Fabrice Defever

The Spatial Organization of Multinational Firms

Using six years of firm-level data covering 224 regions of the enlarged European Union, we evaluate the importance to a firm of locating its activities (production, headquarters, R&D, logistics and sales) close together. We find that, after controlling for regional characteristics, being closely located to a previous investment positively affects firm location choice. However, the impact of distance is dependent on the type of investment (production or service). While within-firm co-location is important for both service and production activities, only production plants are likely to be located close to prior production investments. In this latter case, national borders have a surprisingly positive effect, increasing the probability of choosing a nearby location, but on the other side of the border.

The Spatial Organization of Multinational Firms - L’Organisation Spatiale De L’Entreprise Plurinationale

Using six years of firm‐level data covering 224 regions of the enlarged European Union, we evaluate the importance to a firm of locating its activities (production, headquarters, R&D, logistics and sales) close together. We find that, after controlling for regional characteristics, being closely located to a previous investment positively affects firm location choice. However, the impact of distance is dependent on the type of investment (production or service). The impact dies out faster for service activities. Finally, we show that a surprisingly positive effect comes from locating a new production plant close to an existing production investment, but in another country. A l’aide de donnees au niveau des firmes sur une periode de six ans pour 224 regions de l’Union europeenne agrandie, on examine l’importance pour une firme de localiser ses activites (production, siege social, R&D, logistique et ventes) tout pres les unes des autres. On decouvre que, tenant compte des caracteristiques regionales, etre proche de la localisation d’un investissement anterieur a un effet positif sur le choix de localisation. Cependant, l’impact de la distance depend du type d’investissement (production ou service). L’impact s’attenue plus vite pour les activites de service. Finalement, on montre qu’il y a un impact remarquablement positif qui vient de la localisation d’un nouvel etablissement de production pres d’un investissement de production existant, mais dans un autre pays.

Incomplete Contracts and the Impact of Globalization on Consumer Welfare

We embed a North-South trade model into an incomplete contracts setting where the production of heterogeneous firms can be geographically separated. When a Northern headquarter contracts with a Southern supplier instead of a Northern supplier, the presence of international incomplete contracts may lead to a higher price. As a result, trade liberalization, that induces offshoring, is not necessarily welfare-enhancing for consumers, despite the lower cost of labor in the South. In addition, firms which use the supplier’s component intensively, offshore their supplier in the South using outsourcing. As trade costs fall, less component-intensive firms also offshore, but by vertically integrating their supplier. We argue that this organizational change increases production-shifting in the South, implying that a larger number of varieties will be produced in the South where contracts are incomplete. We show that, this may reduce consumer welfare in both countries.

All These Worlds are Yours, Except India: The Effectiveness of Export Subsidies in Nepal

This paper evaluates the effect on firm-level export outcomes of the Cash Incentive Scheme for Exports program provided by the Government of Nepal. The analysis utilizes customs-level data for 2011-14, combined with information on the subsidy payments made to individual firms provided by the Central Bank of Nepal. The Cash Incentive Scheme for Exports cash subsidy is available to firms exporting a select group of products, and requires firms to export to countries other than India. Overall, the subsidy has not produced a significant impact on firm-level export values, prices, quantities, or their growth rates. However, the study finds a small positive effect on the number of eligible products exported to countries other than India and the number of destination markets reached among firms that receive the subsidy. These results are consistent with the fact that the subsidy was granted primarily to large exporters that were already shipping eligible products to countries other than India. The findings suggest that although the cash subsidy has not produced a significant increase in exports, it has achieved a positive impact on export diversification for firms that were already satisfying the schemes eligibility criteria.