This article estimates the wage effects of foreign direct investment (FDI) using firm-level and linked employer-employee panel data containing a large number of foreign acquisitions over a long period of rapid development in Hungary. Matching on pre-acquisition data, the authors find that much of the raw foreign wage premium represents selection bias, but that foreign acquisition nevertheless raises average wages by 15 to 29% when controlling for fixed effects for firms and highly detailed worker groups, and by 6% with firm–worker match effects. Acquired firms that are later divested to domestic owners experience a substantial reversal of the positive acquisition effect. No type of worker—defined by education, experience, gender, incumbency, and occupational group—experiences wage decline, but the patterns suggest skill bias in the gains from acquisition. The evidence implies a strong cross-firm correlation of FDI wage and productivity differentials, and an inverse relationship between FDI effects and economic development level of the sending country relative to Hungary.
AbadieAlbertoDrukkerDavidHerrJane LeberImbensGuido. 2004. Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata. Stata Journal4(3): 290–311.
2.
AbowdJohn M.KramarzFrancisMargolisDavid N.1999. High wage workers and high wage firms. Econometrica67: 251–333.
3.
AitkenBrian J.HarrisonAnn E.1999. Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela. American Economic Review89: 605–18.
4.
AitkenBrian J.HarrisonAnn E.LipseyRobert E.1996. Wages and foreign ownership. A comparative study of Mexico, Venezuela and the United States. Journal of International Economics40(3–4): 345–71.
5.
AlmeidaRita. 2007. The labor market effects of foreign owned firms. Journal of International Economics72(1): 75–96.
6.
AltonjiJoseph G.BlankRebecca M.1999. Race and gender in the labor market. In AshenfelterOrleyCardDavid (Eds.), Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. 3C, pp. 3143–59. New Holland and Amsterdam: Elsevier.
7.
AltonjiJoseph G.ElderTodd E.TaberChristopher R.2005. Selection on observed and unobserved variables: Assessing the effectiveness of Catholic schools. Journal of Political Economy113(1): 151–84.
8.
AndrewsMartynBellmannLutzSchankThorstenUpwardRichard. 2007. The takeover and selection effects of foreign ownership in Germany: An analysis using linked worker-firm data. Globalisation and Economic Policy Research Paper No. 07/08. Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham.
9.
ArellanoManuel. 1987Computing robust standard errors for within-groups estimators. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics49(4): 431–34.
10.
ArnoldJens M.JavorcikBeata S.2009. Gifted kids or pushy parents? Foreign direct investment and plant productivity in Indonesia. Journal of International Economics79(1): 42–53.
11.
BenfratelloLuigiSembenelliAlessandro. 2006. Foreign ownership and productivity: Is the direction of causality so obvious?International Journal of Industrial Organization24(4): 733–51.
BraconierHenrikNorbackPehr-JohanUrbanDieter. 2005. Multinational enterprises and wage costs: Vertical FDI revisited. Journal of International Economics67: 446–70.
14.
BrownCharlesHamiltonJamesMedoffJames. 1990. Employers Large and Small. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
15.
BrownJ. DavidEarleJohn S.TelegdyÁlmos. 2006. The productivity effects of privatization: Longitudinal estimates from Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine. Journal of Political Economy114(1): 61–99.
16.
BrownJ. DavidEarleJohn S.TelegdyÁlmos. 2010. Employment and wage effects of privatization: Evidence from Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine. Economic Journal120(545): 683–708.
17.
CleeveEmmanuel. 2008. How effective are fiscal incentives to attract FDI to sub-Saharan Africa?Journal of Developing Areas42(1): 135–53.
18.
ConyonMartin J.GirmaSourafelThompsonSteveWrightPeter W.2002. The productivity and wage effects of foreign acquisitions in the United Kingdom. Journal of Industrial Economics50(1): 85–102.
19.
EarleJohn S.TelegdyÁlmos. 2008. Ownership and wages: Estimating public-private and foreign-domestic differentials with LEED from Hungary, 1986–2003. In BenderStefanLaneJuliaShawKathrynAnderssonFredrikWachterTill von (Eds.), Analysis of Firms and Employees: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, pp. 229–52. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
ElekPéterScharleÁgotaSzabóBálintSzabóPéter András. 2009. A bérekhez kapcsolódó adóeltitkolás Magyarországon (Undeclared earnings and tax evasion in Hungary). ELTE Working Papers in Public Finance No. 23. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University.
21.
FelicianoZadiaLipseyRobert E.2006. Foreign ownership, wages, and wage changes in U.S. industries, 1987–92. Contemporary Economic Policy24(1): 74–91.
22.
FosfuriAndreaMottaMassimoRondeThomas. 2001. Foreign direct investment and spillovers through workers’ mobility. Journal of International Economics53: 205–22.
23.
GirmaSourafelGörgHolger. 2007. Evaluating the foreign ownership wage premium using a difference-in-differences matching approach. Journal of International Economics72: 97–112.
24.
GokhaleJagadeeshGroshenErica L.NeumarkDavid. 1995. Do hostile takeovers reduce extramarginal wage payments?Review of Economics and Statistics77(3): 470–85.
25.
GouxDominiqueMaurinEric. 1999. Persistence of interindustry wage differentials: A reexamination using matched worker-firm panel data. Journal of Labor Economics17(3): 492–533.
26.
GroshenErica. 1991Sources of intra-industry wage dispersion: How much do employers matter?Quarterly Journal of Economics106: 869–84.
27.
HarrisRichardRobinsonCatherine. 2002. The effect of foreign acquisitions on total factor productivity: Plant-level evidence from U.K manufacturing, 1987–1992. Review of Economics and Statistics84(3): 562–68.
28.
HaskelJonathan E.PereiraSoniaSlaughterMatthew. 2007. Does inward FDI boost the productivity of domestic firms?Review of Economics and Statistics89(3): 482–96.
29.
HeckmanJames J.IchimuraHidehikoToddPetra. 1998. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Review of Economic Studies65(2): 261–94.
30.
HellersteinJudith K.NeumarkDavid. 1999. Sex, wages, and productivity: An empirical analysis of Israeli firm-level data. International Economic Review40(1): 95–123.
31.
HeymanFredrikSjöholmFredrikTingvallPatrik Gustavsson. 2006. Acquisitions, multinationals and wage dispersion. IFN Working Paper No. 675. Stockholm: Research Institute for Industrial Economics.
32.
HeymanFredrikSjöholmFredrikTingvallPatrik Gustavsson. 2007. Is there really a foreign ownership wage premium? Evidence from matched employer-employee data. Journal of International Economics73: 355–76.
33.
HijzenAlexanderMartinsPedro S.SchankThorstenUpwardRichard. 2013. Foreign-owned firms around the world: A comparative analysis of wages and employment at the micro-level. European Economic Review60: 170–88.
HuttunenKristiina. 2007. The effect of foreign acquisition of employment and wages: Evidence from Finnish establishments. Review of Economics and Statistics89(3): 497–509.
36.
ImbensGuidoRubinDonald B.2010. Causal Inference in Statistics, and in the Social and Biomedical Sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.
37.
ImbensGuido W.WooldridgeJeffrey M.2009. Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature47(1): 5–86.
38.
JacobsonLouisLaLondeRobertSullivanDaniel. 1993. Earnings losses of displaced workers. American Economic Review83(4): 685–709.
39.
JavorcikBeata. 2004. Does foreign direct investment increase the productivity of domestic firms? In search of spillovers through backward linkages. American Economic Review94(3): 605–27.
40.
KézdiGábor. 2004. Robust standard error estimation in fixed-effects panel models. Hungarian Statistical Review, Special English Vol. 9: 95–116.
41.
LichtenbergFrank R.SiegelDonald. 1990. The effect of ownership changes on the employment and wages of central office and other personnel. Journal of Law and Economics33(2): 383–408.
42.
LipseyRobert. 2002. Home and host country effects of FDI. NBER Working Paper No. 9293. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
43.
LipseyRobert E.SjöholmFredrik. 2004. Foreign direct investment, education and wages in Indonesian manufacturing. Journal of Development Economics73(1): 415–22.
MartinsPedro. 2011. Paying more to hire the best? Foreign firms, wages and worker mobility. Economic Inquiry49(2): 349–63.
46.
McGuckinRobert H.NguyenSang V.2001. The impact of ownership changes: A view from labor markets. International Journal of Industrial Organization19(5): 739–62.
47.
MoranTheodore H.2011. Foreign Direct Investment and Development: Launching a Second Generation of Policy Research. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.
48.
ÑopoHugo. 2008. Matching as a tool to decompose wage gaps. Review of Economics and Statistics90(2): 290–99.
49.
OmanCharles. 2000. Policy Competition for Foreign Direct Investment. A Study of Competition among Governments to Attract FDI. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD).
50.
OnaranÖzlemStockhammerEngelbert. 2008. The effect of FDI and foreign trade on wages in the Central and Eastern European countries in the post-transition era: A sectoral analysis for the manufacturing industry. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics19(1): 66–80.
51.
OrazemPeter F.VodopivecMilan. 2009. Do market pressures induce economic efficiency? The case of Slovenian manufacturing, 1994–2001. Southern Economic Journal76(2): 553–76.
52.
[OECD] Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. 2000. OECD Reviews of Foreign Direct Investment: Hungary. Paris: OECD.
53.
PencavelJohn. 1991. Labor Markets under Trade Unionism: Employment, Wages, and Hours. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
54.
RosenbaumPaul R.RubinDonald B.1983. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika70(1): 41–55.
55.
Sabirianova PeterKlaraSvejnarJanTerrellKatherine. 2005. Distance to the efficiency frontier and FDI spillovers. Journal of the European Economic Association, Papers and Proceedings3(2–3): 576–86.
56.
ShleiferAndreiSummersLarry H.1988. Breach of trust in hostile takeovers. In AuerbachAlan (Ed.), Corporate Takeovers: Causes and Consequences, pp. 33–56. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
57.
SiegelDonald S.SimonsKenneth L.LindstromTomas. 2009. Ownership change, productivity, and human capital: New evidence from matched employer-employee data. In DunneTimJensonBradRobertsMark J. (Eds.), Producer Dynamics: New Evidence from Micro Data, pp. 397–442. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
58.
SzakadátLászló. 1993. Property rights in a socialist economy: The case of Hungary. In EarleJohnFrydmanRomanRapaczynskiAndzrej (Eds.), Privatization in the Transition to a Market Economy. Studies of Preconditions and Policies in Eastern Europe, pp. 17–45. London: Pinter Publishers.
59.
TroskeKenneth R.1999. Evidence on the employer size-wage premium from worker-establishment matched data. Review of Economics and Statistics81(1): 15–26.
60.
WaldkirchAndreasOfosuAndra. 2010. Foreign presence, spillovers, and productivity: Evidence from Ghana. World Development38(8): 1114–26.
61.
World Bank. 2002. Transition, The First Ten Years: Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
