_Table 9: Baseline estimates – Whole sample._

|Dependent Variable||||∆GDPpcrt||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||(1)|(2)|(3)|(4)|(5)|(6)|(7)|
|log(GDPpcrt−1)|-0.168****|-0.170****|-0.174****|-0.203****|-0.204****|-0.204****|-0.204****|
||(0.005)|(0.005)|(0.005)|(0.006)|(0.006)|(0.006)|(0.006)|
|Population Changert||||||||
|< 0|...|Ref.|Ref.|Ref.|Ref.|Ref.|Ref.|
|≥0|...|0.004****|0.002|0.000|0.000|0.000|0.000|
|||(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.001)|
|log(Employment Densityrt−1)|...|...|0.062****|0.039****|0.038****|0.036****|0.038****|
||||(0.009)|(0.009)|(0.009)|(0.010)|(0.009)|
|log(Share GVA Agriculturert−1)|...|...|...|-0.056|-0.059|-0.058|-0.059|
|||||(0.055)|(0.055)|(0.055)|(0.055)|
|log(Share GVA Industryrt−1)|...|...|...|0.032****|0.032****|0.032****|0.032****|
|||||(0.005)|(0.005)|(0.005)|(0.005)|
|log(Share GVA Constructionrt−1)|...|...|...|<br>0.028****<br>|<br>0.028****<br>|<br>0.028****<br>|<br>0.028****<br>|
|||||(0.003)|(0.003)|(0.003)|(0.003)|
|log(Share GVA Market Servicesrt−1)|...|...|...|0.051****|0.051****|0.050****|0.051****|
|||||(0.007)|(0.007)|(0.007)|(0.007)|
|log(Share GVA NonMarket Servicesrt−1)|...|...|...|-0.033****|-0.033****|-0.032****|-0.033****|
|||||(0.007)|(0.007)|(0.007)|(0.007)|
|log(Patentsrt−1)|...|...|...|...|0.003****|0.003****|0.003****|
||||||(0.001)|(0.001)|(0.001)|
|log(Inward FDIrt−1)|...|...|...|...|...|0.004***|...|
|||||||(0.001)||
|Max Inward FDIrt−1||||||||
|None|...|...|...|...|...|...|Ref.|
|Headquarter|...|...|...|...|...|...|0.001|
||||||||(0.003)|
|Innovation|...|...|...|...|...|...|<br>0.004<br>|
||||||||(0.003)|
|Production|...|...|...|...|...|...|<br>0.002*<br>|
||||||||(0.001)|
|Logistics, Distribution, Transportation|...|...|...|...|...|...|0.005**|
||||||||(0.002)|
|Marketing and Sales|...|...|...|...|...|...|0.002|
||||||||(0.001)|
|Region FE|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|Year FE|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|Yes|
|No. Observations|18,494|18,494|18,494|18,494|18,494|18,494|18,494|
|No. Regions|1,321|1,321|1,321|1,321|1,321|1,321|1,321|
|R<sup>2</sup>|0.33|0.33|0.34|0.35|0.35|0.35|0.35|
|Adjusted R<sup>2</sup>|0.28|0.28|0.28|0.30|0.30|0.30|0.30|
|<br>|406.74|380.82|358.97|281.76|269.55|258.36|220.55|
|Model F Statistics [p-value]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|<br>[0.000]<br>|
|Notes: *G< 0.1; **G< 0.05; ***G< 0.0<br>and inward FDI are defined per 100,000 inha<br>change between timesNandN−1, and the ca<br>FDI that interested a region, for which the ca|<br>1; ****G<<br>bitants. All va<br>tegorical varia<br>tegory used as|<br>0.001. Robust s<br>riables are defin<br>ble included in<br>reference is no|<br>tandard errors<br>ed in logarith<br>specification (<br>inward FDI re|<br>are reported in<br>m terms, except<br>7) that captures<br>ceived.|<br>parentheses. T<br>for the dummy<br>the most releva|<br>he variables ca<br>variable captur<br>nt business acti|<br>pturing patents<br>ing population<br>vity of inward|

as less precise, since they reflect announced investment values (i.e. as publicized in the media) rather than actual investment values. The actual value of greenfield investments often differs sharply from the announced values. There is no overall consensus among researchers on using number of investments or monetary (or job) value of investments. However, we performed a check on these results to determine if they are substantially different if using the monetary and job value of investments. Specifically, we have tested the robustness of the inward FDI-growth relationship for low-income regions by replicating specification (4) in Table 8 using both a monetary value-based variable and a job-based variable for inward FDI, rather than the number of investments set up in a region. The results confirm the positive association between inward FDI and GDP per capita growth in low-income regions, although the estimated elasticities are equal to 0.001 (rather than 0.011) and are statistically significant at 10 (rather than 0.1) percent level. However, incomplete information on some investments concerning the monetary value or the number of jobs associated with inward FDI could help explaining this reduction in magnitude. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the sign, magnitude, and significance level of all the other variables are confirmed when considering the two alternative variables for inward FDI.

23