Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica, Vol 13, No 6 (2017)

Foreign Direct Investment-Growth Nexus in Emerging Markets: does Human Capital Development Matter?

Kunofiwa Tsaurai¹

Abstract: The study explored the impact of foreign direct investment (FDI) on economic growth and examined if human capital development is a channel through which FDI influence economic growth. Literature shows that the impact of FDI on economic growth is no longer a disputed matter. What is still unresolved is an agreeable list of channels through which FDI affects economic growth. This prompted the author to investigate if human capital development is a channel through which FDI influence economic growth in emerging markets using a dynamic panel generalised methods of moments (GMM) technique. Moreover, majority of previous studies on FDI-growth nexus overlooked the endogeneity issues and the dynamic nature of economic growth data. According to the author’s best knowledge, this is the first study which investigated if human capital development is a channel through which economic growth triggered by FDI takes place in emerging markets. FDI positively but non-significantly influenced economic growth in emerging markets. When FDI was interacted with human capital development, the size of the positive impact on economic growth improved but was still non-significant. Emerging markets are therefore urged to implement policies aimed at increasing human capital development in order to enhance FDI’s ability to influence economic growth.

Keywords: FDI; Growth; Human Capital Development; Emerging Markets

JEL Classification: F21; J24; F43

1. Introduction

1.1. Background of the Study

A general increase in foreign direct investment (FDI) flow between countries the world over has significantly been happening in recent years. According to UNCTAD (2017), total FDI inflow across the whole world went up from US$0.96 trillion in 2005 to US$1.52 trillion in 2016. The flow of FDI is very important as substantiated by UNCTAD (2012) report which disclosed that FDI flow over the years has proven to be a major source of economic growth and development, especially for emerging markets. What the UNCTAD (2012) report assumed was that FDI has got a direct impact on economic growth in the host countries. The assumption has been challenged by empirical researchers (Adams, 2009; Vita & Kyaw, 2009; Omri & Kahouli, 2014; Almfraji & Almsafir, 2014; Asong, 2014) who argued that certain absorption capacities must be existing in the host countries if FDI is to be able to have an impact on economic growth. Relevant to the current study, other studies noted that for FDI to influence economic growth, human capital development as an absorption capacity must be available in the host countries (Shahbaz & Rahman. 2010; Bailliu, 2000). The current study complements a forthcoming article by Tsaurai (XXXX) which focused on human capital development threshold levels needed to trigger significant FDI in that it explored if human capital development is a channel through which FDI influences economic growth in emerging markets.

1.2. Problem Statement and Research Gap

Despite emerging markets being major recipients of FDI in the last decade, empirical studies that investigated the impact of FDI on economic growth in emerging markets as a bloc are quite scant. Fu et al. (2011) found out that modern governance, institutional structures and structured local innovation programs must be prevailing in the emerging markets to enable them to benefit from international technological diffusion. A study by Gorodnichenko et al. (2007) observed that the type of a firm and not high technological advancement of MNEs determined the FDI’s impact on economic growth in 17 emerging markets studied. Other empirical studies which investigated the FDI-growth nexus in emerging markets were done by Bailliu (2000), Adeoye (2007), Shahbaz and Rahman (2010) and Peter et al. (2012). All the FDI-growth nexus which were done on emerging markets are characterised by the following shortcomings. (1) They ignored the dynamic nature of the economic growth data, (2) they did not address the endogeneity problem which emanates from the feedback effect between FDI and economic growth, (3) the data they used is now outdated and their findings can no longer be used for current policy making purposes, (4) did not examine if human capital development is a channel through which FDI influences economic growth, which is the focus of the current study.

1.3. Contribution of the Paper

Apart from using the most up to date data, the current study addressed the issues that were ignored by most of the previous studies on FDI-growth nexus. These include the dynamic nature of FDI data and the endogeneity problem. To the best of the author’s best knowledge, this is the first study to examine if human capital development is a channel through FDI influences economic growth in emerging markets using an estimation technique which captures the dynamic nature of FDI data and endogeneity problem (dynamic GMM estimation technique).

1.4. Organization of the Paper

Theoretical and empirical literature is discussed in section 2. Methodology of the study is explained in section 3. The same section describes the variables used in the study, performs pre-estimation diagnostics, panel stationarity tests, panel co-integration tests and dynamic GMM estimation tests. Section 4 concludes the study whilst section 5 provides a reference list.

2. Literature Review

The present theory on the impact of FDI on economic growth focus on what FDI brings along which then influences economic growth in the host country. In other words, it is silent on the conditions that must be present in the host country to enhance FDI triggered economic growth benefits. For example, the modernisation theory says that FDI brings the capital and technology to the host country which is a necessity for economic growth (Calvo & Sanchez-Robles, 2002). The endogenous growth theory argue that FDI brings along to the host country necessary economic growth ingredients such as technology, training of labour, capital, managerial and organizational skills (Romer, 1986; Lucas, 1988; Kumar & Pradhan, 2002). The neoclassical growth theory is of the view that FDI is foreign savings or additional physical capital stock injected into the host country which only brings short term economic growth benefits (Solow, 1956; Swan, 1956). Empirical studies done so far on FDI-growth nexus have produced results that can be classified into four broad categories and these are (1) FDI-led growth, (2) feedback, (3) no or insignificant hypothesis and (4) existence of certain absorption capacities perspective. Table 1 below shows a summary of empirical studies on FDI-growth nexus.

3.Research Methodology

3.1. Data, Variables and a Priori Expectation

Twenty-one emerging markets’ secondary data ranging from 1994 to 2014 was used for the purposes of the current study. The data was obtained from databases of reputable international institutions such as World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), Global Financial Indicators, United Nations Development Programme and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. The data was already converted into a common currency (United States Dollars), which according to (Nnadi & Soobaroyen, 2015, p. 233) made it easier to compare and analyse the results. The current study only included countries contained in the IMF (2015) list of emerging markets whose data for all the variables studied could be obtained. The 21 countries include Argentina, Brazil, China, Colombia, Czech Republic, Greece, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand and Turkey.

The dependent variable in the current study is economic growth, FDI is the independent variable whereas control variables include savings, financial development, inflation, infrastructural development and trade openness in line with prior empirical studies (Sghaier & Abida, 2013; Nor et al., 2015).

Savings increases investment thus providing a platform which guarantees sustainable levels of growth (Romer, 1986; Lucas, 1988; Singh, 2010). On the other hand, prominent economists such as Schumpeter (1911), McKinnon (1973) and Shaw (1973), among others supported a view that financial sector development has a positive influence on economic growth through mobilising savings and allocating them towards productive sectors of the economy, facilitating risk management and easing the trading of goods and services.

Schreft and Smith (1997) argued that higher inflation increases interest rates and non-efficient allocation of scarce resources, both of which lead to subdued rate of economic growth. High inflation discourage households from saving and this consequently stifle economic growth (Haslag & Koo, 1999). The level of infrastructural development enhances economic growth by acting as a conduit through which FDI is harnessed, in line with Denisia (2010). The view that infrastructural development is critical for economic growth was supported by Fedderke and Garlick (2008) who argued that infrastructure is a necessary ingredient in the economic growth and development process.

Trade openness can either have a positive or negative impact on the economy in line with prior empirical studies. For example, domestic firms are enabled to import key inputs for their production processes (Coe & Helpman, 1995) or export their products to the international markets hence boosting foreign exchange inflow into the economy (Chenery & Strout, 1966; Balassa, 1978; Hart, 1983; Ben-David & Loewy, 1998). On the other hand, the economy can suffer because local companies prefer to buy from other countries even commodities which are manufactured and available locally, consistent with Baltagi et al. (2009).

3.2. Empirical Model Specification

Equation 1 summarises the literature discussed in sub-section 3.1 in as far as the relationship between FDI and economic growth is concerned.

GDP =f(FDI, INFL, FIN, SAV, OPEN, INFR) (1)

Where GDP, FDI, INFL, FIN, SAV, OPEN and INFR respectively stands for economic growth, foreign direct investment, inflation, financial development, savings, trade openness and infrastructural development.

Following other similar studies on FDI-growth nexus, net FDI as a ratio of GDP, stock market capitalisation ratio, gross domestic savings as a ratio of GDP, GDP per capita, inflation consumer prices (annual %), electric power consumption (kWh per capita) and total imports and exports (% of GDP) were used in the current study as measures for FDI, financial development, savings, economic growth, inflation, infrastructural development and trade openness respectively.

As a starting point, the current study investigates the direct impact of FDI on economic growth in emerging markets and estimate the equation below using dynamic GMM approach, consistent with Sghaier and Abida (2013:6).

Ɛit (2)

GDP_it-1is the lag of GDP, subscripts and stands for country and time respectively and Ɛit is the error term. is a matrix of control variables mentioned earlier on in this sub-section whilst is the time invariant and unobserved country specific effect. is the intercept term whereas , and are co-efficients of GDP, FDI and matrix of control variables (INFL,FIN,SAV,OPEN,INFR) respectively.

The second objective of the current study is to find out if human capital development is a channel through which FDI influences economic growth in emerging markets. In line with literature, the hypotheses meant to address this objective appears as follows:

H0: Human capital development is a channel through which FDI influences economic growth in emerging markets.

HA: Human capital development is not a channel through which FDI influences economic growth in emerging markets.

Consistent with Nor et al.’s (2015) approach, the current study interacted the FDI and human capital development variables and then tested the significance and sign of the interacted co-efficient in order to approve or disapprove the null hypothesis –see equation 3.

Ɛit (3)

Equation 3 was then estimated using the dynamic panel GMM approach by Arellano and Bond (1991). If is positive or positive and significant, the results would have shown that the influence of FDI on economic growth is enhanced if human capital development in emerging markets improves. Human capital development was proxied by human capital development index for the purposes of the current study, in line with Shahbaz and Rahman (2010).

Standard deviation from the mean for GDP per capita and infrastructural development is above one thousand, which is evidence of the existence of extreme values in the two variables. The probabilities of the Jarque-Bera criteria are zero for all the variables under study which is proof that the data used is not normally distributed. Furthermore, the Kurtosis values in Table 3 shows that the data for all the variables are positively skewed which is further evidence of the absence of normal distribution. All the data was then transformed into natural logarithms before being used further in order to deal away with the problem of extreme values and absence of normal distribution, consistent with (Hair et al., 2014, p. 80).

3.5. Panel Unit Root Tests

Table 4. Panel root tests –Individual intercept

Source: Author’s compilation from E-Views

Note: LLC, IPS, ADF and PP stands for Levin, Lin and Chu; Im, Pesaran and Shin; ADF Fisher Chi Square and PP Fisher Chi Square tests respectively. *, ** and *** denote 10%, 5% and 1% levels of significance, respectively.

Table 4 shows that not all variables under study were stationary at level. When unit root testing was performed at first difference, all the variables under study became stationary. In other words, the variables studied were integrated of order 1, a condition that must be met before further empirical tests are done, following Jiang and Liu (2014).

3.6. Panel co-Integration Tests

Table 5. Johansen Fisher Panel Co-integration test

Source: Author’s compilation from E-Views

Johansen Fisher panel co-integration framework was used to investigate if there is a long run relationship between economic growth, FDI, human capital development, inflation, financial development, savings, infrastructural development and trade openness in emerging markets. Table 5 shows that the null hypothesis that say there is at most seven co-integrating vectors among the variables studied is accepted. This finding was confirmed by both Fisher’s trace and max-eigen tests (see Table 5).

The next stage involved the use of the dynamic panel GMM estimation technique to determine (1) the impact of FDI on economic growth and (2) if human capital development is a channel through which FDI affected economic growth in emerging markets.

3.7. Dynamic Panel GMM Estimation Technique Results and Discussion

Table 6. Dynamic GMM Results

Source: Author’s compilation from E-Views

Notes: GDP per capita is the dependent variable. ***, ** and * denote 1%, 5% and 10% levels of significance, respectively.

In both models 1 and 2, FDI positively but non-significantly influenced on economic growth in line with Temiz and Gokmen (2014) whose study observed that the influence of FDI on economic growth in Turkey was positive but non-significant both in the long and short run. Resonating with theoretical predictions, both models show that lag of GDP per capita, human capital development, financial development (stock market capitalisation), savings and infrastructural development had a positive and significant impact on economic growth in the emerging markets. Inflation negatively but non-significantly affected economic growth in both models, consistent with Haslag and Koo (1999). On the other hand, trade openness had a negative and significant influence on economic growth in the emerging markets in both models in line with Baltagi et al (2009) whose study argued that an economy can suffer if local companies prefer to buy from other countries even commodities which are manufactured and available locally.

The co-efficient of the interaction term between FDI and human capital development was found to be positive but non-significant in the emerging economies studied. Although not significant, the study found out that human capital development provided a channel through which FDI influenced economic growth in emerging markets. This finding resonates with Shahbaz and Rahman (2010) whose study argued that a developed human capital development index was a necessary precondition for Pakistan to benefit from technological diffusion associated with foreign capital inflows.

4. Conclusion

The paper explored the impact of FDI on economic growth and also investigated if human capital development is a channel through FDI influence economic growth in emerging markets. Although the relationship between FDI and economic growth is no longer a contestable matter in literature, channels through which FDI influences economic growth have not received adequate attention and it’s still an unresolved issue in the literature. It is for this reason that the current study focused on finding out if human capital development is a channel through which FDI influence economic growth in emerging markets using a dynamic panel GMM estimation technique. In both models (with and without an interaction term), FDI was found to have had a positive but non-significant influence on economic growth in emerging markets. When FDI was interacted with human capital development, the size of the positive impact on economic growth was found to have improved but still non-significant. The impact of the lag of GDP, trade openness, financial development, savings, infrastructural development and inflation on economic growth in emerging markets was in line with theoretical predictions. The implications of the study are that emerging markets should implement policies aimed at improving human capital development in order to directly boost economic growth or to enhance FDI’s ability to influence economic growth. Other measures meant to accelerate economic growth which emerging markets should implement include: (1) promoting infrastructural development, savings and financial development, (2) inflation reduction policies and (3) moderating trade openness. Future studies must expand the current study by investigating other channels through which FDI influences economic growth.

5. References

Adams, S. (2009). Foreign direct investment, domestic investment and economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Policy Modelling, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 939-949.

Adeoye, A. (2007). Macro-economic level corporate governance and FDI in emerging markets: Is there a close relationship?. A Masters Dissertation. King’s College London.

Alguacil, M.; Cuadros, A. & Orts, V. (2011). Inward FDI and growth: The role of macroeconomic and institutional environment. Journal of Policy Modelling, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 481-496.

Almfraji, M.A. & Almsafir, M.K. (2014). Foreign direct investment and economic growth literature review from 1994 to 2012. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, vol. 129, no. May, pp. 206-213.

Arellano, M. & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 277-297.

Asong, S.A. (2014). Linkages between investment flows and financial development. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 269-299.

Azam, M. & Ahmed, A.M. (2014). Role of human capital and foreign direct investment in promoting economic growth: Evidence from Commonwealth of Independent States. Journal of Economic Studies, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 434-449.

Baharumshah, A.Z. & Almasaied, S.W. (2009). Foreign direct investment and economic growth in Malaysia: Interactions with human capital and financial deepening. Emerging markets finance and trade journal, vol. 45, no.1, pp. 90 – 102.

Bailliu, J.N. (2000). Private capital flows, financial development and economic growth in developing countries. Working Paper 2000-15. International Department Bank of Canada. pp. 1-22.

Balassa, B. (1978). Exports and economic growth: further evidence. Journal of development economics, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 181-189.

Baltagi, B.H.; Demitriades, P.O. & Law, S.H. (2009). Financial development, openness and institutions: Evidence from panel data. Journal of Development Economics, vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 285-296.

Ben-David, D. & Loewy, M.B. (1998). Free trade, growth and convergence. Journal of Economic Growth, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 143-170.

Buckley, P.J.; Wang, C. & Clegg, J. (2007). The impact of foreign ownership, local ownership and industry characteristics on spill-over benefits from foreign direct investment in China. International Business Review, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 142-158.

Calvo, M.B. & Sanchez-Robles, B. (2002). Foreign direct investment, Economic freedom and Economic growth: New evidence from Latin America. Universidad de Cartabria, Economics Working Paper, No. 4/03.

Chakraborty, C. & Nunnenkamp, P. (2008). Economic reforms, FDI and Economic growth in India: A sector level analysis. World Development, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 1192-1212.

Chenery, H.B. and Strout, A.M. (1966). Foreign assistance and economic development. The American Economic Review, Vol. 56, No.4, pp. 679-733.

Coe, T.D. & Helpman, E. (1995). International research and development spillovers. European Economic Review, vol. 39, no.5, pp. 859-887.

Denisia, V. (2010). Foreign direct investment theories: An overview of the main theories. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 104-110.

Eller, M.; Haiss, P. & Steiner, K. (2006). Foreign direct investment in the financial sector and economic growth in Central and Eastern Europe: The crucial role of the efficiency channel. Emerging markets review, vol. 7, no.4, pp. 300-319.

Ekanayake, E.M. & Ledgerwood, J.R. (2010). How does foreign direct investment affect growth in developing countries? An empirical investigation. The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, vol. 4, no.3, pp. 43-53.

Fedderke, J.W. & Romm, A.T. (2006). Growth impact and determinants of foreign direct investment into South Africa. Economic Modelling, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 738-760.

Fedderke, J. & Garlick, R. (2008). Infrastructure development and economic growth in South Africa: A review of the accumulated evidence. School of Economics. University of Cape Town and Economic Research Southern Africa Policy Paper Number 12, pp. 1-28.

Fu, X.; Pietrobelli, C. & Soete, L. (2011). The role of foreign technology and indigenous innovation in the emerging economies: Technological change and catching up. World Development, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 1204-1212.

Gorodnichenko, Y.; Svejnar, J. & Terrell, K. (2007). When does FDI have positive spillovers?. Evidence from 17 emerging market economies. CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP6546.

Hair, Jr.; Black W.C.; Babin, B.J. & Anderson, R.E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson New International Edition. Seventh Edition.

Hart, O. (1983). The market mechanism as an incentive scheme. Bell Journal of Economics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 366-382.

Haslag, J. & Koo, J. (1999). Financial repression, financial development and economic growth, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. Working Paper Number, 99-02.

Im, K.S.; Pesaran, M.H. & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, vol. 115, no. 1, pp. 53-74.

International Monetary Fund. (2015). World Economic Outlook: Adjusting to Lower Commodity Prices. Washington (October).

Jiang, H. & Liu, C. (2014). A panel vector error correction approach to forecasting demand in regional construction markets. Construction Management and Economics, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 1205-1221.

Kumar, N. & Pradhan, J.P. (2002). FDI, externalities and economic growth in developing countries: Some empirical explorations and implications for WTO negotiations on investment. RIS, Discussion Paper No. 27/2002. New Delhi, India.

Lean (2008). The impact of foreign direct investment on the growth of the manufacturing sector in Malaysia. International applied economics and management letters, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 41-45.

Levin, A. Lin, C.F. and Chu, C.S.J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 108, No.1, pp. 1-24.

Lyroudi, K. and Apergis, N. (2008). The relationship between foreign direct investment and economic growth: Evidence from transition countries. Transition Studies Review, Vol. 15, No.1, pp. 37-51.

Lucas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 3-42.

McKinnon, R.I. (1973). Money and Capital in Economic Development. The Brooklings Institution, Washington, DC.

Naguib, R.I. (2012). The effects of privatization and foreign direct investment on economic growth in Argentina: An international and comparative review. The Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 51-82.

Nnandi, M. & Soobaroyen, T. (2015). International financial reporting standards and foreign direct investment: The case of Africa. Advances in accounting, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 228-238.

Nor, N.H.H.M; Ripain, N. & Ahmad, N.W. (2015). Financial development and FDI-Growth nexus: Panel Analysis. Proceeding of the 2^nd International Conference on Management and Muamalah, pp. 435-446.

Omri, A. & Kahouli, B. (2014). The nexus among foreign investment, domestic capital and economic growth: Empirical evidence from the MENA region. Research in Economics, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 257-263.

Pegkas, P. (2015). The impact of FDI on economic growth in Eurozone countries. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 124-132.

Peter, K.S.; Svejnar, J. & Terrell, K. (2012). Foreign investment, corporate ownership and development: Are firms in emerging markets catching up to the world standard?. The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 94, no. 4, pp. 981-999.

Romer, P. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, vol. 94, no.2, pp. 1002-1037.

Schreft, S.L. & Smith, B.D. (1997). Money, banking and capital formation. Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 157-182.

Schumpeter, J.A. (1911). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sghaier, I.M. & Abida, Z. (2013). Foreign direct investment, financial development and economic growth: Empirical evidence from North African countries. Journal of International and Global Economic Studies, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-13.

Shahbaz, M. & Rahman, M.M. (2010). Foreign capital inflows-growth nexus and the role of domestic financial sector: An ARDL co-integration approach for Pakistan. Journal of Economic Research, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 207-231.

Shaw, E.S. (1973). Financial Deepening in Economic Development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Singh, T. (2010). Does domestic savings cause economic growth? A time series evidence from India. Journal of Policy Modelling, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 231-253.

Solow, R.M. (1956). A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 70, no. 1, pp. 65-94.

Stead, R. (1996). Foundation quantitative methods for business. England: Prentice Hall.

Swan, T. (1956). Economic growth and capital accumulation. The Economic Record, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 334-361.

Tanggapantnam, D.; Geetha, C.; Mohidin, R. & Vincent, V. (2011). The relationship between economic growth and foreign direct investment in Malaysia: Analysis based on location advantage theory. International Journal of Economics and Management Science, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 24-31.

Temiz, D. & Gokme, A. (2014). FDI inflow as an international business operation by MNCs and economic growth: An empirical study on Turkey. International Business Review, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 145-154.

Tsaurai, K. (XXXX). Analysis of the influence of human capital development on foreign investment in BRICS countries using a static panel threshold regression model. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, vol. X, no. Y, pp. xxx-xxx. www.inderscience.com/info/ingeneral/forthcoming.php?jcode=ijbg.

UNCTAD (2012). World Investment Report. New York: United Nations.

UNCTAD (2017). United Nations Global Investment Trends monitor Number 25, 1 February 2017, pp. 1-8.

Vita, G. & Kyaw, K. (2009). Growth effects of FDI and portfolio investment flows to developing countries: A disaggregated analysis by income levels. Applied economics letters, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 277-283.

Zhang, Y.; Li, H.; Li, Y. & Zhou, L. (2010). FDI spillovers in an emerging market: The role of foreign firms’ country of origin diversity and domestic firms’ absorption capacity. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 969-989.

Refbacks

• There are currently no refbacks.