ICT DRIVING FACTORS THROUGH OPENNESS AND DIRECT

EFFECT GDP GROWTH AND GFCF ON FDI IN ASEAN

COUNTRIES

1
Christian Ramos Kurniawan, SE
2
Prof. Dr. Ir. Euphrasia Susy Suhendra, MS

:.

1Gunadarma University (christianramosk@yahoo.com),

2Gunadarma University (susys@staff.gunadarma.ac.id)
:.

ABSTRACT

Information and communication technologies (ICT) is increasingly moving to

the core of national competitiveness strategies around the world. Objection of this
research is to analyzing effect of ICT’s driven factors to support the openness and
foreign direct investment and also analyzing the effect of openness, GDP growth and
GFCF to foreign direct investment. The population of this research is all countries in
ASEAN therefore using purposive sampling technique and only 8 countries that meet
the criteria as a sample. The research using secondary data which are Network
Readiness Index from WEF for ICT driving factors which are availability of latest
technology, firm-level of technology absorption, accessibility of digital content, and
government prioritization of ICT and WDI for FDI Inflows, GDP growth, GFCF and
openness. Analysis data using AMOS 20 and SPSS 20 software. Result of this research
found that GDP growth, GFCF, openness and accessibility of digital content affects
directly to FDI but government prioritization of ICT indirectly affects to FDI.

Keywords: GDP Growth, GFCF, Openness, FDI, ICT Driving Factors.

BACKGROUD
FDI is very important for the development of a country, especially for
developing economies. The experience of newly industrialized countries (NICs) shows
that FDI has played an important role in their economic development. In the age of
globalization with cross-border flow of capital among nations, FDI becomes a key
solution to reducing development gaps among nations. The rapid growth of
multinational corporations (MNCs) has become the major driver for the process of FDI
because they are looking everywhere in the globe as investment center.
Southeast Asia has long been a magnet for foreign direct investment. Foreign
direct investment (FDI) flows into ASEAN in 2013 continued to surge and are about on
par with those to China for the first time since 1993. Inflows in 2013 exceeded $122
billion – pushing the region’s rapidly rising inward FDI stock to $1.6 trillion. Most
ASEAN Member States recorded higher inflows in 2013; two recorded marginal
declines (ASEAN Investment Report, 2014).
FDI to ASEAN remains highly concentrated and dominated by a few countries.
The traditional sources – Japan, the United States and the European Union – remain
significant investors. In Industry recipients, services and the manufacturing sector
continued to dominate FDI flows in the region, with some variations between the more
developed member economies and the CLMV countries. Overall, these two sectors
accounted for about 90% of FDI flows in ASEAN in 2012 and 2013 (ASEAN
Investment Report, 2014).
Moreover, in a more competitive world, information and communication
technologies (ICT) is increasingly moving to the core of national competitiveness
strategies around the world, thanks to its revolutionary power as a critical enabler of
growth, development, and modernization. The level of FDI depends on the ICT and
macroeconomic indicators. When a country have better ICT, at the first time, foreign
investor will see that country as a gold. Foreign investor will come and invest in that
country.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Foreign Direct Investment Definition and Theory
FDI is a form of direct capital investment engaged in various fields. Excluded
from FDI inflows are investment in the form of portfolio, shares on the stock, bonds and
other securities. Moreover, FDI is associated with direct ownership, control of plant,
equipment and infrastructure which help to finance the creation of capacity growth in an
economy, while the short-term foreign debt is more frequently used to finance
consumption. According to Moosa (2002), theories of FDI can be classified into four
types: (1) Theories assuming perfect market; (2) theories assuming imperfect market;
(3) other theories; (4) theories based on other variables.

Macroeconomic Indicators
Macroeconomic indicators are economic statistics which are released
periodically by government agencies and private organizations. These indicators
provide insight into the economic performance of a particular country or region.

Gross Domestic Product Growth

One out of several key factors as FDI determinant is host country’s market
growth rate. It can be measured by the GDP growth rate. Investors, especially foreign
investors, will be more captivated in countries with larger market size, as indicated by
GDP growth rate which reflects the level of potential demand.

Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF)

Gross fixed capital formation includes land improvements (fences, ditches,
drains, and so on); plant, machinery, and equipment purchases; and the construction of
roads, railways, and the like, including schools, offices, hospitals, private residential
dwellings, and commercial and industrial buildings.

Openness
Trade openness refers to a degree of which countries or economies permit or
have international trade with others. Trade activities include import and export, inter
countries investment, borrowing and lending, and repatriation of funds abroad.
Information and Communication Technology Driving Factors
There are various driving factors for information and communication technology
because ICT is a global and wide area of research. Therefore, from various driving
factors of ICT only our factors which are used in this research, as follow.

Availability of Latest Technology

Through the history, human always use technology can help the human by made
the jobs become easier, faster and simpler than manually. Yet, technology always
growth and develop by innovation. Innovation is one key success for availability of
latest technology (Addison and Hesmati, 2004). Through innovation, technology will
always updated and will have latest technology to help human jobs (Michie, et al.,
2002).

Firm-Level of Technology Absorption

Although form domestic or foreign, the ability to absorb technology is no less
important than generating new knowledge. Absorption is about when the absorber take
and implement the new thing in order to help the absorber its self. In technology and
economic case, technology absorption means how strength and strong the absorber to
implement the technology in order to help the economic activities (WEF 2012).

Government Prioritization of ICT

Government have a crucial and important role in technology sector beside
economic sector of a country. Aforementioned before that ICT have a crucial role also
in order to support the country activities then government prioritization of ICT is
become important.

Accessibility of Digital Content

Information is important thing in this modern era especially for economic sector.
Real and actual information can help the firm, investor, and other people who need the
information should published to public and public should have free accessibility of the
information.
Research Model

Figure 2.1
Research Model

Based on the description and the research model above, it can be formulated
hypothesis in this study as follows.
H1: Gross domestic product growth directly affect the foreign direct investment.
H2: Gross fixed capital formation directly affect the foreign direct investment.
H3: Availability of latest technologies directly affect the foreign direct investment.
H4: Firm-level of technology absorption directly affect the foreign direct investment.
H5: Government prioritization of ICT directly affect the foreign direct investment.
H6: Accessibility of digital content directly affect the foreign direct investment.
H7: Openness has effect on foreign direct investment.
H8: Availability of latest technologies has effect on openness.
H9: Firm-level of technology absorption has effect on openness.
H10: Government Prioritization of ICT has effect on openness.
H11: Accessibility of digital content has effect on openness.

METHODOLOGY
Data Collection
The technique used to collect data in this research is documentary method,
namely data collection is done by studying the records or documents are available on
the official website of World Economic Forum and UNCTAD and literature, by
studying, understanding, observing, analyzing and identifying things that already exist
from a variety of literature and other resource (Nur'ainy, 2010; Maris, 2013) related to
information and communication technology. The variables in this study include Foreign
Direct Investment (FDI) as dependent variable, GDP growth, GFCF, availability of
latest technologies, firm-level technology absorption, government prioritization of ICT,
and accessibility of digital content as independent variables, and openness as
intervening variable.

Population and Sampling

The populations in this research are all countries in ASEAN. All countries also
listed in United Nations organizations. However, countries which became sample in this
research are 8 countries from all countries in ASEAN namely Indonesia, Malaysia,
Vietnam, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Cambodia and Brunei Darussalam.

Analysis Methods
The analysis methods in this research are classical assumption test, and
goodness of fit test to test the quality of the data and path analysis to test the hypothesis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Classical Assumption Test, and Goodness of Fit Test
Based on classical assumption test, and goodness of fit test, this research meet
the requirements for classical assumption test, and goodness of fit test.

Path Analysis Test Result

Path Analysis test was conducted using Amos software version 20. The
significant limit used in hypothesis testing for making decisions of the hypothesis is
0.05 or 5%. In other words, the hypothesis will be accepted if the significant value (p)
that are less than or equal to 0.05 or 5% (p ≤ 5%).
 Table 4.1
Path Analysis Results
Estimate Direction P Results
FDI <--- GDP_Growth 12.513 Positive *** H1 accepted

FDI <--- GFCF .548 Positive *** H2 accepted

FDI <--- Tech -.184 Negative .634 H3 rejected

FDI <--- Absorp -.059 Negative .899 H4 rejected

FDI <--- GovICT -.233 Negative .455 H5 rejected

FDI <--- AccDigital 1.098 Positive .003 H6 accepted

FDI <--- OPENNESS .643 Positive .043 H7 accepted

OPENNESS <--- Tech -.050 Negative .770 H8 rejected

OPENNESS <--- Absorp -.112 Negative .579 H9 rejected

OPENNESS <--- GovICT .469 Positive *** H10 accepted

OPENNESS <--- AccDigital .166 Positive .277 H11 rejected

Source AMOS v. 20 Output 2015.

The result show that six hypothesis are rejected and five hypothesis are accepted.
H1 accepted with estimate 12.513 , H2 accepted with estimate 0.548, H6 accepted with
estimate 1.098, H7 accepted with estimate 0.643 and H10 accepted with estimate 0.469.

Coefficient Determinants (R2)

Coefficient determinants (R2) test aims to see how much the ability of
independent variables in explaining the variance of the dependent variable (Ghozali,
2006). By using AMOS, it can be proven though square multiple correlations facilities
which is available in the Table 4.2 below:
.
Table 4.2
Squared Multiple Correlations
Estimate
OPENNESS .577
FDI .795
Source AMOS v. 20 Output 2015.
 Table 4.2 above shows that the value of coefficient of determination (R 2) for
openness is 0.577. This indicates that 57.7% of the openness can be explained by the
variation of the four independent variables which are Tech, Absorp, GovICT and
AccDigital. While 43.3% is influenced by other variables that are not observed in this
research.
Moreover for FDI as dependent variable, coefficient of determination value is at
0.795. It means that 79.5% of FDI can be explained by the variation of the six
independent variables which are GDP Growth, GFCF, Tech, Absorp, GovICT and
AccDigital and an intervening variable which is openness. While 20.5% is influenced
by other variables that are not observed in this research.

Direct Effect of GDP Growth on FDI

GDP growth has direct impact on FDI, The results are consistent with research
Rininta (2011) which states positive relationship between FDI inflow and economic
growth. Percentage of GDP as a catalyst to FDI since it is assumed to raise the
productivity of private capital by financing both public and private investments such as
location-specific capital ventures, human capital resource investments, diversified
microeconomic investments, and community support, maintenance and sustenance
(Azeez, and Begum, 2009).
Over the next 20 years, Southeast Asia will be one of the world’s fastest
growing consumer markets with ASEAN members’ GDP forecast to rise more than
fourfold to US$10 trillion by 2030. The combined GDP of member nations is already
significantly larger than India’s economic output and by 2018, it will exceed that of
Japan according to US industry analyst IHS Global Insight. The AEC will unleash a
new era of growth by creating a competitive market of more than 600 million people in
the ten member countries comprising Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao
PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam (Investing
in ASEAN, 2013).
ASEAN accounted for 3% of the global economy in 2013 but attracted more
than 8% of global FDI flows. It accounted for 8% of the combined GDP of emerging
markets and developing countries but received 16% of global FDI flows to the
developing world. Higher inflows over the past decade have produced a five-fold rise in
FDI stock per capita, from $500 in 2000 to nearly $2,500 in 2013 (ASEAN Investment
Report, 2013).

Direct Effect of GFCF on FDI

GFCF has direct impact on FDI. The results are consistent with research Fahmi
(2012) which states the more infrastructures will end up with the higher FDI inflow.
Infrastructure consists on communications, roadways, transportation, highways and
ports among others. In recent studies, Khadaroo and Seetanah (2010) addressed mainly
on transport infrastructure along with some other variables of FDI and evidenced the
positive significant contribution of infrastructure in captivating FDI. Though, the studies
of Akhtar (2000) and Aqeel and Nishat (2004) contributes towards the literature on FDI
for Pakistan, but these studies ignored the important determinant of FDI i.e.
infrastructure (Khadaroo & Seetanah, 2010).
Infrastructure can have different impact on developing and developed nations. In
developing economies, infrastructure has a significant attractiveness for FDI inflows
(Khadaroo and Seetanah, 2010; Asiedu, 2006). Sekkat and Varoudakis (2007) assess
that Infrastructure has a significant attractiveness of FDI even than that of openness and
investment climate in developing countries. Addison et al. (2006) acknowledge such
promotional impact only for developed nations but, on the other hand, such situation not
exists for developing countries. Whereas, Bae (2008) states that in developed countries,
infrastructure is not a motivator but an indicator to attract FDI in large emerging
economies.

Direct and Indirect Effect of Availability of Latest Technologies through Openness

on FDI
Availability of latest technologies has no direct impact on FDI. The result
declare that foreign direct investment in every country in ASEAN is not affected by
availability of latest technology. There are many other thing that foreign investor should
focused when do the FDI activities like political condition, economic growth and many
other (Sun, et al., 2002; WEF, 2012; Sarwedi, 2002). Yet availability of latest
technology in the host country of FDI is only the focused of foreign investor because
FDI in the host country become a driven factor for transfer technology in the host
country (Lai, et al., 2009). Maris (2013) declare multinational companies which do the
FDI activity will bring the latest technology that the latest technology that has
implemented in the origin companies to a subsidiary that will be built or acquisition
company. This happens because the subsidiaries and acquisition companies will adopt
the origin enterprise systems and tool of origin companies. Therefore, the availability of
latest technology is not a major factor in attracting foreign investors to invest their funds
in the country of FDI destination. Moreover, result of hypothesis 3 consistent with the
result of Maris (2013) and Lee (2014).
In addition to the direct effect on FDI, availability of latest technology also has
no effect on openness. These results contrast with Iyer et al. (2006) confirm these
findings and show that developing countries can increase their technological catch‐up
by opening up to trade and foreign direct investment. .Improvements in transport,
telecommunications and information technology, together with increased economic
integration and greater trade openness, have resulted in higher levels of technological
diffusion and increased mobility and accumulation of productive factors over time
(World Trade Report, 2013).

Direct and Indirect Effect of Firm-Level of Technology Absorption through

Openness on FDI
Firm-level of technology absorption has no direct impact on FDI. The result
declare that foreign direct investment in every country in ASEAN is not affected by
firm-level of technology absorption. However, these results are in contrast with the
results of the research Lee (2014) which states technologies absorption and innovation
capabilities are intimately depend upon the government and societal institutions.
Government and societal permission to absorption technology will help manager to
make increase their company level of technology absorption, when the company
become attractive it can increase the FDI inflow to the host-country.
In addition to the direct effect on FDI, firm-level of technology absorption also
has no effect on openness. These results contrast with Comin and Hobijn (2004) find
that the degree of openness to trade is one of the most important determinants of the
speed at which a country adopts more advanced technologies because it introduces the
pressures of foreign competition on incumbents, thereby reducing their payoff from
lobbying the government to deter the adoption of new technologies.

Direct and Indirect Effect of Government Prioritization of ICT through Openness

on FDI
Government prioritization of ICT has no direct impact on FDI. The results are
consistent with research Maris (2013) which states inflows of FDI in host country has
not affected by government prioritization of ICT. It is because of ICT is not major factor
in the business sector of the company in the country of FDI destination (Maris, 2013).
When government not concerned in ICT and having a weak investor protection it will
become disaster for FDI host country. Foreign investor will not make that country as
FDI destination (Ayogu and Bayat, 2010). In South Africa case which is declare by
Ayogu and Bayat (2010), When the government not have prioritization in ICT but
having good protection of investor, the FDI flow still good and not significant influence
by government prioritization of ICT (Ayogu and Bayat, 2010)
However, government prioritization of ICT has effect on openness. Some of
investor believe that ICT a crucial part of economic growth to increase the effective and
efficiency company. When the government not support and not supply the infrastructure
it will make investor to rethink again to invest in the host country. Developing countries
must develop more technological capability and greater flexibility to succeed in the
more demanding and asymmetric global environment it will increase openness,
especially in developing countries.
Since the implementation of recommendations provided by Hong Kong’s
telecommunication regulatory body (OFTA), the country was able to fully liberalize its
ICT market in 2001 and maximize an open ICT competition (ITU, 2007). Currently,
there are no limits on foreign ownership of the ICT sector and FDI inflow is encouraged
by the internal government. The openness of Hong Kong towards its ICT market and its
clear market conditions make the country an attractive place for ICT operators and
investors.
Direct and Indirect Effect of Accessibility of Digital Content through Openness on
FDI
Accessibility of digital content has direct impact on FDI. When government give
permission to free access digital content it can support the economic growth through
lowering cost of and facilitating access to service, notably in administration, education,
health and banking; providing access to research; and of course it can contributing to
better governance, a prerequisite to growth through increased participation,
accountability and transparency (Africa Partnership Forum, 2008). The result also
consistent with Maris (2013) and Lee (2014), this finding suggests that the accessibility
of digital content can attract foreign investors to invest their funds in Asia countries
OCED (2006) cited by Maris (2013) states that most of the business activities
increasingly depend on digital content. With the case of accessibility of digital content
form a country, investors are not going to worry about the business activities in the
country.
However, accessibility of digital content has no effect on openness. Clarke
(2004) declare the cross-country correlation suggests a possible causal relationship
between Internet use and exports, but tells us little about the direction of causality. That
is, even if the correlation is not spurious, we cannot determine whether trade openness
encourages Internet use, Internet use stimulates trade, or both. These results contrast
with Wallsten (2003) and Baliamoune (2002) find that Internet users made up a greater
share of the population in developing countries that are more open to trade. Other
studies have also found that additional measures of ICT use and investment are
correlated with various measures of openness. In general, the correlation between ICT
use and openness appears to be stronger in developing countries. Several of the papers
that find a positive correlation between measures of ICT use and openness focus on
developing countries (Baliamoune, 2002).

Effect of Openness on FDI

Openness has positive effect on FDI. It indicates that openness is one of many
factors that important to foreign investor when doing the foreign direct investment.
Trade openness enhances the integration of a nation’s trade regime into the global
economy requiring opening up of the external sector to the international community and
the dismantling of international trade barriers (Dean, et al, 1994). The results are
consistent with research Fahmi (2012) which states open market policy from
government which encourages international trade in the form of export and import.
Yasmin, et al (2003) states that domestic investment, labor force, external debt and trade
openness as the significant determinants of the flow of FDI. The impact of openness on
FDI depends on the type of investment. When investments are market-seeking, trade
restrictions (and therefore less openness) can have a positive impaction FDI (Asiedu,
2002). The reason stems from the “tariff jumping” hypothesis, which argues that foreign
firms that seek to serve local markets may decide to set up subsidiaries in the host
country if it is difficult to import their products to the country. In contrast, multinational
firms engaged in export-oriented investments may prefer to invest in a more open
economy since increased imperfections that accompany trade protection generally imply
higher transaction costs associated with exporting.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Conclusions
Based on the analysis and hypothesis tests, it can be concluded that GDP growth,
GFCF, accessibility of digital content and openness have direct effect on FDI, and
government prioritization of ICT has direct effect on FDI. Direct effect in this research
is greater than indirect effect on FDI

Implications
According to the results of the test have been done, there are several
implications resulting from this research. Role of openness for ICT driving factors are
fit properly. Most of research treat openness for enhances the integration of a nation’s
trade regime into the global economy. Then from this research it can be seen the role of
openness- as a macro sector - can influence the ICT and FDI. It indicate that in
economic international openness has its portion and impact also.
GDP growth, GFCF and ICT as factors for economic growth in economic
international also proven from this research. Therefore, corporate, governance,
researcher or other parties can more concern about this issue. For that reason, each
country should prepare strategies, policies, implementing ICT in all sectors, availability
of infrastructure and facilities in order to create conducive climate and win the
competition over other countries in attracting foreign investors.

REFERENCE
Addison, T., and Heshmati, A. 2004. The New Global Determinants of FDI Flows to
Developing Countries: The Importance of ICT and Democratization. Research
in Banking and Finance (Vol. 4, pp. 151-186). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Addison, T., Khansnobis, G.B., and Mayrotas, G. 2006. Introduction and Overview.
World Economy, 29(1), 1-8.
Africa Partnership Forum. 2008. Climate Challenges to Africa: A Call for Action.
Akthar, H. M. 2000. The Determinants of FDI in Pakistan: An Econometrics Analysis.
The Lahore Journal of Economics, 5:1
Aqeel, A., and Nishat M. 2004. The Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in
Pakistan. The Pakistan Development Review, 43(4) II, 651-664.
ASEAN. 2013. Investing in ASEAN 2013-2014.
ASEAN. 2014. ASEAN Investment Report 2013-2014: FDI Development and Regional
Value Chains. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat.
Asiedu, E. 2002. On the Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment to Developing.
Asiedu, E. 2006. Foreign Direct Investment in Africa: The role of Government Policy,
Institutions and Political Instability. World Economy, 29(1), 63-77.
Ayogu, Melvin D. and Fiona Bayat, 2010. ICT Governance: South Africa.
Telecommunication Policy 34 (2010), 244-247.
Azeez, A. K. M. and Begum, M. 2009. International remittances: A source of
development Finance. International NGO Journal, Vol. 4 (5), May, 299-304.
Bae, M. T. 2008. Foreign Direct Investment Inflows and ICT Configurations. Pacific
Focus, 17(2), 217-226.
Baliamoune, Mina N., 2002. The New Economy and Developing Countries. WIDER
Discussion Paper # 2002/77, World Institute for Development Economics
Research, Helsinki, Finland.
Bart Hobijn and Diego Comin, 2004. Historical Technology Adoption in a Neoclassical
Model, 2004 Meeting Papers 106, Society for Economic Dynamics.
Clarke, George R.G and Scott J. Wallsten. 2004. Has the Internet Increased Trade?
Evidence from Industrial and Developing Countries. Mimeo, World Bank,
Washington DC.
Dean, Judith M., Seema Desai, and James Riedel. 1994. Trade Policy Reform in
Developing Countries since 1985: A Review of the Evidence. World Bank
Discussion Paper, 267.
Fahmi, Muhammad R. 2012. Analyzing The Relationship Between Tax Holiday and
Foreign Direct Investment in Indonesia. Master Thesis.
Ghozali, Imam. 2006. Aplikasi Analisis Multivariat dengan Program SPSS. Semarang:
Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
ITU. 2007. Measuring the Information Society 2007, ICT Opportunity Index and World
Telecommunication/ICT indicators.
Iyer, K., Rambaldi, A., and Tang, K.K.. 2006. Globalisation and The Technology Gap:
Regional and Time Evidence. Leading Economic and Managerial Issues
Involving Globalisation, Chapter 15, Nova Scotia.
Khadaroo, A. J., and Seetanah, B. 2010. Transport Infrastructure and Foreign Direct
Investment. Journal of International Development, 22, 103–123.
Lai, Mingyoung, H. Wang and S. Zhu. 2009. Double-edged Effects of the Technology
Gap and Technology Spillovers: Evidence from the Chinese Industrial Sector.
China Economics Review, 20 (2009), 414-424.
Lee, Samuel David. 2014. Information and Communication Technology Driving
Factors on Corporate Governance and Its Influence on Foreign Direct
Investment. Master Thesis.
Maris, Andrea W. 2013. Foreign Direct Investment and Its Driving Factors from
Information and Communication Technology Perspective: Case Study in Asia.
Master Thesis (Unpublished).
Michie, L, Oughton C. and Pianta M. 2002. Innovation and the Economy. Int Review
Application Economics 2, 2002, 16:3.
Moosa, I. A., 2002. Foreign Direct Investment: Theory, Evidence and Practice. New
York: PALGRAVE.
Nur’ainy, Renny. 2010. Pengaruh Implementasi Good Corporate Governance
Terhadap Return Saham Melalui Profitabilitas, Leverage dan Likuiditas,
Dissertation (Unpublished).
Rininta, Nurrachmi. 2011. The Causality of FDI Inflow and Economic Growth in
Indonesia. MPRA Paper No. 46572. International Islamic University Malaysia.
Sarwedi. 2002. Investasi Asing Langsung di Indonesia dan Faktor yang
Mempengaruhinya. Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, Vol. 4, No. 1, Mei 2002:
17-35.
Sekkat, K., and Varoudakis, A.M. 2007. Openness, Investment Climate and FDI in
Developing Countries. Review of Development Economics, 11(4), 607-620.
Sun, Qian, W. Tong and Q. Yu. 2002. Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment
across China. Journal of International Money and Finance, 21, 79-113.
Wallsten, Scott, 2003. Regulation and Internet Use in Developing Countries. Policy
Research Working Paper # 2979, World Bank, Washington DC.
WEF. 2008. The Global Information Technology Report 2008-2009: Mobility in a
Networked World. World Economic Forum.
WEF. 2009. The Global Information Technology Report 2009-2010: ICT for
Sustainability. World Economic Forum.
WEF. 2010. The Global Information Technology Report 2010-2011: Transformations
2.0. World Economic Forum.
WEF. 2011. The Global Information Technology Report 2012: Living in a
Hyperconnected World. World Economic Forum.
WEF. 2012. The Global Information Technology Report 2013: Growth and Jobs in a
Hyperconnected World. World Economic Forum.
WEF. 2013. The Global Information Technology Report 2014: Rewards and Risks of
Big Data. World Economic Forum.
WTO. 2013. World Trade Report 2013: Factors shaping the future of world trade.
Yasmin, B., A. Hussain, and M. A. Chaudhary. 2003. Analysis of Factors Affecting
Foreign Direct Investment in Developing Countries. Pakistan Economic and
Social Review Volume XLI, No. 1&2 (2003), pp. 59-75.