Despite the fragile economic and political environment in conflict-affected countries, a significant number of multinational enterprises (MNEs) enter these markets, particularly as conditions begin to improve. To better understand how MNEs respond to positive institutional changes in challenging markets, we examine the relative effects of peace agreements and MNE capabilities on foreign direct investment. We expect that MNEs can engage in institutional arbitrage by leveraging political capabilities in their home market as well as their environmental, social, and governance capabilities to enter conflict-affected countries. Thus, rather than focusing solely on managing downside risk, we also analyze the relative value of MNE capabilities as countries strive to become more peaceful. Specifically, we hypothesize and find that peace agreements and the associated positive changes in the political environment in the host country are less important for MNEs with political capabilities and strong environmental and social governance than they are for other MNEs. The results raise important questions about why and how certain firms may thrive in challenging environments and reveal the differential impact of positive institutional change.

尽管受冲突影响国家的经济和政治环境脆弱，但仍有大量跨国企业 (MNE) 进入这些市场，尤其是在情况开始好转时。为了更好地了解跨国公司如何在充满挑战的市场中应对积极的制度变化，我们研究了和平协议和跨国公司能力对外国直接投资的相对影响。我们预计跨国公司可以利用本国市场的政治能力以及环境、社会和治理能力进入受冲突影响的国家，从而进行制度套利。因此，我们不仅关注管理下行风险，还分析了跨国公司能力在各国努力变得更加和平时的相对价值。具体来说，我们假设并发现，与其他跨国公司相比，和平协议以及东道国政治环境的相关积极变化对于具有政治能力和强大环境和社会治理的跨国公司来说并不那么重要。结果提出了一些重要问题，即某些公司为何以及如何在充满挑战的环境中茁壮成长，并揭示了积极制度变革的不同影响。