The Experience of transnational corporations’ development in the conditions of world financial crisis

the debates on the influence of transnationalization, savants and experts concluded long ago that this phenomenon is not purely economic,

The Experience of transnational corporations’ development in the conditions of world financial crisis

Дипломная работа

Иностранные языки

Другие дипломы по предмету

Иностранные языки

Сдать работу со 100% гаранией
phasized as an advantage for our national economy.for LUKOIL, as a matter of fact, this corporation is one of the largest vertically integrated oil companies. Company's main activities are exploration and production of oil and gas, petroleum products and petrochemicals, and marketing of these products.agreement envisages the development of the Khauzuk and Shady Denghizkul field and Kandym group of fields, as well as carrying out exploration work in Kungrod block. The area of the contract area is 431 square kilometers in Khauzuk and Shady and 3,7 square kilometers in Kungrad block.2006, the Khauzak conducted extensive drilling and construction of a preliminary gas, gas collection stations, camps, roads and power lines.beginning of commercial production of gas fields Khauzak and Shady scheduled for 2007, Project production volume for the entire project is 10 billion m3 per year of gas. Also planned to drill 240 wells and construction of more than 1,5 thousand kilometres of pipelines. , this corporation launched some agreement related to Aral:

·Signing of the agreement - 2006

·Duration of agreement - 35 years

·Other project participants: Uzbekneftegaz (20%) Khauzak - Shady is not a secret that the share of small business in our gross domestic product is notable huge. However, transnational corporations are able to project the big investment plans. Therefore, it would be better if our country attracts more foreign direct investment along with transnational corporations. The potential of our countrys economy is enough for this.


is no denying that transnational corporations have been playing a larger role in any countrys national economy along with the reform and opening up their affiliates in the last three decades. But every coin has two sides. The entrance of transnational corporations also has negative impacts due to historical reasons and shortcoming with themselves and local enterprises, mainly through the crowding-out effect. First of all, the monopoly of TNCs in some sectors has forced local companies to quit, and some foreign companies have taken measures to prevent their local companies as a way to protect. TNCs have attracted the top Research and Development and management talents to create difficulties for host country companies in recruiting the right people. In a one way talented and skilled people by TNCs attract a growing group of technicians - know-how, management and research programs may also concentrate at foreign companies. role of transnational corporations in the national economy varies greatly in terms of industry due to different strategies, management and home countries of the TNCs. But the paper concludes that the absorption capacity of domestic enterprises and state policies of host country are also two key factors deciding the role TNCs. Local enterprises in any country generally lack core technology with weak R&D and innovation management, which is an important fact underlying the unsatisfying spillover effect. As for policies, the focuses are mainly investment structure and supporting measures, and a lot of developing countries are reviewing its exchange market for technology approach in a move to encourage R&D input by TNCs and their connections with local innovation agencies. The policies should also help to create a fair play environment for foreign and domestic companies, but the government role in assisting infant sectors should be reconsidered.

Offers: Improve Both the Hard and Soft Conditions of Host Countriesforeign direct investment along with has become an essential part of development strategies among less developed countries. Many offer special incentives to foreign investors, such as tax holidays, tariff reductions or exemptions, and subsidies for infrastructure. To a large extent, such policies have indeed been instrumental in accelerating foreign direct investment flows into least developed countries.a broader level, Policy makers in host countries seeking to attract the flow of FDI into their cities must improve both the hard and soft conditions of their citys investment environment-to offer solid economic infrastructures and favorable policy incentives are not enough. They should also put efforts into cultivating business-oriented institutions and cultures. At a higher level, a host countrys policy makers should be cognizant of foreign investors motivations, concerns, and calculations. Our observation that many foreign investment projects have avoided or even failed in the political capital suggests that there is still much room for the central government to improve and reform the countrys institutions in a systematic manner.

Focusing Investment in Strategic Industriesusefulness of industrial policies is hotly debated. Having already invested huge sums in developing its manufacturing sector, the governments now want to strengthen their domestic capability. Any transnational corporation which allocates an affiliate of transnational corporations should meditate where to allocate investment. During allocating transnational corporations to host country, there should be perspective.

Learning to Compete in International Rules

Today world trade is increasingly forced to play by the rules of the WTO and some other international countries. Stricter enforcement of agreements on trade and intellectual property will make it more difficult to copy designs and processes, thus limiting the scope for reverse engineering. So learning to compete in international rules is a long-term task for transnational corporations.



1.I.A. Karimov, Ozbekiston XXI asr bosagasida: xavfsizlikka tahdid, barqarorlik shartlari va taraqqiyot kafolatlari. Uzbekistan, 1997.

.The report of the President of our country, dedicated to the socio-economic development in 2006.

3.A.A. Isadjanov, Jahon Iqtisodiyotining globallashuvi, JIDU- Toshkent, 2008.

4.Ch. Hill, Global business today - New York, 2002.

5.I.P. Nikolaev, The world economy third edition - Moscow, 2006.

6.P. Buckley, M. Casson, The economic theory of the multinational enterprise, - New York, 1995.

7.Ryan M.Marin, Internal Organization of Transnational Corporations, 2002

8.Г.И. Мачавариани, Мировая экономика, Выход из кризиса, 2010

9.Michie, Jonathan and Smith, John Grieve, Managing the Global Economy - Oxford University Press, 1995

.Christopher A. Bartlett, Transnational Management, 2003.

.A.A. Дынкин, Мировая экономика до 2020 года - Москва, 2008.

12.K Meyer, Direct Investment in Economies in Transition - Cheltenham and Northampton (1998), 1998.

13.Paul Krugman, "Firesale FDI," Working Paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1998.

14.R.C. Feenstra, Facts and Fallacies about Foreign Direct Investment - 1998.

15.World Investment Report 1995, 2003, 2008, 2009, 2010. New York and Geneva.

.World Investment Survey 2009-2011. New York and Geneva.

17.UNCTAD, Investment Policy Review of Uzbekistan.

18.IMF, report 2009.

19.Экономическое обозрение, Монополии как главные виновники кризиса, 2009, February.

20.J.N. Dunning, The Electric Paradigm of International Production: A Restatement and Possible Extension, The Journal International Business Studies, 2007, Volume19, Number1.

.The Economist, Big actors in world economy 2011/02.

22.Н.К. Жуманиезов, Автореферат, Становление, специфика развития и укрупнение социально-экономических отношений содружества независимых государств.

23.Исажанов А. «Перспективы интеграции Центрально Азиатских стран в мировое сообщество в условиях глобализации экономики»/ Экономический вестник Узбекистана. № 3-4, 2004 г.

24.Журналь, Мировая Экономика международные отношение, 2009. <>

Appendix 1

worlds largest corporations 2010


RankCorporationRevenues($ millions)Profits($ millions) 1Wal-Mart Stores408,21414,3352Royal Dutch Shell285,12912,5183Exxon Mobil284,6519,284BP246,13816,5785Toyota Motor204,1062,2566Japan Post Holdings202,1964,8497Sinopec187,5185,7568State Grid184,496-3439AXA175,2575,01210China National Petroleum165,49610,27211Chevron163,52710,48312ING Group163,204-1,313General Electric156,77911,02514Total155,88711,74115Bank of America Corp.150,456,27616Volkswagen146,2051,33417ConocoPhillips139,5154,85818BNP Paribas130,7088,10619Assicurazioni Generali126,0121,8220Allianz125,9995,97321AT&T123,01812,53522Carrefour121,45245423Ford Motor118,3082,71724ENI117,2356,0725J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.115,63211,72826Hewlett-Packard114,5527,6627E.ON113,84911,6728Berkshire Hathaway112,4938,05529GDF Suez111,0696,22330Daimler109,7-3,6731Nippon Telegraph & Telephone109,6565,30232Samsung Electronics108,9277,56233Citigroup108,785-1,60634McKesson108,7021,26335Verizon Communications107,8083,65136Credit Agricole106,5381,56437Banco Santander106,34512,4338General Motors104,589--39HSBC Holdings103,7365,83440Siemens103,6053,097Appendix 2


International projects of LUKOIL


Appendix 3


Projects of LUKOIL in Uzbekistan



Похожие работы

<< < 5 6 7 8 9