Hosting sports events to attract international tourists is a common policy practised by many host governments. Hosting mega-sports events like the Olympics is said to leave a legacy that could impact the attractiveness of a country/city in the long term. However, the opportunity to host these mega-events is limited and expensive. This study considers the economic impact of hosting annual international sporting events, specifically the extent to which Formula 1, ATP Tennis and PGA Golf can attract international tourists. Using monthly data from 1998 to 2018, we show that the effect differs from one sport to another within a country and the same sport across countries. Hosting the Formula 1 is most effective for Canada but has no significant impact in Australia and the United Kingdom. ATP Tennis and PGA Golf have a significant impact on at least two countries. Policy-makers must consider carefully the sport that gives the best bang-for-the-buck.
Hosting sports events to attract international tourists is a common policy practised by many
host governments. Hosting mega-sports events like the Olympics are said to leave a legacy
that could impact the attractiveness of a country/city in the long term. However, the
opportunity to host these mega-events are limited and expensive. This study considers the
economic impact of hosting annual international sporting events, specifically the extent to
which Formula-1, ATP Tennis, and PGA Golf can attract international tourists. Using
monthly data from 1985 – 2018 and we show that the effect differs from one sport to another
within a country, and the same sport across countries. Hosting the Formula-1 is most
effective for Canada but has no significant impact in the UK. ATP tennis has a significant
impact on all three countries but may not be the star event. Policy-makers must consider
carefully the sport that gives the best bang-for-the-buck.
Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy
China's outward FDI reached a peak in 2016, making it as important a foreign investor as Germany, France and the United Kingdom. In this paper, we investigate the main motivations behind Chinese investments in developing countries, Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in particular. Although the size of Chinese investment in CEE is small, the region is strategic for China as it is a gateway into Western Europe under the Belt Road Initiative. As new or future members of the EU, the CEE countries also provide access to the single market. We find that the motivations to invest in developing countries differ according to regions. Based on outward FDI data provided by the Chinese authorities, the number of Chinese FDI greenfield and M&A projects fromFinancial TimesandZephyrrespectively, as well as face-to-face interviews with companies with investments in CEE, we find that for the case of CEE, domestic markets, access to the larger EU market, strategic assets like technology and prior relationship with the CEE are main reasons for investing.
Journal of Business Strategy
Chinese investments abroad are being scrutinized more stringently because host governments fear that Chinese companies would steal domestically grown technology and know-how or be duped into a debt trap. The purpose of this paper is to provide a narrative of Chinese investments in a region that is neither developed nor underdeveloped – Central and Eastern Europe. The authors aim to provide an alternative view of Chinese investments abroad.
The authors base their narrative on face-to-face semi-structured interviews with eight Chinese firms that carried out mergers and acquisition activities in the region.
The respondents claim that they saved companies and jobs in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. Access to the China market and elsewhere has increased as a result of these investments. Transfer of technology has gone both ways depending on which partner had superior technology.
It is important that Chinese investors emphasize the positive spillover effects from their investments, such as jobs saved, potential technology transfer and increased exports, when applying for FDI approval from host governments. Host governments, on the other hand, should evaluate each Chinese investment on its individual merits.
There is little that has been researched on the contributions of FDI from developing countries to host economies. This paper is an early attempt in this direction.
China’s annual economic growth has slowed since the global financial crisis, dropping from 14.2% in 2007 to 6.9% in 2017. The question as to whether China would fall into the middle-income trap (MIT) has attracted plenty of discussions. However, China is a diverse country with uneven economic development. Some provinces are far more advanced than others. Therefore, it might be inaccurate to look at China as one single entity to make a judgment on the MIT issue. Instead, looking into each province and comparing provincial-level differences would be more insightful.
This case is essentially about economic growth and development in general, and that of China in particular. It makes the topic of growth more interesting by discussing the triggering factors of the MIT through comparing the differences between a “trapped” and an “escaped” province, i.e., Shaanxi and Jiangsu. To alleviate the regional development gap, Shaanxi and Jiangsu became paired poverty alleviation partners in 1996 under the guidance of the Chinese central government. However, more than 20 years have passed, yet there is still a huge gap between the two provinces in many fields. Jiangsu’s GDP per capita has surpassed the range of MIT, while Shaanxi’s has not and is very likely to be trapped with the continuing slowdown of its economic growth. The key difference between the two provinces is not their resources, but their development policies.
the Middle Income Trap
The One Belt One Road (OBOR) project is perhaps China's most significant international relations initiative in recent times. It is based on openness, harmony, inclusivity, mutual benefit and market operations and aims to connect the economically vibrant East Asia and the developed Europe by land and by sea, and in the process, it brings growth and development to tens of countries along the modern Silk routes. In this paper, we compare the impact of the main initiatives of OBOR, namely enhancements in physical infrastructure and improvements in border administration, on the trade of countries that have signed on to this project, especially countries along the six economic corridors. We find overwhelming evidence that shows improvements in border administration has the greatest impact on exports of corridor countries. Although physical infrastructure is important for trade, the Chinese government should place equal attention to improvements in trade facilitation to ensure trade routes operate seamlessly across the various corridors.
one belt one road