Publication: Metodologías de valoración del riesgo país en la inversión extrajera directa: ¿Qué riesgos comportan?
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2014
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Instituto Complutense de Estudios Internacionales (ICEI)
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Impredecible, subjetivo, escurridizo y difícil de encerrar en modelos formales son algunos calificativos que expertos analistas han atribuido al riesgo país. Estos rasgos no sorprenden si tenemos en cuenta que el riesgo país emana de la esfera política y pone de manifiesto toda la complejidad de la realidad sociopolítica, económica y financiera de un país. El riesgo país en el comercio internacional se circunscribe a la insolvencia que esa realidad compleja pueda ocasionar al estado o a una firma que opere en el país. En cambio, en las operaciones de inversión extranjera directa los riesgos están relacionados con las pérdidas que pudiera generar al inversor, minorando sus derechos de propiedad, dañando sus activos o mermando su actividad. La valoración del riesgo país es imprescindible para las empresas, a la hora de tomar decisiones de internacionalización, y para los países, en el diseño de su estrategia de desarrollo. Ahora bien, a la vista de la complejidad que entraña el análisis del contexto sociopolítico y su impacto en la economía, ¿cuál es la metodología más adecuada para valorarlo? ¿Son suficientes los modelos econométricos? Este artículo examina y analiza varias metodologías de análisis y da respuesta a estas preguntas.
Unpredictable, subjective, elusive and difficult to lock in formal models are some adjectives that expert analysts have attributed the country risk. These traits are not surprising considering that behind the political risk is the complexity of the socio-political, economic and financial reality. Country risk in international trade affects solvency whereas in FDI is related to the losses caused by deprivation of property rights, cessation of activities or damage to assets. The country risk assessment is essential for multinational companies and for countries in the design of their development strategy. However, in view of its complexity, what is the most appropriate methodology for this kind of risk? Are econometric models appropriate? This article reviews and discusses various analysis methodologies and responds to these questions.
Unpredictable, subjective, elusive and difficult to lock in formal models are some adjectives that expert analysts have attributed the country risk. These traits are not surprising considering that behind the political risk is the complexity of the socio-political, economic and financial reality. Country risk in international trade affects solvency whereas in FDI is related to the losses caused by deprivation of property rights, cessation of activities or damage to assets. The country risk assessment is essential for multinational companies and for countries in the design of their development strategy. However, in view of its complexity, what is the most appropriate methodology for this kind of risk? Are econometric models appropriate? This article reviews and discusses various analysis methodologies and responds to these questions.
Description
UCM subjects
Unesco subjects
Keywords
Citation
Barro, R. (1991): “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106: 407-44.
Berne Union (2012): International Union of Credit and Investment Insurers, Exporta Publishing and Events Ltd. London, UK.
Economist Intelligence Unit (2007): World Investment Prospects for 2011. FDI and the challenge of political risks, EIU London, UK.
Gastil, R. D. (1986): “Freedom in the World”, Political Rights and Civil Liberties 1985-1986, Westport, Greenwood Press.
Gordon, K. (2008): “Investment Guarantees”, OECD Investment Policy Perspectives. OECD, Paris.
Henisz, W.J. (2000): “The Institutional Environment for Multinational Investment”, Oxford University Press. JLEO, V16N2.
Hymer, S. H. (1960): “The International Operations of National Firms: A Study of Direct Foreign Investment”. PhD Dissertation. Published posthumously. The MIT Press, 1976. Cambridge, Mass Jensen, N.M. & Jhonston, N.P. (2010): “Political risk, reputation and the resource course”. Social Science Research Network. Disponible en http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1667515 el 14/10/2012.
Knack, S y Keefer, P (1995): “Institutions and Economic Performance: Cross-Country Tests Using Alternative Institutional Indicators”. Munich Personal RePEc Archive, MPRA Paper No. 23118, posted 10. June 2010.
Kobrin, S. J. (1980): “Foreign Enterprise and Forced Divestment in LDCs”. International Organization 34:65–88.
Li, Q (2009): “Democracy, autocracy and expropriation of foreign Direct Investment”. Disponible el 10/10/2012 en http://www.princeton.edu/~pcglobal/conferences/IPES/papers/li_S1100_2.pdf.
Li, Q y Resnick, A. (2003): “Reversal of Fortunes: Democratic Institutions and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows to Developing Countries”. International Organization 57, 2003, pp. 175–211.
MIGA (2009): World Investment and Political Risks. The World Bank. Washington.
MIGA (2010): World Investment and Political Risks. The World Bank. Washington.
MIGA (2011): World Investment and Political Risks. The World Bank. Washington OECD.(2012): Country Risk Classifications. Disponible el 5/10/2012 en http://www.oecd.org/tad/exportcredits/countryriskclassification.htm.
Simon, J.D. (1992): “Political Risk Analysis for International Banks and Multinational Enterprises” Country Risk Analysis. International Economic Consultants, Ed. Rouledge. Londres y N. York.
Standard & Poor´s (2011): Sovereign Government Rating Methodology And Assumptions. Global Credit Portal. Ratings Direct.
Vilariño, A. (2001): Turbulencias Financieras y Riesgo de Mercado. Prentice Hall, Madrid, 2001, 300 pp.
Walter, I. (1981): “Country Risk, Portfolio Decisions and Regulation in International Bank Lending”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 85, 77–92.