继续研究BRI和投资方式选择的关系。今天把literature review的outline列出来，I'm not a logical person : ( . 不过已经是把自己觉得需要阐明的东西都列出来了，到时候再rearrange好了。

看了一篇paper（太少了），有写没写。

The framework of the Belt and Road Initiative

- Background (the global investment environment, how the framework developed into today’s status, countries and regions included, etc.)

- Investment-related measures

 Investment promoted after BRI

- OFDI can be promoted by policy (free-trade zones, better bilateral/multilateral relationships and other institutional measures encourage OFDI, while corruption, bad relationships discourage it)

- Evidence of the increase in OFDI after BRI 

- Determinants of OFDI in quantity and type (those determinants should be incorporated in BRI and have more positive impacts after BRI)

Investment promoted along BRI

- Preferred target countries before and after BRI

- Determinants of choosing target countries 

- Types of investment vary among different target countries

Factors of Investment decision 

- Country-level studies

- Firm-level studies

- Research gap: mostly focus on location choice, not on investment type.

To capture the dynamics of the macro-economy in a specific year, the DID (difference in difference) model is the most commonly used one. To the best of our knowledge, the latest literature only covers the period from 2010 to 2015, despite the biggest sample size that had ever used in this area.

Both Liu (2017) and Du and Zhang (2018) separate target countries into BRI and Non-BRI groups, in order to compare the different effect of BRI on investments flowing into them. However, Kang et al(2018) argue that a sample selection bias occurs when conducting a simple DID model since the BRI and Non-BRI countries are not two randomly selected groups, and therefore, suggests to adopt matching techniques to control the heterogeneity. Their findings revealed that the BRI has better stimulated China’s OFDI in these related countries after the announcement in 2013 compared with other countries outside the BRI group, which is also consistent with the conclusion published by Liu et al. (2017) and Du and Zhang (2018).

The OBOR initiative only created a temporary policy shock for the continental belt (OB) and non-OBOR countries. The long-term and spillover effects of the initiative in these countries still require more evidence.

Dunning (1993) investigates FDI determinants by categorizing investment according to motivations, namely Efficiency-seeking, resource-seeking, and market-seeking. 

Previous studies concentrated on what circumstances and advantages can attract FDI inflows to China. With China’s integration into the world economy, research interest shifted from FDI to OFDI. Buckley et al. (2007) regarded policy liberalization and political risk as the important determinants of China’s OFDI. Wang et al. (2015) showed that institutions and taxation both matter in China’s OFDI. But still, such field needs more systematical analysis. The latest research on the determinants of China’s OFDI done by Kang et al (2018) by exploiting an expanded gravity model. 

Theories:

Buckley (2007)

Data:

Use the GDP deflator provided by the World Bank to deflate the nominal values.

Model:

β2 reflects the incremental effect of OBOR countries after the initiative, and the effect of non-OBOR after initiative is reflected into the separated term post in regression to capture the spillovers of OBOR initiative, which is absorbed by year dummies.

We relied on Rosenbaum and Rubin’s (1983) approach to use the probability included in the BRI (BRIt=1) conditional on the ex-ante characteristics of countries (Xt−1), which includes…, captured by the main explanatory variables and control variables in period t – 1.

Matching procedure means to match each BRI country with a non-BRI country that had the most similar propensity score.