.d.) On other words, it is a category
of investment that reflects the objective of establishing a lasting interest by a resident
enterprise in one economy (direct investor) in an enterprise (direct investment enterprise) that
is resident in an economy other than that of the direct investor. The lasting interest implies the
existence of a long-term relationship between the direct investor and the direct investment
enterprise and a significant degree of influence on the management of the enterprise. The
direct or indirect ownership of 10% or more of the voting power of an enterprise resident in
one economy by an investor resident in another economy is evidence of such a relationship.
Some compilers may argue that in some cases an ownership of as little as 10% of the voting
power may not lead to the exercise of any significant influence while on the other hand, an
investor may own less than 10% but have an effective voice in the management. Nevertheless,
the recommended methodology does not allow any qualification of the 10% threshold and
recommends its strict application to ensure statistical consistency across countries. (OECD
Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment, 2008)
To be more specific, the investing company may make its overseas investment in a number of
ways - either by setting up a subsidiary or associate company in the foreign country, by
acquiring shares of an overseas company, or through a merger or joint venture.
The accepted threshold for a foreign direct investment relationship, as defined by the OECD,
is 10%. That is, the foreign investor must own at least 10% or more of the voting stock or

ordinary shares of the investee company.

An example of foreign direct investment would be an American company taking a majority
stake in a company in China. Another example would be a Canadian company setting up a
joint venture to develop a mineral deposit in Chile.
1.1.2. Types of FDI
- Horizontal: where the company carries out the same activities abroad as at home (for
example, Toyota assembling cars in both Japan and the UK.
- Vertical: when different stages of activities are added abroad. Forward vertical FDI is where
the FDI takes the firm nearer to the market (for example, Toyota acquiring a car
distributorship in America) and Backward Vertical FDI is where international integration
moves back towards raw materials (for example, Toyota acquiring a tire manufacturer or a
rubber plantation).
- Conglomerate: where an unrelated business is added abroad. This is the most unusual form
of FDI as it involves attempting to overcome two barriers simultaneously - entering a foreign
country and a new industry. This leads to the analytical solution that internationalization and
diversification are often alternative strategies, not complements.
FDI can take the form of greenfield entry or takeover.
Greenfield entry implies assembling all the elements from scratch as Honda did in the UK,
whereas foreign takeover means the acquisition of an existing foreign company - as Tatas
acquisition of Jaguar Land Rover illustrates.
Foreign takeover is often covered by the term 'mergers and acquisitions (M&As) but
internationally, mergers are vanishingly small, accounting for less than 1 per cent of all
foreign acquisitions.
This choice of entry mode interacts with ownership strategy the choice of wholly owned
subsidiaries versus joint ventures to give a 2x2 matrix of choices greenfield wholly owned
ventures, greenfield joint ventures, wholly owned takeovers and joint foreign acquisitions -

giving foreign investors choices that they can match to their own capabilities and foreign
conditions.
(Definition of foreign direct investment, n.d.)
1.2. Spillover Effects of FDI
The studies on spillover effects of FDI are based on the common recognition that
multinational corporations possess superior organizational and production techniques
compared to the domestic firms (Hymer, 1976). Wang and Blomstrom (1992) developed a
model in which international technology transfer through multinational corporations develops
endogenously by means of the interaction between a foreign subsidiary and a host country
firm. They have found that:

The higher the level and cost efficiency of a domestic firms learning investment, the
faster the technology transfer.

The lower the subsidiarys discount rate, the more rapid the technology transfer. The
higher the operation risksfor example, political instability or low potential economic
growththe more reluctant foreign firms will be to transfer technology.

The less costly the technology spillovers from the parent to subsidiary firms, the faster the
technology transfer.

Multinational Enterprises

Licensing
Trade
Subcontracting
FDI

Host Country
Subsidiary

Horizontal
Spillover
Vertical Spillover

Franchising
Strategic Alliances
Figure 1. Channels of Technology Transfer and Spillover from FDI

Multinational corporations can transfer technology through various means like licensing, trade,
FDI, subcontracting, franchising and strategic alliances. Eventually, multinational
corporations are preferably to transfer technology through FDI since it can internalise the
transfer of superior technological assets at little or no extra cost and regarded as the best way
to keep control over the technological knowledge (Caves 1996). Moreover, to the side of the
host economy, it is possible that a portion of the technologies and experiences transported by
multinational corporations will be diffused from their affiliates to the indigenous
establishments.
According to Javorcik (2004, p. 607), Spillovers from FDI take place when the entry or
presence of multinational corporations increases the productivity of domestic firms in a host
country and the multinationals do not fully internalize the value of these benefits.
Business projects of multinational corporations provide learning opportunities for the
domestic firms. They could reduce the costs of innovation and imitation for local firms, which
in turn speed up productivity improvement (Helpman, 1999). FDI may heighten productivity
levels of domestic firms in the industries they entered by improving the allocation of
resources in those industries.

This is neo-classical view on spillover effects. The spillover effects from the FDI can be
broadly classified as intra-industry/horizontal spillovers and inter-industry/ vertical spillovers.
o intra-industry/horizontal spillovers
FDI may lead to an increase in the productivity of the host economy in the same industry
through various means.
First, demonstration effects refer to the copying or the imitation of foreign firms technology
and organisational practices by the domestic firms. Since new technologies are introduced to
the host country, domestic firms can observe foreign firms actions, skills or techniques and
imitate them or make efforts to achieve these techniques and apply them, which results in
production improvements (Wang and Blomstrom, 1992).
Second labour mobility effects occurs when workers and managers employed in foreign
affiliates who have been trained with advanced technical and managerial skills move to other
domestic firms or open their own enterprises (Fosfuri, 1996). These workers are carriers of
multinational corporations technology. Multinationals can prevent the flow of labour by
paying higher wages. On the contrary, there is a possibility of reverse labour effect when
employees of domestic firms can move to foreign firms.
Third, competition effects refers to a situation in which entry of foreign firm forces the
domestic firms to increase their efficiency by improving the existing methods of production or
adopt new ones. Competition is considered as the drive of innovation. From the point of view
of the consumer, competition effects are certainly beneficial thanks to the availability of the
higher quality of products. In contrast, in an industry consisted of weak and small domestic
firms, the entry of foreign firms may eventually lead to an exit of those host firms.
o inter-industry/ vertical spillovers
Spillovers effect is not just confined within industries. It can appear as a result of interaction
across industries. The inter-industry spillover arises mainly by the consumer-supplier
relationship between foreign firms and domestic firms. According to Dunning (1993, p.456),

the presence of FDI has helped to raise the productivity of many domestic suppliers, and this
has often had beneficial spillover effects on the rest of their operations.
Vertical spillover mechanism operates both at the upstream and downstream sector.
multinational corporations usually source their raw materials and components from domestic
suppliers. The incentive for the multinational corporations to source from the domestic market
arises in the case of high transportation costs as well as certain regulations imposed by the
local government. The multinational corporations usually assists the local suppliers to achieve
technical and organisational competence by providing technological assistance as well as
training programmes for employees of local supplier firms (Lall, 1978). As a result, the
domestic supplier firms improve their quality of products and production process. The entry
of foreign firms may increase the demand for intermediate inputs by local firms. Therefore
through backward linkage mechanism, productivity of domestic firms may improve.
o Negative spillover
On the contrary to positive effects of spillovers discussed above, it is also argued that FDI
may create negative spillovers to domestic firms productivity and this effect may be large
enough to offset the above positive ones. A multinational corporations enter the market, their
advantages on technology and know-how may take in the market of the domestic firms and
make them produce in less efficient scales, which leads to less productiveness of domestic
firms (so-called market stealing effects). As a result a negative vertical spillover can arise in
such a situation. On the other hand, Markusen and Venables (1999) in a theoretical model
show that as a result of the contact with multinational firms, local input suppliers can be
strong enough in the long run to make the multinational corporations leave the market. We
can conclude that the net effects of horizontal and vertical spillover can be either positive or
negative.
In summary, foreign firms can have productivity spillover effects on local competitors
(horizontal spillovers) as well as on upstream and downstream domestic firms (vertical

spillovers). The transfer of technology (broadly defined as managerial practices, production

methods, marketing techniques or any other knowledge embodied in a product or service) can
occur through a number of channels. For example, local firms may learn to imitate a new
process or improve the quality of their product through observation, interaction with foreign
managers in business chambers, and from former employees of foreign multinational
corporations. Local firms may also benefit from the entry of new professional services or
suppliers as a result of the multinational corporations entry. Foreign firms may act as catalyze
domestic suppliers to improve the quality or time efficiency of their good or service by
demanding higher standards. On the other hand, foreign firms may have a negative effect on
domestic firms output and productivity, especially in the short run, if they compete with
domestic firms and steal their market or their best human capital. As domestic firms cut
back production they may experience a higher average cost as fixed costs are spread over a
smaller scale of production. (Aitken and Harrison, 1998)

2. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Vietnam

2.1. Overview of Vietnams Economy
The development of Vietnamese Economy is divided into two major phases: before 1986
(pre-reform) period and after 1986 (post-reform). In the previous phase, Vietnam is a
centralized economy, in which government determined all economic targets and prices. Since
the political and economic reformed after 1986, Vietnam has transformed from one of the
poorest countries in the world , with per capita income below $100, to a lower middle income
country within about 25 years with per capita income of over $2000 by the end of 2014.
For more than a decade, Vietnams growth rate has averaged 6.4% per year since 1990, living
standard improves, poverty reduced from almost 60% in the 1990s to less than 3% in 2014, a
lot of achievements have been made in education and Vietnam ranks high as of UNDP
Human Development Index (HDI). There was a recession during 1997-1999 period after
Asian currency crisis, however, the economy has recovered since 2000. Another recession
occurred in 2009 due to world economic crisis, nevertheless, the economy has picked up the
next year (Figure: GDP Growth Rate). Among factors leading to these successes, it is
believed that FDI has been played a crucial role to the economic development of Vietnam.

GDP Growth Rate

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1985

1988

1991

1994

1997

2000

2003

2006

2009

2012

(Source: World Bank, 2013)

2.2. Recent Trends in FDI of Vietnam

After the introduction of open door policy or Doi Moi in 1986, Vietnamese economy was
restructured. Since the approval of the Law of Foreign Investment (LFI), which opened the
economy to foreign investment and was passed in December 1987, FDI inflows to Vietnam
have increased substantially. Foreign companies found that Vietnam is a potential market
which has cheap and plentiful labour, therefore, they started establishing business in this
developing country, opening FDI trend in Vietnam. As a matter of fact, Vietnam has so much
potential for economic growth and its young and energetic and knowledgeable population
who are willing to favorable attitudes to multinational companies. Aware of it, Vietnamese
government uses FDI as a business development strategy. According to Multinational
business review, in a survey among 3 countries, Korea, Indonesia and Vietnam, when being
asked about evaluation of foreign companies impact on their own countries, Vietnamese
government showed the approval with highest mark, which means that FDI plays an
important role in the economy in recent years. Vietnamese Ministry of Planning and
Investment (MPI) acknowledged these forms of FDI in Vietnam:
Joint venture: parties have mutual agreement about equity contribution to form a new
entity. Joint venture companies are mainly in tourism, transportation and other industries.
100% foreign owned: the foreign companies are parent ones which own 100% stock
common.
Business Corporate Contract: parties enter legally binding agreement. BCC are mostly in
oil and telecommunications.
Other forms such as Built-Operation-Transfer (BOT), Built-Transfer-Operation (BTO),
and Built-Transfer (BT), stock company, and conglomerate company. The latest data
issued by MPI show that, based on the number of projects, 100% foreign owned and
venture forms rank 1st and 2nd. Whats more, local areas in Vietnam that attract foreign
companies investment are main cities which has facilities and huge population force: Ho

Chi Minh, Ha Noi, Vung Tau, Dong Nai and developing city: Binh Duong.
Rapid growth via high FDI inflows
Vietnam advanced from virtually no foreign investment in the era of 1986-1988 to 8004.80
million USD in the fourth quarter of 2014. In UNTACDs ranking, from a host country of low
inward FDI potential index during 1988-2001, Vietnam had become ranked as a front runner
with high inward FDI potential and performance indices in 2004. FDI in Vietnam averaged
3667.60 million USD from 2001 until 2014, reaching an all time high of 25790.92 million
USD in the second quarter of 2008, due to the fact that Vietnam joined WTO in 2007 has
opened more opportunities for Vietnamese economic growth in the future.

Millions of USD

FDI inflows in Vietnam

12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
1986

1989

1992

1995

1998

2001

2004

2007

2010

2013

(Source: World Bank, 2013)

Sources of FDI inflow in Vietnam by country
Up to the end of 2013, Vietnam has attracted investors from a total number of 60 countries,
among them investors from Japan have contributed the largest share, worth 7.3 billion USD.
Hong Kong is the next largest investor with 3 billion USD in contributions. Singapore, British
Virgin Islands and Taiwan have also participated heavily in Vietnamese FDI for a combined
contribution of 5.7 billion USD.

Vietnam top 10 sources of FDI inflows

4.0%

3.0%
Japan

5.00%
15.0%

South Korea
Singapore

5.0%

Taiwan

British Virgin Islands

7.0%

13.0%

Hong Kong
United States

12.0%

Malaysia

13.0%

China

(Source: The General Statistics Office of Vietnam, 2013)

Japan is not only one of the earliest but also the largest investor up to date in Vietnam.
Predicting the Vietnamese potential economy, Japan has participated in almost all sectors of
Vietnam. According to Tradescopes information, collaborating with Viettronics, a state
owned home appliance company, Sony was the first Japanese company to start manufacturing
home appliance in Vietnam in 1994, with first products: audio equipment and color TV set. It
led to many Japanese companies to Vietnam as joint venture with Vietnamese ones, such as
Toshiba (color television), Matsushita Electric (Color TV, stereo system), Sanyo (washing
machine). In manufacturing field, particularly automotive sector, after estimating the vehicles
demand in Vietnam, and granting Vietnamese government approval for investment,
Mistubishi, Toyota and Suzuki opened their factories in Vietnam. They all specialized in
manufacturing vehicles such as: motorbikes, passenger cars and industrial vehicles.
Vietnamese construction field also witnessed the investment of big construction contractors
such as Shimizu, Nippon Koei, and Toda, They have carried numerous projects in building
facilities, infrastructures and buildings in Vietnam. With high technology application, Japan is
one of the global leading countries in IT industry. In Vietnam, there are many Japan-owned
companies in IT services such as website development, integration system, and hosting, also,

Vietnam was chose to be business partner of Japan software outsourcing.

In recent years, from the end of 2013 onward, Vietnam has been received huge new
investment projects from South Korea, among them the largest project signed and passed in
December 2014 is valued for more than 6 billion USD.
It can be concluded that Asian countries still dominate Vietnams sources of foreign
investment. The fact that foreign investors are mainly from Asia implies that technology gaps
from Vietnams level are not so big and Asian customs are comparatively similar, hence it
may be favorable for FDI to spillover on domestic production.
2.3. The Roles of FDI on Vietnams Economy
Attracting FDI has become an important element of economic and industrial development
strategies for many developing countries, and Vietnam is not an exception. The policy makers
have undertaken several measures to attract foreign direct investment to the country.
The role of FDI on Vietnams Economy is very important. FDI is known as a financial
support for developing Vietnams economy. It is believed to contribute to the economic
growth of the host countries, directly through capital inflow, increased local employment,
usage of advanced equipment and technology or indirectly through a number of channels
including technological innovation caused by increased domestic competition and technology
spillover from subsidiaries of multinational corporations to indigenous firms in the host
countries.
Moreover, the amount of FDI inflows to Vietnam will create a positive impact on the
mobilization of other sources such as ODA, NGO, while also stimulating investment
attraction within domestic.
FDI also plays a role of accelerating the process of economic structural shift. Through foreign
direct investment, many new industries and field has emerged and developed such as oil and
gas, information technology, chemicals, automobiles, motorcycles, steel, electronics and
electronics household, industrial food, agricultural products, footwear, apparel... FDI helps to

promote the level in many economic sectors, contributing to labor productivity growth in
these sectors and increase its share in the economy.
With the surge of FDI inflow in the last few years, it is now time for policy makers and
researchers to pay more attention to the potential spillover effects that FDI brought about
rather than focusing almost entirely on determinants of FDI inflows.

3. Researches of Technological Spillovers from FDI in Vietnam

In the year 2008, the researchers from Development and Policy Center (DEPOCEN) and
Center for Analysis and Forecasting (CAF) carried out a report called Foreign Direct
Investment in Vietnam: Is The Any Evidence of Technology Spillover Effects?. They
collected data for measurement from The General Statistics Office (GSO). The database
contained information on type of enterprises (State owned enterprises, joint stock companies,
private enterprise, FDI), value of output, value of exports and imports, number of employees,
wages, materials costs and fixed assets, R&D activities. Although there was still a serious
limitation of the data which is some of the information is only available for some years which
made it difficult to construct a continuous panel dataset for analysis, the result was still
applicable.
They used the OLS model to measure the spillover effects. Researchers have used data from
different categories, in different periods of time and from different types of countries to form
the most suitable methods of calculation for technology spillover effects.
Basically, the framework of most researchers are similar to each other. They combined the
influence of foreign presence on output level or labor productivity of domestic firms with
other factors such as capital intensity, labor quality, production sales, competitiveness of the
market, the foreign presence proxy was included as an independent variable in a linear or loglinear regression with labor productivity of domestic sector being the dependent variable. In
the estimation, if the significant positive sign of foreign presence coefficient is found, a
positive spillover is concluded.
They investigated both the intra-industry and the inter-industry linkages for both the
manufacturing and the service sectors.
In manufacturing sectors, the measures of FDI forward linkages were found to be statistically
significant and negatively related to the output performance of domestic firms. In contrast, the
measures of FDI backward linkages were found to be statistically significant and positively

related to the output of firms. Turning to the horizontal effects, they found mixed results of
the horizontal spillovers. It seems that there was some evidence of the market stealing effect.
The estimated coefficient of the horizontal output measures of FDI presence was negative and
statistically significant. However, at the same time the horizontal employment measure of FDI
presence in the industry was positive and also statistically significant indicating some learning
of domestic firms through the labour mobility channel.
In the estimation results for the service sector, both the backward and forward measures of
FDI linkages were found to be statistically significant and negatively related to the
performance of domestic service firms. This indicated that on average the domestic service
firms do not benefit from their contacts with their FDI partners (both suppliers and customers).
However, interestingly there was evidence of demonstration effects that domestic service
firms can learn from their competitor FDI firms. Similar to the manufacturing sector, there
was some evidence of a negative spillover effect in terms of labour mobility for Vietnamese
domestic service firms.
In general, the emerging picture of FDI spillover effects for Vietnamese domestic industries
are mixed. The results of their study indicated a positive spillovers for those domestic firms
supplying to foreign multinational corporations in the manufacturing sector (i.e. the existence
of spillover through the backward linkage). However, they did not find any evidence of
backward and forward spillovers for the service sector. In terms of horizontal spillover,
although they did not find any evidence of technological spillover for domestic firms in terms
of the conventional measure of output (demonstration or competition), they did find some
evidence of spillovers through labour mobility in the manufacturing sector. However, for the
service sector they found evidence of horizontal spillovers both through the output channel
and through the labour mobility channel.
In conclusion, their findings about both positive and negative spillovers effects as well as
different channel of FDI spillovers to domestic firms call for a more elaborate policy gearing

toward encouraging FDI into sectors that nurture the technological spillover.

4. Conclusion
FDI has been considered as the engine growth for developing countries in general and a major
concern in the researches of Vietnamese economists and politicians in particular. As a result,
there are many policies taken on the ground that FDI inflows will create employment and
bring along the much needed technological advances, which will spill over to domestic firms.
However, much of the existing studies concentrate on the objective and subjective factors and
institutions attracting FDI to Vietnam. While, in fact, potential benefits of technological
spillovers from international multinational corporations to Vietnamese firms should also be
put in further study.
As explained from the whole assignment, spillovers from FDI take place when the entry or
presence of multinational corporations increases the productivity of domestic firms in a host
country and the multinationals do not fully internalize the value of these benefits. Indeed, on
one hand, FDI when invested in country, multinational corporations consisted of capital,
technology, managerial and marketing skills and global network which contribute
significantly to a host countrys economic growth. They are also the chances for us to
improve our management and directly learn new technology. If our country can adjust policy
to maximize the positive technological spillovers, it means that those investments from
foreign has been made use of wisely.
In summary, we can achieve technology spillover by imitating a new process or improving
the quality of our product or learning managerial skill. As a result, if domestic firms fail to
catch up with multinational firms on any of these aspects, our economy might be much suffer
from competitive market.
Thats why we should pay more attention to technology spillover effect from FDI to build
solution and policy to take advantage of spillover effect, otherwise FDI could become a threat
to our domestic economy.

5. Appendix
The basic model of DEPOCEN research in 2008 is demonstrated as follow:
= + 1 ln + 2 ln + 3 ln + 4
+ 5 + 6 + + +
: the real output of firm i at time t operating in sector j
: the capital of firm i at time tin sector j, which is defined as the value of assets at
the beginning of the year
: the measure of labor, defined as the number of employees
: material inputs
is to measure the presence of foreign firms in sector j at time t, defined as
follows:
=

,
,

, gross output/labor of foreign invested firm j of the sector i at time t

, total gross output/labor, of the sector i at time t.
, can be calculated by the model below:
, =

is taken directly from input-output table.

, is defined as
=

(, , )
, ,

The equation can also be written in another way:

= + 1 ln + 2 ln + 3 ln + 4
+ 5 + 6 + + +

Estimated results using the pooled OLS method in the research carried out by DEPOCEN

6. References
1.

(2013). Retrieved May 2015, from General Statistics Office of Vietnam.

2.

Anh, M. (Ed.). (2013, July 16). Foreign Direct Investment in Vietnam. Retrieved May

2015, from Vtown: http://vtown.vn/en/articles/foreign-direct-investment-in-vietnam.html

3.

Anh, N. N. (2008, January 1). Foreign Direct Investment in Vietnam: Is There Any

Evidence Of Technological Spillover Effects? Retrieved May 2015, from DEPOCEN.

4.

Definition of foreign direct investment. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2015, from Financial Times

Lexicon: http://lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=foreign-direct-investment
5.

Foreign Direct Investment - FDI. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2015, from Investopedia:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fdi.asp
6.

OECD Benchmark Definition of Foreign Direct Investment. (2008). Retrieved May 2015,

from OECD: http://www.oecd.org/daf/inv/investmentfordevelopment/2487495.pdf

7.

Thc trng u t trc tip nc ngoi (FDI) Vit Nam. (2014, 12 2). Retrieved May

2015, from VIETRADE: http://www.vietrade.gov.vn/tin-tuc/20-tin-tuc/4666-thc-trng-u-t-trctip-nc-ngoai-fdi-vit-nam.html

8.

Vietnam Foreign Direct Investment. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2015, from Trading

Economics: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/vietnam/foreign-direct-investment
9.

Vietnam

Overview.

(2013).

Retrieved

May

2015,

from

World

Bank:

http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/vietnam/overview
10. World Development Indicators. (n.d.). Retrieved May 2015, from World Bank:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.KLT.DINV.CD.WD
11. Yuen, J. (Ed.). (2015, January 20). Vietnams Logistics Market: Exploring the
Opportunities.

Retrieved

May

2015,

from

HKTDC:

http://hkmb.hktdc.com/en/1X0A0XQJ/hktdc-research/Vietnam%E2%80%99s-LogisticsMarket-Exploring-the-Opportunities

7. Groupwork Assessment
Assigned tasks
Name
ng Lan Anh

Task assignment
Technological Spillover Theory
Trends of FDI in Vietnam

Nguyn Thy Hnh

Theory

Nguyn M Linh

Research about Technological Spillover from FDI in Vietnam

Groupwork Evaluation
Advantages:
Team leader set up clear roles and ground rules for team.
All members made great effort to complete tasks assigned and met the deadline.
Good communication skills among members.
No conflicts happened during the period of group work.
Disadvantages
In spite of meeting the deadline, tasks were completed at slow speed.
Difficulty in the process of building outline.
Team members lacked of econometrics knowledge, which led to difficult in
understanding researches of experts.