BB figures buck FDI flow statistics of investment board
Rejaul Karim Byron
While the Board of Investment (BoI) reports a 315 per cent increase in foreign direct investment last calendar year, the Bangladesh Bank (BB) figures rather show a 45 per cent plunge. And in terms of fiscal (July-June period), the flow of foreign direct investment (FDI) dipped 55 per cent last fiscal, according to the BB statistics. Figures show $28.50 million FDI inflow in last fiscal, which was $65 million in the previous fiscal. BB reports show the FDI flow has been on a steady decline since fiscal 1997-1998 when it stood at $249 million. According to the World Investment Report of Unctad, FDI dipped in Bangladesh and Nepal in South Asia 43.04 per cent and 52.38 per cent last calendar year. FDI increased 1.35 per cent in India, 113.77 per cent in Pakistan and 195.12 per cent in Sri Lanka. FDI remained static in the Maldives while the figure for Bhutan was not available. During the last calendar year, Bangladesh received $45 million in FDI, Unctad said, which was $79 million in the year before. The BoI however defers from this estimate and says FDI flow in last calendar year was $328.30 million. This includes $135.70 million in equity capital, $135.70 million in reinvestment and $77.70 million in intra-company borrowing. BoI sources said it calculates the flow of FDI according to the Unctad definition. But the BB calculates it by the traditional balance of payment method, which caused the difference in figures. The SoE and NCB Reforms Project Mission of the World Bank and the IMF recently commented; "While Bangladesh has been attracting some FDI, there had been lack of credible data on actual FDI inflow. Information on FDI inflow did not get recorded in a credible manner. The focus, in the past, had been on the number of investors registering with BoI during a particular period." "The expected figure of FDI expressed during that registration was used to portray FDI inflow figures. These figures, however, were quite inflated and had little relevance because actual investment were nowhere near those numbers."
|