Descriptive analysis
The important details of our bibliometric data, which comprise 1717 documents, published across 841 distinct sources, are shown in Table 2. The dataset covers the period beginning in 1987, making it the field’s very first publication. There are 45979 references cited overall, with 13.84 citations per document on average. The publications come in a variety of formats, including books, book chapters, reviews, and scientific articles. The analysis involves 2345 authors, with an average collaboration rate of 2.10 co-authors per document. Notably, approximately 20.38% percent of the collaborations involve international partnerships.
From 1987 to 2023, the line graph in Fig. 3 shows the publication trend for scientific articles on China’s OFDI. The first documented study by Johnson and Clark (1987)sheds light on the early recognition of China’s potential as an investment destination. The study highlighted that Chinese investment would become more favorable for multinational companies with comparative advantages in mineral exploration, mining and processing technologies, and marketing, emphasizing the need for in-depth Chinese expertise. Since then, the publication trend on this topic has been fluctuating with very few studies. Between 1978 and 1991, China’s government tightly regulated outward investments. Only state-owned enterprises (SOEs) were permitted to invest abroad, and even these required case-by-case approval, regardless of the investment amount (Wang and Gao, 2019). This rigid regulatory framework significantly restricted the scale and scope of OFDI activities, leaving little room for academic research or discourse on the subject. Moreover, in this period, China’s primary goal was to attract inward FDI rather than promote outward investment (Wu and Chen, 2001). Therefore, research and policy attention on the study and practice of OFDI were not prioritized at this time. But from 2000, when China introduced its “Going Global Strategy” to encourage Chinese companies to expand internationally, the trend showed a gradual increase. Several incentives and support measures were offered to Chinese companies under this policy to encourage them to invest abroad, establish overseas subsidiaries or joint ventures, acquire foreign companies, and engage in technology transfer and international collaborations (Luo et al., 2010). Due to this policy’s emphasis on expanding internationally and making cross-border investments, Chinese outbound FDI patterns, effects, and implications have attracted the attention of researchers. Another contributing factor to the surge in academic interest in China’s OFDI in this period was the unique opportunities that emerged for Chinese enterprises following the 2008 global financial crisis. During this period, many firms in developed economies faced severe financial constraints, declining markets, and operational challenges, creating a vacuum that Chinese companies were well-positioned to fill (Wang and Gao, 2019). While global FDI inflows declined by 14 percent in 2008, China resisted the trend, with its OFDI flow more than doubling to $55.9 billion that year (UNCTAD, 2009). This countercyclical growth spurred significant academic curiosity about the underlying factors driving China’s OFDI resilience and expansion (e.g., Buckley et al., 2007; Morck et al., 2008).
Notably, China established the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2013, a historic program focused on increasing connectivity and collaboration between China and countries along the ancient Silk Road routesFootnote 2. The publication trend was further accelerated by this initiative, generating widespread interest and attention in the field of research. Researchers began investigating the BRI’s influence on China’s outbound FDI, including investment flows, infrastructure projects, and economic impacts related to the initiative.
Taken together, the descriptive analysis shows that research on China’s OFDI has been shaped by policy milestones and global economic events. Restrictive regulations limited early scholarly output, while initiatives like the “Going Global Strategy” and the BRI encouraged academic attention. The surge of OFDI during the 2008 global financial crisis highlighted the uniqueness of China’s investment trajectory and attracted more research interest. These patterns provide a foundation for the deeper performance and mapping analyses that follow.
Citation analysis
The number of citations a published work receives is a key indicator in determining its caliber, significance, and scientific impact (Stremersch et al., 2007). Although various techniques, such as network metrics, can assess the significance of publications in a research field, the most direct and unbiased indicator of their impact is the number of citations they receive (Pieters and Baumgartner, 2002; Stremersch et al., 2007; Donthu et al., 2021). Therefore, citation analysis is used to assess the influential documents in China’s OFDI research field. Results in Table 3 shows the top 10 most influential documents based on the global citationsFootnote 3, indicating their relevance and contribution to the broader understanding of China’s OFDI. Besides, Table 4 shows the top 10 most trending documents based on the total citations per year.
It is found that Buckley et al. (2007) is the most influential work in this field for its pioneering effort to model the determinants of Chinese OFDI between 1984 and 2001. Its significance lies in several key factors that have earned widespread recognition among researchers. The study’s theoretical contributions are noteworthy, as it extends the applicability of the general theory of FDI to the context of an emerging economy like China. By testing established theoretical explanations, such as capital market imperfections and institutional factors, the study advances our understanding of the complex dynamics driving Chinese multinational enterprises (MNEs) to invest overseas. It highlights the interplay of unique contextual factors, including political risk, cultural proximity, and natural resource endowments, establishing a foundational benchmark for subsequent research on Chinese OFDI. Building upon this foundation, Cheung and Qian (2009), ranked as the 10th most impactful study, further investigate the empirical determinants of Chinese OFDI, focusing on the difference between investments in developed and developing countries. This study challenges conventional assumptions by demonstrating the dual motivations behind Chinese OFDI: market-seeking and resource-seeking motives. Unlike Buckley et al. (2007), Cheung and Qian (2009) offer insights into the role of Chinese exports and international reserves in influencing OFDI flows. Specifically, the study suggests that Chinese exports to developing countries play a significant role in stimulating OFDI, while international reserves are instrumental in promoting OFDI in developed countries. By distinguishing between these investment patterns, the study provides a deeper understanding of the multifaceted strategies underpinning China’s outward investment behavior.
In a similar vein, Kang and Jiang (2012), ranked 8th among the most impactful studies, explore the factors influencing the location choices of Chinese MNEs for OFDI. The research highlights the dynamic interplay between economic and institutional factors driving FDI flows. Notably, the study emphasizes the fluctuating influence of institutional variables such as economic freedom and political factors, across various temporal and regional contexts. This underscores the importance of understanding the evolving institutional landscapes and their implications for Chinese investment behaviors. Additionally, the study’s analysis of sub-regional dynamics within East and Southeast Asia uncovers the heterogeneous nature of FDI location decisions among Asian economies. By scrutinizing the distinct political, legal, and socio-cultural environments of different subgroups, the study deepens our understanding of the diverse drivers behind Chinese OFDI in the region. Kolstad and Wiig (2012), ranked 4th, further contribute to this discourse by investigating host country determinants of Chinese OFDI during the period from 2003 to 2006. Their research focuses on the interactive effects of institutions and natural resources. The findings highlight how the institutional environment and resource endowments influence Chinese investment decisions, particularly showcasing the attractiveness of countries with abundant natural resources but poor institutions.
Each of these studies adds unique value to the literature on the driving forces of Chinese OFDI by providing distinct perspectives and empirical evidence. Moreover, the remarkable increase in Chinese OFDI has also drawn scholarly interest towards examining the attributes of Chinese firms and the national policy contexts influencing their strategies for internationalization (Child and Rodrigues, 2005; Deng, 2007; Luo et al., 2010; Rui and Yip, 2008). In this context, the study by Luo et al. (2010), ranked 2nd most influential document, offers a theoretical framework and presents significant empirical findings that contribute to our understanding of China’s OFDI research landscape. One of the key findings is the identification of specific governmental policies and measures that have played a pivotal role in stimulating OFDI by Chinese enterprises. These policies range from financial incentives, such as grants, loans, and tax incentives, to non-financial support, including market access facilitation and diplomatic assistance. Furthermore, the study highlights the evolution of OFDI policies in China over time, tracing the trajectory of regulatory reforms and policy adjustments aimed at facilitating and promoting outward investment. This historical analysis reveals how the Chinese government’s approach to OFDI promotion has evolved in response to changing economic priorities, global market dynamics, and domestic regulatory environments.
Similarly, ranked 9th among the most influential studies, Deng (2007) makes a significant contribution to China’s OFDI research by examining the motivations driving Chinese multinational corporations (MNCs) to invest in developed countries. The study emphasizes the importance of acquiring strategic resources and capabilities as a key driver of these investments. Utilizing empirical evidence and case studies, the study reveals that Chinese MNCs predominantly pursue asset-seeking FDI to access strategic resources unavailable domestically but abundant in advanced foreign markets. The research identifies firm’s vulnerable strategic positions—characterized by intense competition and limited access to advanced domestic technologies and marketing expertise— as a primary driver promoting overseas expansion to address these challenges. Moreover, Deng (2007) aligns with Luo et al. (2010) in highlighting the role of Chinese government policies, such as tax incentives and low-interest loans, in encouraging MNCs to engage in overseas investments. These policies align with China’s strategic objectives to enhance global competitiveness. Additionally, the study underscores the critical role of asset acquisition in developed countries for strengthening technological capabilities and expanding global market reach. By bridging the technology gap through strategic investments, Chinese MNCs aim to elevate their competitive standing on the international stage.
In contrast, Morck et al. (2008), ranked 3rd most influential document, identify state-controlled enterprises as the primary drivers of China’s outward FDI, particularly those with government-sanctioned monopoly status. This finding sheds light on the dominance of state influence in shaping China’s international investment strategy and emphasizes the role of political considerations in guiding investment decisions. By linking the behavior of these enterprises to the broader institutional context characterized by high savings rates and bank-dominated capital allocation, the study provides insights into the structural factors driving China’s OFDI. In addition to these empirical observations, the study offers theoretical perspectives on the economic rationales behind China’s OFDI. It suggests that while conventional theories of FDI may apply, they take on unexpected forms in the Chinese context due to the unique institutional environment and incentive structures. For example, the study discusses how internalization theory and ownership reversal theory can help explain the motivations behind Chinese firms’ international expansion, despite the challenges posed by cultural and managerial differences.
However, the evolving approach of the Chinese government towards OFDI, as underscored by Luo et al. (2010), Deng (2007), and Morck et al. (2008), engenders varying institutional pressures at home, both temporally and across industries. This phenomenon is further drawn attention to in the influential work by Cui and Jiang (2012), ranked 5th among the most impactful documents. First and foremost, the study delves deeper into understanding how firms, particularly state-owned enterprises (SOEs), respond to external institutional pressures due to their political affiliation with the home-country government. The study demonstrates that SOEs, due to their political affiliation with the home-country government, exhibit a stronger tendency to adapt to institutional pressures, particularly in choosing joint ownership structures for their foreign affiliates. Furthermore, the study’s empirical analysis, based on primary data from 132 FDI entries by Chinese firms, provides robust evidence supporting its theoretical framework. It reveals that the effects of external institutional pressures on firms’ choice of FDI ownership structure are amplified when the share of equity held by state entities in the firm is high. This suggests that state ownership increases firms’ resource dependence on home-country institutions, leading to greater conformity to regulatory and normative pressures. Importantly, as Chinese firms increasingly expand their presence on the international stage, understanding the role of state ownership and institutional pressures becomes paramount for policymakers, practitioners, and scholars alike. Ramasamy et al. (2012), ranked 6th most influential document, extends this exploration by considering the specific motivations of SOEs and private-owned Chinese enterprises. Note that, while government-controlled firms are attracted to resource-rich countries with weaker political systems, internationalizing private Chinese firms exhibit more risk aversion and tend to provide value-added services. Additionally, SOEs are more inclined toward strategic motives, such as acquiring technology and know-how, while private firms lean towards existing theories for their OFDI decisions. Du and Zhang (2018), ranked 7th most influential document, also acknowledge the role of SOEs and non-SOEs in Chinese OFDI, but in response to the BRI policy with a particular emphasis on mergers and acquisitions. In the land-based Silk-road countries, the study revealed that both SOEs and non-SOEs contributed to the surge in acquisitions, with SOEs concentrating on infrastructure sectors and non-SOEs on non-infrastructure sectors.
Certainly, highly cited articles consistently hold significance for researchers and policymakers, as the knowledge they offer remains pertinent. This is evident in the fact that the first seven documents among the most impactful articles are also among the top ten trending pieces, demonstrating their ongoing importance. Despite this, as shown in Table 4, Gaur et al. (2018) attract attention by emphasizing the significance of the home country environment and international experience portfolios for Chinese emerging market firms (EMFs). It examines how the supportiveness of the home government and the unfavorable conditions of the home industry serve as key determinants, comparing their relative importance. This research aligns with the findings of Deng (2007) and Luo et al. (2010). Importantly, the study introduces the concept of international experience portfolios, illustrating how these portfolios moderate the effects of the home country environment on OFDI. Notably, it underscores that perceived government supportiveness outweighs unfavorable industry conditions in shaping the OFDI activities of Chinese EMFs. However, there is a growing emphasis on China’s OFDI, particularly regarding environmental concerns, which hold paramount importance. This concern arises from the recognition that China, as a major global player in OFDI, has the potential to influence environmental outcomes significantly, both within its borders and in the countries where it invests. For instance, one of the most trending articles, Hao et al. (2020) delves into the intricate relationship between China’s OFDI and domestic carbon dioxide emissions and reveal the effects of OFDI, encompassing scale, technical, and compositional impacts. Besides, another trending article—An et al. (2021) offers important insights into China’s OFDI within the BRI and its environmental implications. It confirms the income-induced EKC hypothesis in lower to medium-polluted BRI countries, suggesting that economic growth may eventually lead to reduced carbon emissions. However, the study also highlights the Pollution Haven Hypothesis (PHH), showing that Chinese OFDI increases carbon emissions in medium to high-polluted countries. Additionally, it identifies significant spillover effects of Chinese OFDI, such as technology transfer and employment creation, underscoring the potential for both economic development and environmental impact mitigation through strategic investment strategies.
In summary, the citation analysis shows that foundational contributions influence scholarly debates on the drivers of China’s OFDI, such as strategic resource acquisition and state institutions. At the same time, more recent trending works broaden the focus toward environmental impacts, technology transfer, and developmental spillovers, reflecting responsiveness to global concerns. Together, these contributions illustrate the continuity and evolution of research agendas.
Collaboration patterns
The analysis of international collaboration in China’s OFDI research highlights both the breadth and unevenness of global scholarly engagement (Fig. 4). The collaboration map represents countries as nodes and their relationships as links, where node size corresponds to the volume of publications and link thickness reflects the strength of co-authorship. Distinct colors indicate clusters of countries that collaborate more closely collaborating countries, visually depicting the field’s intellectual geography.
Collaboration network of countries based on the authors’ country of origin.
China occupies the largest and most central node in this network, reflecting its status as the core subject of inquiry and the intensity of its academic engagement. Authors affiliated with Chinese institutions have collaborated with scholars from 38 countries, underscoring the country’s role as the primary hub of knowledge production in this field. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia follow closely, engaging with 34, 30, and 20 countries, respectively. These patterns reveal a broad yet asymmetrical network, with advanced economies dominating the center. In contrast, collaborations with regions that are major recipients of Chinese investment, such as Africa and Eastern Europe, remain comparatively limited.
Several factors underpin these patterns. Regional proximity and shared economic interests often encourage collaboration (Kraut et al., 1988). Developed countries such as the USA, the UK, and Australia frequently appear among China’s top collaborators. These countries share not only common economic interests but also geographic proximity and common scientific objectives. Beyond geography, practical research needs, such as accessing specialized data, evaluating policy outcomes, and analyzing broader economic impacts, motivate international teams (Katz and Martin, 1997). Political considerations further shape this network (Katz and Martin, 1997), as China’s expanding global economic influence attracts scholarly attention and fosters collaborations that reflect broader geopolitical relationships.
The map also highlights the role of regional clusters. Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Malaysia appear as important nodes in Asia, often acting as bridges between Chinese institutions and the wider international community. In Europe, countries such as Germany, France, and the Netherlands are well integrated, while Eastern European countries remain peripheral, with only limited ties to the core clusters. Collaboration with African economies exists but is comparatively weaker—mostly channeled through South Africa and Nigeria—despite the continent’s prominence as a recipient of Chinese OFDI. Another notable feature is the fragmented yet growing South–South collaborations, particularly between China and countries like Pakistan, India, and Brazil. These partnerships, while not as dense as those with Western counterparts, indicate an important diversification of perspectives that may reshape the intellectual agenda in the future.
Overall, the collaboration landscape reveals that research on China’s OFDI has matured into an international enterprise, but it is still characterized by a core–periphery structure. The dominance of advanced economies in shaping theoretical frameworks and research agendas highlights the need to incorporate more perspectives from host countries and emerging economies. Expanding such collaborations will not only diversify the intellectual discourse but also ensure that the field captures the full complexity of China’s global investment footprint.
Content analysis and thematic mapping
Content clusters
The co-occurrence analysis revealed in Fig. 5 showcases the most frequently used keywords in studies on China’s OFDI. To ensure clarity and focus on important relationships and structures, keywords with a minimum occurrence of ten were included in the visualization. The interconnectedness of keywords is represented by lines, indicating their frequent co-occurrence. The color-coded clusters of keywords illustrate the distribution of clusters, keywords, and their relationships.
Network visualization of bibliometric clustering.
It is found that there are five distinct yet interconnected clusters. Each cluster contains the primary keywords—China’s FDI, or OFDI, or investment in host countries as they are the largest and have the most members. The first cluster is depicted in purple color on the map and explores various topics such as development strategy, capital flow, capital market dynamics, industrial investments, manufacturing, infrastructural development, natural resource utilization, investment location decisions, the role of multinational enterprises, and both state-owned and private sectors that shape the investment strategies and outcomes. Cluster two, vividly portrayed in red, extends the scope to explore various dimensions of China’s global participation. It includes topics such as international relations, soft power dynamics, trade relationships, European Union interactions, governance approaches, political economy, infrastructural development, and geopolitical dynamics, providing insights into China’s multifaceted role in the international arena. The third cluster, depicted in blue, takes a focused look at China’s Belt and Road Initiative and its profound implication for international trade, finance, mergers and acquisitions, Chinese enterprises, their operational efficiencies, location preferences, and its effects on the host countries’ economic and social well-being including employment opportunities. Cluster four, with its olive-colored distinctiveness, focuses its investigation on energy-related topics, such as energy security, energy resources, alternative and renewable energy sources, energy policies, and energy market dynamics, emphasizing the pivotal role of energy in China’s OFDI strategies. Lastly, cluster five, depicted in green, focuses on the environmental perspective of China’s OFDI. It casts a keen eye on topics such as carbon dioxide emissions, emission control strategies, environmental regulations, the development of green economies, as well as the role of international cooperation, innovation, and spillover effects in matters pertaining to the environment. Overall, these five interconnected clusters of keywords provide a comprehensive picture of diverse efforts from scholars to understand China’s overseas investment.
Thematic mapping
The network visualization of Fig. 5, moreover, provides a wide-ranging representation of the important keywords associated with China’s OFDI that allows us to identify primary themes and eight key dimensions, as portrayed in Fig. 6. Furthermore, it illustrates the interrelationships and connections among these themes across eight different dimensions of this dynamic field. The aggregate dimensions are formed by consolidating multiple second-order themes (Sharma et al., 2023).
Concepts, themes, and dimensions.
China’s outward investment strategy is grounded in deliberate business planning and enterprise expansion, aimed at positioning Chinese firms competitively within global value chains (Armstrong, 2011; Ittefaq et al., 2023; Marjanović et al., 2022). These forward-looking strategies have fostered international trade and regional cooperation, upgrading production capabilities in host countries and enhancing economic complexity in regions with initially lower industrial sophistication (Yeung and Huber, 2023). However, these expansionary moves also raise concerns. Scholars point to the risks of crowding out local firms, creating asymmetric bargaining power, and fostering dependency on Chinese capital (Thuan, 2017; Fan and Wang, 2020). In sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, while Chinese initiatives have created growth opportunities, they have been criticized for limited technology transfer and for reinforcing distributional inequalities, thereby questioning their long-term pro-poor impact (Verkhovets and Karaoğuz, 2022).
Alongside commercial goals, political diplomacy and institutional governance significantly shape China’s global investment practices (Berger, 2019). Governance factors play a crucial role in determining the viability of large-scale projects, particularly infrastructure initiatives (De Beule and Zhang, 2022). While these initiatives have fostered new partnerships, they have also ignited debates about “debt-trap diplomacy” and the implications of BRI for sovereignty, transparency, and financial vulnerability in host countries (Tong et al., 2018; Al-Fadhat and Prasetio, 2022). Although recent evidence suggests that Chinese OFDI under the BRI does not systematically exacerbate distressed debt levels (Wang et al., 2023), the perception of financial vulnerability persists, especially in countries with fragile governance institutions (Fon and Alon, 2022).
China’s outward investment also reflects a multifaceted economic framework and market dynamics (Murton et al., 2016). Through capital accumulation and investment risk assessments, China actively participates in international trade and cooperation (Simons et al., 2016), shaping global resource allocation (Lim, 2010). In many contexts, these investments enhance the economic complexity of host countries and help upgrade their production capabilities (Yeung and Huber, 2023). However, some perceive these investment flows as strategically biased toward advancing China’s geopolitical influence rather than prioritizing host-country development. These tensions are particularly evident in Latin America and the Caribbean, where infrastructure projects, while aligned with China’s development strategies, often pose significant social and environmental risks (Gransow, 2015).
Legal and regulatory compliance is often discussed in the literature as both a safeguard and a challenge. On one hand, Chinese firms are increasingly engaging with international standards and legal norms (Dong et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2022). These robust governance mechanisms and regulatory frameworks promote transparency and accountability in international business ventures (Wu and Zhang, 2021). On the other hand, weak enforcement in host countries can create governance gaps, regulatory avoidance, and labor rights concerns (Haglund, 2008; Sutherland et al., 2020).
Cultural context and societal dynamics also play a significant role, as cultural distance influences investment choices and collaboration strategies (Abdulsalam et al., 2021; Qi and Rao, 2021; Zheng et al., 2022). While local economic impacts, such as job creation and infrastructure development, often strengthen host-country acceptance of Chinese projects (Liao et al., 2021), questions remain about inclusivity. This is particularly evident in Sub-Saharan Africa, where some argue that globalization linked to China has not been broadly pro-poor (Verkhovets and Karaoğuz, 2022).
Environmental sustainability and resource management represent perhaps the most contested aspects of China’s outward investment strategy (Pareja-Alcaraz, 2017). China is acutely aware of the close relationship between economic progress and environmental sustainability, actively engaging in collaborative efforts to address global environmental challenges (Su et al., 2022). The country invests significantly in renewable energy projects, contributing to global sustainability goals while enhancing energy security (Fakheri, 2021). These investments catalyze technological advancements and optimize resources, fostering sustainable development in partner countries (Pan et al., 2022). Empirical findings indicate that, on average, China’s OFDI leads to a net reduction in carbon intensity across BRI countries (Wang et al., 2023). However, the outcomes vary significantly: in some African and BRI countries, investments have been associated with increased CO₂ emissions, deforestation, or ecological disruption, echoing the “pollution haven” hypothesis (Oladipupo and Ajide, 2024).
Consequently, technological innovation and knowledge transfer complement China’s outward investment strategy, driving spillover effects and fostering global innovation ecosystems (Yin and Yan, 2020). China’s investments in green technologies facilitate technology transfer and promote sustainable development (Heerma van Voss and Rafaty, 2022), underscoring its commitment to advancing global technological progress and knowledge dissemination (Li et al., 2022). Nonetheless, these positive spillovers are not consistently realized across host countries, as limited absorptive capacity often hampers meaningful knowledge exchange (Cai et al., 2023; Sun and Fan, 2023).
Finally, policy development and analytical techniques are crucial in shaping China’s outward investment strategy. Evidence-based tools such as demand analysis, regression models, and trend analysis are frequently employed in the literature to inform outward investment strategies and guide future reforms (Dai et al., 2021; Cheng and Qi, 2021; Ge et al., 2022).
In summary, the thematic mapping reveals that China’s OFDI research landscape is neither uniformly positive nor wholly detrimental. Instead, it reflects a complex field marked by strategic ambition, institutional challenges, developmental opportunities, and critical controversies. While China’s investments undeniably reshape global economic geographies, their implications vary significantly across contexts, highlighting the importance of governance quality, societal inclusivity, and environmental safeguards in determining outcomes.
Thematic evolution
The research landscape surrounding China’s OFDI has evolved significantly across distinct periods, as depicted in Fig. 7, which is derived from the overlay visualization of Fig. 5 and the themes built in Fig. 6. This scholarly evolution reflects the shifting priorities and challenges faced by China as it expanded its investments globally.
Evolution of research themes on China’s OFDI.
It is found that, in the early investment years, prior to the launch of the BRI, studies predominantly concentrated on understanding the foundational elements crucial for China’s global investment strategy. Researchers delved into the mechanisms of capital flow and the structure of capital markets, which were critical for mobilizing resources to support China’s overseas ventures (Hong and Sun, 2006; Martin, 2010). Simultaneously, attention was directed toward China’s strategies for resource acquisition and industrial investments, which played a key role in guiding early investment decisions (Zhang and He, 2009). This phase also marked the rise of global integration, with Chinese multinational enterprises stepping onto the international stage (Chou et al., 2011). Consequently, researchers turned their focus to understanding international relations and governance strategies (Alon and Cherp, 2012; Berger, 2011; Taylor, 2011). They explored the challenges of navigating diverse regulatory environments and political landscapes in host countries, highlighting both the obstacles and opportunities that accompanied China’s expanding global presence.
With the onset of the BRI development phase, research priorities shifted to align with the initiative’s core principles of connectivity and collaboration. Connectivity emerged as a central theme, emphasizing how infrastructure development and cross-border cooperation not only facilitated China’s overseas expansion but also enhanced the well-being of host countries (Siem, 2017; Soumaré et al., 2016). The role of collaboration also gained prominence, highlighting the importance of partnerships between public and private sectors, as well as the involvement of state-owned enterprises, in ensuring the success of BRI projects (Bath, 2015; Dobson, 2017; Godfrey and Ross, 2016; Luo et al., 2017). During this phase, researchers explored the broader implications of Chinese investments, particularly in technology transfer and trade expansion, aiming to gain insights into the economic impacts, competitive advantages, and policy dimensions associated with such investments (e.g., Kim, 2016; Mba, 2017; Wang et al., 2014; Zhu Xiaoqian and Shao Yuan, 2016). The research outcomes during this phase significantly influenced economic policymaking and cooperation between China and its partner countries (Dimitrijević, 2017; Sun and Shao, 2016). Additionally, they developed strategies for risk mitigation and improved the efficiency of China’s OFDI by enabling more informed decision-making processes (Seyoum and Lin, 2015).
In the contemporary investment landscape, studies have undergone a profound transformation characterized by a holistic and multifaceted approach to global economic engagement. This phase places significant emphasis on comprehensive development strategies and active participation in infrastructure projects, going beyond the traditional focus on economic expansion (Chan, 2018; Wang et al., 2021). As China’s global influence grows, navigating the complex landscape of international relations, where economic interests intersect with geopolitical dynamics and soft power considerations, has become increasingly crucial (Karim, 2022). Therefore, governance and ethical considerations have also come to the forefront, reflecting the recognition of understanding local contexts, governance systems, and ethical frameworks to ensure responsible and effective investments (Fan et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2022). Prominently, environmental sustainability and innovation have become central themes in contemporary studies. China’s investments align with sustainability goals, demonstrated by concepts like carbon emissions, environmental impacts, alternative energy, and innovation, all underlining a commitment to green initiatives and innovation-driven growth. Fundamentally, contemporary research on China’s OFDI marks its evolving global role, a strong dedication to sustainability, and an acknowledgment of the interplay balance between economic, geopolitical, and ethical factors. This makes a new era where China’s economic ambitions align with global responsibilities and the pursuit of sustainable development.
In summary, the thematic evolution of China’s OFDI research highlights how scholarly attention has shifted from foundational concerns with capital flows, resource acquisition, and industrial strategy, to connectivity and collaboration under the BRI, and more recently to governance, sustainability, and ethical considerations in a complex geopolitical environment. This progression reflects the field’s responsiveness to China’s evolving global role and the diverse challenges associated with it.
