Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Foreign Direct Investment in the Visegrad Countries after 2004: Have the Visegrad Countries’ Membership in the European Union Changed Something?


The purpose of the paper is to identify the volume and dynamics of FDI in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia (V4) after their full accession to the European Union. The following hypothesis is tested: the Visegrad countries’ membership in the European Union has not resulted in higher increases of FDI in these countries. The methodology is based on the concept of Investment Development Path (IDP) and Net Outward Investment position (NOI) of a country. The most current data (as of 2012) on FDI is derived from UNCTAD. The literature available in ScienceDirect and EBSCO has been reviewed.





  1. Ambroziak, L. (2012). FDI and Intra-industry trade: theory and empirical evidence from the Visegrad countries. International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 4(1-2), 180-198.
  2. Boudier-Bensebaa, F. (2008). FDI – assisted development in the light of the investment development path paradigm: evidence from Central and Eastern European countries. Transnational Corporations, 17(1), 37-67.
  3. Durán, J.J., & Úbeda, F. (2001). The investment development path: a new empirical approach and some theoretical issues. Transnational Corporations, 10(2), 1-34.
  4. Durán, J.J., & Úbeda, F. (2005). The investment development path of newly developed countries. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 12(1), 123-137.
  5. Fonseca, M., Mendonça, A., & Passos, J. (2007). The Investment Development Path Hypothesis: Evidence from the Portuguese Case – A Panel Data Analysis, School of Economics and Management, Technical University of Lisbon, Working Papers 021/2007/DE. Retrieved on December 18, 2013, from
  6. Gorynia, M., Nowak, J., & Wolniak, R. (2007). Poland and its investment development path. Eastern European Economics, 45(2), 52-74.
  7. Gorynia, M., Nowak, J., & Wolniak, R. (2010). Foreign Direct Investment in Central and Eastern Europe: The IDP trajectories of selected countries. Poznań University of Economics Review,10(1),5-26.
  8. Herrmann, S., & Jochem, A. (2005). Trade balance of the Central and East European EU member states and the role of foreign direct investment. Deutsche Bundesbank, Research Centre,
  9. Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies, no. 41. Retrieved on December 18, 2013,Available from
  10. Kayam, S.S., & Hisarciklilar, M. (2009). Revisiting the investment development path (IDP): a non linear fluctuation approach. International Journal of Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, 6(2), 63-82.
  11. Kornecki, L. (2008). Foreign direct investment and macroeconomic changes in CEE Integrating into the global market. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 5(4), 124-132.
  12. Kravtsova, V. (2014). Productivity change and externalities: empirical evidence from hungary. International Review of Applied Economics, 28(1), 102-125.
  13. Kuti, M. (2005). The role of FDI in the external financing of the national economy. Development and Finance/Fejlesztes es Finanszirozas: Quarterly Hungarian Economic Review, 2, 54-65.
  14. Mutascu, M., Hetes, R., & Miru, O. (2010). The general framework for foreign direct investments attraction in Central and Eastern European Countries. Review of Economic and Business Studies, 3(2), 65-87.
  15. Narula, R., & Guimón, J. (2010). The investment development path in a globalised world: implications for Eastern Europe. Eastern Journal of European Studies, 1(2), 5-19.
  16. Nowak, A.Z., & Steagall, J.W. (2002). Foreign direct investment patterns and consequences in Central and Eastern Europe, 1990-2000. Transformations in Business and Economics, 1(1-2), 132-151.
  17. Nucu, A.E. (2011). The Dynamics of Foreign Direct Investments in Central and Eastern Europe under the Impact of International Crisis of 2007. Centre for European Studies Working Papers, III, (1), 81-91. Retrieved on December 18, 2013, from
  18. Onaran, Ö. (2008). Jobless Growth in the Central and Eastern European Countries. Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Working Paper Series, no. 165. Retrieved on December 18, 2013, from
  19. Onaran, Ö., & Stockhammer, E. (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 Dynamics, 19, 66–80.
  20. Pelinescu, E., & Radulescu, M. (2009). Impact of foreign direct investment on the economic growth and countries’ export potential. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 12(4), 153-169.
  21. Rugraff, E. (2008). Are the FDI policies of the Central European countries efficient?. Post-Communist Economies, 20(3), 303–316.
  22. Sass, M. (2004). FDI in Hungary – EIB Papers, 9(2), 62-90.
  23. Stoian, C. (2013). Extending Dunning’s Investment Development Path: The role of home country institutional determinants in explaining outward foreign direct investment. International Business Review, 22, 615–637.
  24. UNCTAD (2013). World Investment Report 2013.Global Value Chains: Investment and Trade for Development.
  25. Zámborský, P. (2012). Competitiveness gap and host country effects of FDI in the new OECD. International Journal of Trade and Global Markets, 5(3-4), 336-354.


Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.