Comparison of China's direct investment in Asia, Europe and America 中国在亚洲、欧洲和美洲的经济和直接投资比较

106	148	30%	35%	35	68	19%	47%	141	216	26%
38%
state-owned enterprises	106	148	30%	35%	34	66	18%	46%	140	214	26%	37%
Sovereign wealth fund	0	0	0	0	1	2	1%	1%	1	2	0	0
Private and Public *	253	280	70%	65%	153	77	81%	53%	406	357	74%	62%
amount to	359	428	-	one	188	145	-	-	547	573	one	one
gross investment	green area	percentage	merge	percentage	All transactions	percentage	green area	percentage	merge	percentage	All transactions	percentage
	America	EU	America	EU	America	EU	America	EU	America	EU	America	EU
All government	1922	2738	62%	52%	8017	11397	61%	73%	9939	14135	61%	67%
state-owned enterprises	1922	2738	62%	52%	6436	7799	49%	50%	8358	10537	51%	50%
Sovereign wealth fund	0	0	0	0	1581	3599	12%	23%	1581	3599	10%	17%
Private sector and Public Public *	1195	2569	38%	48%	5217	4253	39%	27%	6412	6822	39%	33%
amount to	3117	5307	-	-	13234	15650	-	one	16350	20958	one	-

3.4 Comparison of China's direct investment between Asia and Europe

Both Europe and the United States are discussing the significance of direct investment by Chinese enterprises. On the one hand, Chinese investment can make up for the decrease of capital inflow through traditional channels, provide new capital for enterprises in distress to promote growth again, enhance market competition, improve social welfare, and increase market access opportunities for China, one of the largest and fastest growing markets in the world. But China, as a major investor, has once again triggered some old debates about the political and economic risks that foreign ownership may cause, which are exacerbated by the unique nature of the Chinese government and economy.
The current response to China's investment in the United States and Europe reflects this ambiguity. At first, the policy makers in the United States and Europe expressed hesitation and hesitation. Now they are more aware of the huge opportunities brought by Chinese investment, and the policy makers are more active in promoting the inflow of Chinese capital. At the same time, China's investment has triggered a cautious response from national security departments, commercial competitors, and the unknown public.

3.4.1 Promoting investment in China: recognizing opportunities

Asia, Europe and the United States generally believe that it is profitable to welcome and encourage foreign direct investment. FDI increases the net welfare of producers and consumers. FDI enables enterprises to develop new markets, operate effectively in different countries, reduce production costs, increase economies of scale, and promote specialization. For companies that want to divest assets, because there are more and more competitive bidders, this means that the price of assets will be higher. For consumers, the entry of foreign investors means that more manufacturers want to attract the attention of buyers, and consumers can have more choices, lower prices and enjoy innovation. In local communities, FDI will bring new job opportunities and tax revenue, while training, technology transfer and R & D activities for workers will also bring technology spillover effects.
This is why the developed economies (including the Asia, United States and the European Union) adopt an open attitude towards foreign direct investment, while the regulation is mainly concentrated in the narrow scope of anti-monopoly and national security. Legally, investment opening is non discriminatory. Chinese investors, like investors from other countries, enjoy the right to establish factories and market access. Not only is it open to Chinese capital, but European and American policy makers are also actively promoting Chinese investment.
Asia and European countries have always been good at investment promotion. As of 2015, EU countries and third countries have signed more than 1100 bilateral investment agreements (bits). In addition, national, state, regional and municipal governments also use investment promotion agencies (IPAs) or special tax incentives to attract foreign investment. In recent years, many national and local investment promotion agencies have turned their attention to China. (3) after the "Lisbon treaty" in 2014, the development of Asia investment policy has gained new momentum. This treaty transfers the exclusive authority of investment policy to the European Commission. One of the priorities of the European Commission is to formulate a bilateral investment agreement with China to replace the existing 26 individual bits. At present, the organization is assessing the impact of this change.
The United States has always adopted a laissez faire attitude towards foreign investment, and the pressure for investment promotion is mainly at the state and municipal levels. However, at present, the United States needs to compete with other countries to obtain FDI capital, and the importance of investors in China and other emerging market countries is also rising, which forces the US government to reconsider its attitude and take a more positive attitude in investment promotion. In 2020, George Bush created the "invest in America" project in the Department of international trade of the US Department of Commerce to better coordinate investment promotion measures within the United States. The purpose of the "choose America" project in 2016 is to further improve the role of the US federal government in investment promotion. The Obama administration is also very active, hoping to dispel the doubts of the outside world about the US investment policy after the CNOOC Unocal transaction was blocked in 2018. High level government officials, including President Obama, Vice President Biden and US ambassador to China Gary Locke, have repeatedly reiterated that the US market is open to Chinese investors. Some specific measures of the delegation have reduced the administrative obstacles of Chinese investors, including simplifying the visa procedures for Chinese investors to travel in the United States for business. These measures have implemented the proposals of government officials. In 2021, the United States began negotiations with China on a bilateral investment treaty, although little progress has been made so far.