Access to the local market which might otherwise be impossible if that nation has high tariff barriers. 

Developing nations such as Brazil, India and China have significant domestic markets that many MNCs wish to gain access to.

In some cases the MNC is able to take advantage of cheap labour and lower production costs in the host nation.   

Some LEDCs offer a more business friendly environment in terms of greater restrictions on organised labour, as well as lower environmental regulations.   

A nation may be rich in mineral resources such as oil and gas and need the assistance of MNCs to exploit those resources.

Many of the largest multinational companies are oil companies such as BP and Exxon (Esso), as well car companies (for example, Ford, Toyota, Nissan and Volkswagen). Other well-known companies such as Coca-Cola, IBM and Sony are also defined as being multinational.

Over a 10 year period GDP has tripled, from a low base, but this suggests the potential for growth.  In resource rich nations much of the investment is focused on resource exploitation while more developed markets in South Africa for instance, the large domestic market has attracted firms such as Walmart and Burger King.

Trading blocs such as the east African bloc has been of particular interest to MNCs.

Relatively low expected growth rates on the continent

Lack of trade between African nations

High levels of corruption / perceived corruption

Political uncertainty

Security concerns

Poor infrastructure especially transport and power generation

Low levels of human capital.

This would be illustrated by either a left shift (inwards) in either LRAS or PPF, as the potential output of the economy is reduced.

One that has its headquarters (management) in one nation but then operates in other nations.

Sony - Japan, Amazon - USA, IKEA - Holland, HSBC - London, Walmart - USA.

Firstly multinational companies provide much needed sources of capital.  This is often in the form of new technology to the host nation.  The MNC will also often provide skills and knowledge which the country is also lacking. 

Just as with tourism another advantage of MNCs is that the introduction of MNCs helps to upgrade communication infrastructure in the area.  The improved infrastructure can then also be used by local residents.

Local residents also benefit from increased employment opportunities.  While many of these positions may well be low skilled and low paid, those positions still provide an improvement in living standards compared to other opportunities in the area.

The host country will gain tax revenue from profits generated by the MNCs activities, as well as tax revenues from income and additional sales taxes.  This can then be used to balance public expenditure.

The presence of MNCs may also reduce prices and increase consumer choice for domestic residents.  This may be of particular benefit to the middle class of the host country.

When multinational companies emerge in a location this can also encourage other local businesses to locate to area, increasing economic activity further.

Many LEDCs suffer from an absence of capital as they have low savings ratios.  As a consequence many LEDCs are forced to adopt very high interest rates to attract foreign capital and compensate for this savings gap.  Direct investment flows can help fill this gap.

Many MNCs have been accused of exploiting workers in developing countries by offering low wages and inferior working conditions.  Many MNCs will bring in their own management teams and use domestic labour for only basic assembly tasks that require limited training. 

Many companies are also encouraged to relocate in an LEDC because of favourable tax incentives so in reality the host nation may see little of the profits generated.

While MNC investment does improve transport and communications infrastructure (often built at the host nation's expense) this is often designed to serve only the direct routes required by the company and not necessarily to provide benefit to local businesses. 

Many MNCs also have particularly poor records on pollution as well the safety of their workforce. Other MNCs have also been accused of ignoring the environment in their quest for profits. 

Lastly, MNCs will also repatriate the profits made back to the host nation, meaning that the economic benefit to the host nation may be minimal, according to some economists.

Governments in many LEDCs will be aware that to attract FDI they will have to offer a business friendly environment, given the risks involved and this would tend to leave many host nations open to exploitation.

Many MNCs are keen to develop and publicise a positive image of their business.  For this reason many large businesses positively promote ethical policies, outlining their commitment to human rights, employee conditions, pay and their impact on the environment. 

There is near universal agreement as to the positive impact of MNCs on growth and development in Developing nations.  However, there are concerns as regards the impact on sustainability.  The overall impact ultimately depends on the type of investment as well as the ability of the host nation to regulate the worst excesses of the MNC.   

Improvements in technology and reduced tariffs, generally driven by the West.

Much of the low value added and labour intensive parts are completed in LEDCs with more creative and high value production parts completed in Developed nations.  This is consistent with comparative advantage theory.

The video states that many of the products produced in LEDCs are consumed in the West, a part of the world with an insatiable appetite for cheap consumer goods which they do not need and barely use.

Removing people out of poverty, perhaps hundreds of millions of them.

As a President Donald Trump would clearly love more US manufactured goods made in the USA and this is also popular with US voters (as expressed during the 2017 election).  However, it is far from clear that they (the voters) would be prepared to pay higher prices for their consumer products and even less clear that the CEO of any business would voluntarily put their company at a disadvantage by producing products in a high wage country than a low wage one.

Rassweiler claims that making all of the iPhone's parts in the U.S. would push the price of the iPhone's components from $190 to around $600, adding $400 to the price of a phone.

Very long production (growing lines) of several years and government subsidies designed to provide security for farmers.

Political pressure to reduce or even remove government subsidies over time, rising demand levels and a largely fixed supply of land available for production - coffee production requires a specific climate and soil to grow.

Note the low level of PES, with S1 representing the supply of the product without any subsidy, S2 the current situation and S3 the predicted supply if the level of subsidy is removed over time. Furthermore, the decrease in supply might be greater still if more individual coffee growers chose to walk away from their crop, as indicated in the video.

The video also suggests that demand for the commodity is likely to grow as the product is increasing in popularity, represented by D1 to D2 with the new price at P2.

As a result equilbrium will shift from A to B and a new price created of P2 (although the video is merely suggesting possible changes which cannot be guaranteed). 

Hint:

Consider the tax revenue paid by MNCs

Low income families (in all parts of the world) whose real wages are increased by lower consumer prices

Local businesses in LEDCs unable to compete with cheap imported products

LEDCs such as China, South Korea e.t.c. who have benefited from inward investment

Reductions in absolute poverty rates throughout the world

Sustainability of development (pollution, inequality e.t.c.)

Unemployed factory workers in the 'rust belt'.