**<u>│</u> 3**

for fulfilling both economic and social objectives, as well the availability and quality of the data. By augmenting the set of publicly available information on differences between plants of multinational and domestic firms, this study paints a picture that contributes to a better understanding of what multinational firms bring to advance various development outcomes, and the differences across countries.

Compiling indicators of development outcomes at the level of firms is predicated on the understanding that differences between firm outcomes are a driving force behind development impact at the level of the economy. Outcomes of foreign-owned firms are however not to be confused with aggregate development impact of international business; they are one among a number of such drivers that shift macro-economic and social outcomes of host countries. In addition to the variety of characteristics of firms presented in this work, the actual aggregate impact of foreign multinationals on host countries remains dependent on the volume of investment, local conditions, spillovers to domestic firms, and government policies.

The picture this exercise unveils is highly heterogeneous. While there appears to be no striking trade-off between competitiveness and inclusiveness of foreign multinationals, contrary to the efficiency-equity trade-off that fuels intense debates (WEF & EIB, 2017), one can observe systematic differences in how pronounced their premia are across regions and income groups. Relative to other regions, foreign MNEs established in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, for example, exhibit higher premia over domestic firms in the majority of outcomes relating to competitiveness and inclusiveness. Foreign MNEs established in Latin America stand out in terms of productivity and skills transfer while the opposite pattern is observed in Sub-Saharan Africa, where foreign multinationals stand out with respect to job expansion and wages. The mix appears to be highly specific to the type of multinationals each region attracts, including the industry and investor motivations, as well as the host economy conditions. In the Middle East and North Africa, for example, multinationals differ significantly in terms of export propensity and geographical diversification due to the concentration of FDI in natural resource sectors. Meanwhile they also contribute more in these regions than anywhere else to gender empowerment by employing significantly more women in managerial positions, potentially due to social and cultural differences between the home and host countries.

Differences in some key areas that drive competitiveness, such as productivity, innovation, and skills transfer, appear to increase with income, while premia in all other areas would reach a maximum in lower-middle or low-income markets, highlighting the relevance of foreign multinationals for socio-economic progress in these contexts. Outcomes in export orientation, skills transfer, and investment in physical capital are more consistent across some countries, whereas in others they display wide variations, suggesting potentially higher sensitivity to investor motivations, sectors, seasonal trends and business environments.

Interpretation of these patterns requires caution, due to the limitations of the underlying analysis. Indicators are static, non-exhaustive on dimensions of sustainable development, and cover only part of developing-country economies in terms of sectors, formality, and firm sizes according to survey design. In addition, the underlying surveys are not conducted simultaneously across countries and therefore are prone to seasonal bias. The deliberate focus on developing countries makes the results less generalizable to the global economy. In