Chinese FDI outflows and host country environment.

This study provides first evidence on the effects of Chinese FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) outflows on host country environments. The study draws upon a comprehensive dataset covering aggregate Chinese FDI outflows and sector specific data into 65 host nations over the 2007-2019 period. Employing a STIRPAT (Stochastic Regression on Population, Affluence and Technology) model and several different techniques including DID (Difference-in-Difference), pooled OLS (Ordinary Least Squares), quantile regression, IV (Instrumental Variable) estimation, threshold and Tobit regression, the findings suggest that Chinese FDI leads to an increase in host country CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) emissions, aligning with the pollution haven hypothesis at the aggregate level. A closer investigation at the development regime and sectoral levels indicates that in the low development regime, FDI inflows into the financial and real estate sector increase emissions. Conversely in the high-income regime, Chinese FDI into the entertainment sector is associated with an increase in carbon emissions. Chinese FDI is further found to lead to an increase in emissions in countries with a per capita GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of below USD72041.7. However, as per capita income rises above USD72041.7, FDI leads to a fall in carbon emissions.

Health-system equity, egalitarian democracy and COVID-19 outcomes: An empirical analysis.

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a spate of studies showing a close connection between inequitable access to health care, welfare services and adverse outcomes from the pandemic. Others have argued that democratic governments have generally failed relative to more autocratic ones, simply because autocrats can make the hard choices required for stemming the spread of viruses. We address this question by asking whether more 'egalitarian' forms of democracy matter, given that they contain more equitable health-care access and societal infrastructure, such as social capital and trust. METHODS: We use standard regression techniques, including instrumental variables analysis addressing endogeneity on COVID-19 testing and deaths data as of the end of May and beginning of September. We use novel data from the Varieties of Democracy Project on health-system equity and egalitarian democracy. RESULTS: Our results suggest that more equitable access to health care increases testing rates and lowers the death rate from COVID-19. Broader egalitarian governance, measured as egalitarian democracy, however, shows the opposite effect. Thus, factors associated with health-care capacity to reach and treat matter more than broader societal factors associated with social capital and trust. The results are robust to alternative testing procedures, including instrumental variable technique for addressing potential endogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a great deal of public health focus on how equitable governance helps fight the adverse effects of so-called neoliberal pandemics, we find that broadly egalitarian factors have had the opposite effect on fighting COVID-19, especially when an equitable health system has been taken into account. Fighting disease, thus, might be more about the capacity of health systems rather than societal factors, such as trust in government and social capital.