Disentangling public opposition to Chinese FDI: trade unions, patient capital, and members’ preferences over FDI inflows

Abstract

I examine whether union membership affects individual foreign direct investment (FDI) preferences in ways that vary across investors’ country of origin. I argue that the country of FDI origin will bear upon how union members assess FDI, because it provides cues about what the economic prospects of (unionized) workers will look like under different foreign investors. I argue that the salient attribute of foreign investors is whether they originate from a country that is an important form of patient or impatient capital. Compared with non-members, members will be more supportive of FDI from countries embodying patient than impatient capital. Specifically, I expect the (positive) gap in support between FDI from patient and FDI from impatient capital countries to increase with union membership. Conversely, I expect the (positive) gap in support between FDI from impatient versus patient capital countries to decrease with membership. Evidence from original Swiss survey data corroborates my argument. Respondents were asked to evaluate FDI from China and Europe (entities embodying patient capital) and from the United States (a country embodying impatient capital). The results show that the gap in enthusiasm for European FDI versus American FDI increases with union membership, while the gap in enthusiasm for American FDI versus Chinese FDI decreases with membership. Complementary qualitative analysis of reports, documents, and testimonies by trade unions in continental Europe show that their views are in sync with those of their members, suggesting that unions shape their members’ FDI preferences. The findings have important implications for the politics of backlash against economic globalization.