Search results

Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.

Multinational companies whose importance has increased or improved depending on global capitalisation and travelling around the world without knowing borders have activities in developing countries due to suitable conditions (e.g. cheap workers costs, flexible legal arrangements). In this study, the precautions set forth to prevent environmental troubles, to obliterate or to minimise it, are the activities undertaken by the multinational companies which are considered. In the study, Turkey as a case country in which this subject was studied. Globalisation is the last step of economical sovereignty set up by means of multinational companies all over the world by capitalism which affects our age deeply. Unlimited capital stocks of capitalism and its economical development aim “whatever the result is” fastens the problems internationally as a result of not recognizing the social developments and justice, inequality, poverty and unsocializing people in developing countries. As a result of this, we're having environmental problems, the speed of nature's being consumed has been increased and there have been troubles almost every field of the social lives. However there is no one else who accepts the responsibilities of cost and social policies in the global economies in which international capital and global corporations decide on the rules; there is also no one else who accepts the responsibilities of environmental pollution and natural possessions' destruction as the result of the activities of international capital and global companies. The reason for this is that it is assumed that the government must take the responsibility “to protect and to development the environment”. According to this idea, protecting and developing the environment has been supplying public use and public service. Thus public service is the duty of the state. Environmental rights subject, known as third generation rights or corporation rights, is to protect the environment and to development it. People who have the environmental rights are those actors who will make use of these rights and who will have the responsibilities of these rights. The people who will make use of these rights and who will have the responsibilities are generally the same actors. These are not only the people but also public and special institutions including communities; states and public; and the next generation. In this case, all the right owners who have the rights to live in a healthy and well balanced environment are obliged to protect and to development the environment at the same time, including the multinational companies. Every economic activity has an effect on the environment. Multinational companies have activities in the fields like gold mining, petrol, chemicals and food industry which have high potential effects on the environment in developing countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and Nigeria. On this point the question why multinational companies choose these countries should be answered. The answer doesn't only help to explain the issue's political sides but also it could show that the most dirtying foreign capital activities take place in developing countries. Why multinational companies have chosen these developing countries was studied under two titles. (1) Dirtying industries are choosing the countries which don't have severe legal arrangements, (2) The public opinion in developing countries is unconscious of the harms that economical activities give to the environment. If the first finding hadn't been true, the activities in most polluting sectors wouldn't have been directed to the countries where environmental laws are flexible/flexibly practised. Besides, the public opinion in these low educational level countries doesn't have enough knowledge about the environmental problems and importance of environment. This information also gives assurance to the multinational companies that they don't face with the opposing activities of the public there. Nevertheless, foreign capital is wanted by these countries to supply new technologies, to supply the political and economical support of the countries which export development and capital, to open their economy to other countries and to protect the environment of the country. But, in practice, these countries which are under pressure to pay their debts don't pay attention to the ecological defects of the activities let the multinational companies to settle in the country, import the wastes which supply currency entrance, to be stored in the national borders and to be reused without evaluation. Foreign capital entrance in gold mining fields is a small example about being served and defended as a gold opportunity to pay Turkey's foreign debts. As a result, multinational companies are unsuccessful in sharing environmental responsibilities in the developing countries. Multinational companies have been making use of the opportunities that the environment presents but they don't do their duties to environmental rights. The efforts by multinational companies have been improving as prevention of increasing the environmental standards. Related to this, in the countries mentioned and also in Turkey, where economical activity fields like ecological sensitivity isn't assured enough by law and isn't protected wholly is a kind of great danger for Turkey.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate how corporate philanthropy (CP) can affect consumer perceptions of Japanese multinationals, for which there exists strong animosity in Asia, and how this animosity can be attenuated.

The study first examines Japanese firms in China (Study 1) and then Japanese, European and local firms in Korea (Study 2).

The results suggest that CP activities can have a positive effect on the consumer recognition of company localness and they can also attenuate company animosity for foreign multinationals. In addition, the findings suggest that Japanese multinationals can benefit greatly from CP activities in Asia than for domestic and other foreign firms.

The study found that consumers do not have ethnocentric attribution biases in evaluations of CP activities by foreign multinationals, as suggested by attribution theory (Hewstone, 1990; Nisbett, 1971).

There is limited evidence supporting the effects of CP activities by foreign multinationals from a country of origin for which there exists strong animosity.

The aim of this paper is to discuss the apparent paradox that multinational firms may and sometimes do pursue social benefits as their main objective.

This paper explores the grey area that lays between some consolidated analytical concepts, namely: spillovers, corporate responsibility, social cooperation and non‐governmental organizations. It is in this grey area that “social multinationals” can be placed and examined. Scattered evidence is provided to illustrate the emergence of this relatively new phenomenon.

There are weak signals that the “social multinational” is a viable institutional innovation. The economic rationale is mainly represented by what could be defined in Smithian terms as the “selfless component of self‐interest”, combined with the ex ante and ex post advantages associated to multinationality. Institutional and technological transformations have created opportunities for the emergence of this phenomenon over the past three decades. However, there is a need for specifically designed policies to reinforce this relatively new trend in international business.

The paper proposes a new analytical category and draws insights on its potential implications for welfare, poverty reduction and economic development.

Although employees are considered key stakeholders, they receive limited attention in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature compared to other stakeholders such as customers. This study aims to address this gap, investigating how different factors, including CSR communication, may affect employee perceptions, and to what extent they can influence or be influenced by CSR activity.

Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data from three multinationals (MNCs) operating in Bangladesh. Mid- and entry-level employees from different departments, namely, marketing, logistics, human resources, IT and finance, were approached for data collection. It is important to note that all the study participants were Bangladeshi.

This study demonstrates how CSR perceptions, shaped by the level of employee awareness, personal beliefs about CSR and perceived motivation for adopting CSR, strengthen psychological ties between employees and their organisation. One-way CSR communication adopted by these MNCs disseminates positive information about an organisation’s contribution to society and creates an aspirational and ideational image, which enhances identification, evokes positive in-group biases and encourages employees to defend their organisation against criticism. This study further demonstrates that employee CSR engagement can galvanise their experience of organisational identity, enhance their pride and reinforce their organisational identification.

Drawing on social identity theory and the CSR communication model proposed by Morsing and Schultz (2006), this study aims to understand employees’ CSR perceptions and the possible impact of this on their behaviour. Previous studies largely focus on customers’ perceptions of these activities, which means the link between CSR perception and employee behaviour remains unclear. The current study suggests that employees working in Bangladesh will not withdraw support from their organisations if CSR is used to build reputation or public image. The findings extend the literature by arguing that some employees in developing countries not only seek to improve their status by working in a reputed organisation but also tend to engage with CSR activities undertaken by their organisation.

The purpose of this paper is to warn policymakers, by examining certain aspects of policy, possibly overlooked, against overestimating the power of corporate social responsibility (CSR) idea to inhibit tax avoidance by the multinationals.

By examining, with narrative and qualitative means, existing insights such as ones with regard to the inefficiency of the public sector.

Implication that the following three factors could not co-exist: promoting CSR activities, which include moral tax payment by the multinational corporations; requiring the multinationals to refrain from immorally reducing effective tax rates and keeping the current level of public utilities.

To sound an alarm to tax policymakers who are particularly addicted to the base erosion and profit shifting by multinational enterprises recently by this new implication mixing up with existing findings with regard to the CSR idea and cost-inefficiency character of the public sector activities.

Among the prominent economic trends in recent decades is the exponential increase in flows of goods and capital driven by technological progress and falling of restrictions. A key driver of this phenomenon has been the cross-border production, foreign investment, and trade both final and intermediate goods by multinational corporations. Research has sought to understand how foreign direct investment (FDI) affects host economies. This paper reviews the main theories and empirical evidence of two streams of literature: the mechanisms by which multinational activity might create positive effects and externalities to countries and the role of complementary local conditions, also known as “absorptive capacities,” that allow a country to reap the benefits of FDI paying particular attention to the role of factor markets, reallocation effects, and the linkages generated between foreign and domestic firms. The survey focuses mainly on work related to developing countries.

Multinational structure has been linked to operational flexibilities that can improve corporate adaptability and a knowledge‐based view suggests that multinational resource diversity can facilitate responsive opportunities. The enhanced maneuverability from this can reduce earnings volatility and hence the corporate performance risk. But, the internationalization process may also require irreversible investments that increase corporate exposures and leave the risk implications of multinational enterprize somewhat ambiguous. Hence, the purpose of the paper is to present an empirical study of the implied relationships between the degree of multinationality and various risk measures including downside risk, upside potential, and performance risk.

The paper provides a brief literature review, develops hypotheses, and tests them in two‐stage least square regressions on archival data to control for pre‐selection biases.

The analyses indicate that multinationality is associated with lower downside risk as well as higher upside potential and leads to reduced performance risk. The study finds no trace of diminishing effects from higher degrees of multinationality.

The empirical study uses a sample of large US‐based corporations, which could affect the generalizability of results. However, this is consistent with other studies and eases comparability of findings.

The findings add to the ongoing debate about the risk effects of a multinational corporate structure and confirms that a diverse multinational presence is associated with positive risk outcomes.

The paper complements a limited number of studies with equivocal results and adopts alternative risk outcome measures. The study extends the industry scope by introducing a comprehensive sample of firms operating in different manufacturing and service businesses.

The traditional view of the multinational firm, from the early analyses in the 1960s and early 1970s, is one of a large industrial company with operations in multiple countries and a centralized chain of command. By definition, a multinational firm has activities in more than two countries. Although this simple definition is not widely used, it is a reasonable baseline from which to begin thinking about such firms. If the firm has sales operations in multiple countries, production in multiple countries, or some other permutation of international business activities physically present in multiple countries, then it is multinational.

The purpose of this paper is to synthesize a manufacturing value network for digital multinationals that combines the global reach of multinationals, the power of platform business models and digitalization. Toward this, the authors assess the critical roles platform ecosystems, and Industry 4.0 play in resolving the key challenges associated with asset specificity, location specificity and information asymmetry, inherent in the conventional business models of manufacturing multinationals.

The authors take an exploratory approach in reviewing industry literature and analyzing implementations of digital technologies in manufacturing and supply chain processes at four large manufacturing multinationals from diverse industry sectors, from electronics to packaged food production. The authors also identify how value-creation activities are relocated, and how players collaborate to create and capture value. Consequently, the authors abstract a framework for global value network of manufacturing multinationals.

With changing definitions of industry, competition and organizations, the authors’ framework for manufacturing value network establishes the ways digitalization can be integrated in the global businesses of manufacturing multinationals, realizing the combinatorial effect of Industry 4.0 and platform ecosystems. The transformation redefines the ways multinationals have been leveraging their ownership-location-internalization (OLI) advantages. The authors recognize that the multinational orchestrator plays a critical role in creating shared goals for platform participants and governing the dynamics. In addition, the participants' propensity to trust the platform and the perceived trustworthiness of the orchestrator shape the scope and boundaries of the platform.

The authors raise critical questions about the role of multinational orchestrator and trust dimensions. In addition, the OLI-platform paradigm that incorporates the combinatorial effect of platform ecosystem and Industry 4.0 explains how multinationals create and capture value in new ways.