时区对我国OFDI的影响研究

Study on the Influence of Time Zone on OFDI in China

摘要: 传统的国际投资与贸易理论主要关注纬度距离和区位、气候环境条件、自然资源储备等自然地理因素的考量，不太关注经度距离对OFDI的影响。但是由于经度距离引致的时区差异会对OFDI产生包括即时沟通减少和健康损害在内的一系列成本，且纬度距离不能反应这种双方频繁实时交互下的各种成本。本文在传统的以时差反应和即时沟通减少为侧重的时区对OFDI负向同步性效应基础上拓展成了两大类八小项拓展的同步性效应理论，并给出了逻辑机制分析和OFDI主体时区背景下内外部优势与成本分析框架。本文运用我国2020~2023年对包含OECD全部成员国在内的65个主要国家OFDI的宏观数据，通过建立随机效应GLS模型进行了实证分析，得出时区差异对我国OFDI区位选择具有显著负向影响。当时区差异每增加1小时，我国OFDI存量便会下降大约20%，这是综合了GLS基线回归、对数变换以及tobit回归后的结果，并且这一估计对改变标准误、量纲调整、数据删失处理、控制变量删替、改变样本范围、换取非线性模型、改变核心解释变量的度量等一系列方法检验后均是稳健且显著的。其次，综合了GLS和Tobit两种模型下的各自分组回归结果，时区差异对我国OFDI的影响具有经济规模的国别异质性，即时区效应对发展中经济体极其强烈，而对发达经济体虽然为负但不显著。然后，将地理距离拆解为纬度和经度距离，只有后者对我国OFDI起显著作用，但加入时区效应后纵向距离不再显著，而时区效应是显著的，可能表明时区差异是经度距离影响OFDI的一种机制。最后，距离具有国别异质性：我国OFDI布局在发达国家组别时，经度或纬度距离都不重要，此时技术驱动型动机起主导作用；而布局在发展中国家组别时，经纬度距离都起极其显著的作用，但是反向相反，其中纬度距离为正而经度距离为负，说明纬度差异较大的国家其资源禀赋和产业经济结构与我国进行了互补，此时资源追逐型动机起主导作用，可能伴随有特殊战略目标的影响。

Abstract: Traditional international investment and trade theories primarily focus on natural geographic factors such as latitude distance, location, climate conditions, and natural resource reserves, paying less attention to the impact of longitude distance on OFDI. However, time zone differences caused by longitude distance can lead to a series of costs for OFDI, including reduced overlap in working hours and health damage costs, which cannot be reflected by latitude distance alone. Based on the traditional time zone negative synchronization effect of OFDI, which focuses on time difference reaction and instant communication reduction, this paper expands the synchronization effect theory into two categories and eight sub-items, and gives the logical mechanism analysis and the framework of internal and external advantages and cost analysis under the background of OFDI subject time zone. This paper uses macro data on OFDI from 65 major countries, including all OECD member states, in China from 2020 to 2023, and conducts empirical analysis using a random effects GLS model. The results show that time zone differences have a significant negative impact on the location choice of China’s OFDI. For every additional hour of time zone difference, China’s OFDI stock decreases by about 20%. These findings are based on GLS baseline regression, logarithmic transformation, and Tobit regression, and remain robust and significant after various methodological tests, including changing standard errors, dimensional adjustments, handling missing data, substituting control variables, altering sample ranges, switching to nonlinear models, and changing the measurement of core explanatory variables. Furthermore, combining the results of group regressions under both GLS and Tobit models, the impact of time zone differences on China’s OFDI exhibits country-specific heterogeneity in terms of economic scale, with a particularly strong effect on developing economies, while it is negative but insignificant for developed economies. Then, the geographical distance is broken down into latitude and longitude distances. Only the latter significantly impacts China’s OFDI, but when the time zone effect is included, the longitudinal distance no longer plays a significant role, while the time zone effect remains significant. This may indicate that time zone differences are a mechanism through which longitude distance influences OFDI. Finally, the distance exhibits country-specific heterogeneity: when China’s OFDI is concentrated in developed countries, neither longitude nor latitude distances are important, and the technology-driven motivation takes precedence; however, when it is concentrated in developing countries, both latitude and longitude distances play extremely significant roles, but in opposite directions—latitude distance is positive while longitude distance is negative. This suggests that countries with larger latitude differences have resource endowments and industrial economic structures that complement those of China, leading to resource-chasing motivation, which may be accompanied by the influence of specific strategic goals.