非洲市场上中国与荷兰投资者的风险认知比较(2)

Chapter 3: Conceptual Framework..................  17

3.1 Hypothesis.................. 17

3.2 Defining the model..................  17

3.2.1 Introduction .................. 17

3.2.2 Country Risks.................. 18

3.2.3 Project Risk Factors.................. 22

Chapter 4: Methodology.................. 23

4.1 Type of Research.................. 23

4.2 Methods.................. 24

4.3 Sample.................. 25

4.4 Data analysis.................. 26

Chapter 5: Results.................. 28

5.1 Results.................. 28

5.1.1 Country Risk-Political Risk.................. 28

5.1.2 Country Risk-Economic Risk.................. 31

5.1.3 Country Risk - Financial Risk.................. 34

5.1.4 Project Risk.................. 36

5.1.5 Country Risk versus Project Risk.................. 38

5.2 Comparison Risk Perceptions..................  39

Chapter 5: Results

In this section, the results of the survey will be discussed. The results of the analysis areexamined around three issues. First, the raw data resulting from the five point scale survey isconverted according to Stacey's model, enabling correct interpretation of the results, as shownin the tables of section 5.2. Secondly, the relative importance of the risk factors is discussed forboth samples. Finally, based on these findings, a comparison between the two countries will bemade in section 5.3.

5.1 Results

The results are shown for both sample groups per risk type. All the survey items are included inorder to present a complete overview of the gathered data. As mentioned in the survey itself；all the survey items across different risk types are directly compared and ranked. Whendiscussing their ranking, there is referred to the overall ranking of all the risk factors, includingall the risk types. The graphs include the frequency count, frequency percentage, mean and t-value, and the interpretation of the risk factor's relative importance. The significance level a is0.05.

When interpreting the results as shown in the above table, it can be observed that internal &external conflicts is a specifically important risk factor for Dutch investors, while democraticaccountability is relatively less important. The remaining political risk factors are of averageimportance across the group of all risks. Corruption does not play a significant larger role thanother risks. Looking closer into the data, it can be seen that government stability & bureaucracyquality ranks sixth in total. Although not significantly more important, it is still an important riskfactor taken into account by Dutch investors.

Chapter 6: Conclusions and Limitations

The goal of this study was to answer the problem statement To what extent and in which waydo risk perceptions of Dutch and Chinese policy banks differ when they are seeking to invest inAfrica?'. A literature review and empirical research were conducted to answer this question. Inthis chapter, the findings of both studies are discussed. The conclusions of the previouschapters are reviewed to answer the problem statement. In addition, the implications of thefindings of the study are discussed. Finally, limitations of this study are outlined andrecommendations are provided for future research.

6.1 Conclusions

After years of internal economic development and opening up to foreign investors, China ismore recently increasingly investing abroad itself. China's expansion is global, but its substantialOFDI in Africa has led to some debate among policy makers and scholars. For decades, OECDcountries were the main investors in Africa. Now, they have to share this market with China.How different is China's approach? What are China's objectives? How is the Chinese investors'decision making process shaped? Answers to these questions that are arising around the worldare partially being found, while still much research is done to gain a better understanding. Thisstudy zoomed in on a key decision making factor; risk.

Despite the vast amount of literature on risk perceptions and FDI in Africa, there is animportant gap on the differences between country-specific risk perceptions regarding Africainvestments. This unique study adds to the current state of literature by comparing the riskperceptions of Chinese and Dutch professionals investing in Africa for Chinese and Dutch policybanks and institutions respectively.

In this study, existing literature is discussed to put forward different arguments and findingsconcerning varying risk perceptions amongst different cultures, as well as various risk factorsinfluencing investments in Africa. This review led to a hypothesis stating that:

When they evaluate the country and project risks in Africa, decision makers of a policy bank orinstitution in China differ from decision makers of o policy bank or institution in the Netherlandsin terms of the relative importance they attach to the various risk factors.

reference:

• [1] 陶舜如.  中国企业在非洲对外直接投资的国别选择与进入路径研究[D]. 湖南师范大学 2012
• [2] 潘琳.  中国对非洲投资政治风险的定性与定量分析[D]. 山东大学 2012
• [3] 肖卓立.  后危机时期我国对非洲直接投资面临的风险及应对措施研究[D]. 外交学院 2012
• [4] 赵利娜.  中国对非洲直接投资问题研究[D]. 浙江工业大学 2012
• [5] 税成志.  中国对非洲直接投资研究[D]. 西南财经大学 2010
• [6] 张奇.  中国对非洲直接投资问题研究[D]. 东北财经大学 2011
• [7] 法迪卢（FADILOU）.  中国企业非洲投资风险分析与评价[D]. 天津大学 2008
• [8] 李娟.  非洲投资环境的因子分析以及对我国企业对非洲直接投资决策的启示[D]. 山东大学 2010
• [9] 巨正波.  中国企业对非洲的直接投资研究[D]. 云南大学 2010