By Khant Ko Ko Aung
(Statistics)
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is often discussed through a single question: How much investment is coming into the country? For policymakers, however, the more important questions are what the investment numbers reveal, where the investment is coming from, which sectors are receiving capital, and whether current trends point towards opportunities or policy gaps. For Myanmar, examining FDI through a statistical and evidence-based perspective can help strengthen investment promotion and support better policy decisions.
The latest international data provide an important starting point. According to the United Nations Trade and Development (UNCTAD) World Investment Report 2026, global FDI increased by six per cent to approximately US$1.6 trillion in 2025. Developing Asia remained the largest recipient region, attracting approximately US$644 billion. This demonstrates that Asia continues to be at the centre of global investment activity despite continuing uncertainty in the international economic environment.
Within this regional environment, ASEAN continues to demonstrate strong investment performance. According to the latest ASEAN investment information based on UNCTAD data, ASEAN attracted US$243.9 billion in FDI in 2025, an increase of 9.7 per cent from US$222.3 billion in 2024. ASEAN therefore continued to strengthen its position as one of the world’s most important destinations for foreign investment. The region accounted for approximately 15 per cent of global FDI inflows in 2025.
The ASEAN figures are particularly relevant for Myanmar. In 2025, Singapore attracted approximately US$150.9 billion, Indonesia US$21.4 billion, Viet Nam US$20.4 billion, Thailand US$19.1 billion and Malaysia US$15.4 billion. Lao PDR attracted approximately US$1.4 billion, while Myanmar recorded approximately US$1.1 billion in FDI inflows. Myanmar’s 2025 inflow was about US$1.067 billion, compared with US$1.095 billion in 2024, representing a decline of approximately 2.6 per cent.
These numbers should not simply be interpreted as a ranking of countries. They provide a useful statistical signal. Myanmar is operating within a region where FDI is expanding, while its own inflows remain relatively modest. This means that the central policy question is not whether international capital is available. It clearly is. The more important question is how Myanmar can strengthen its competitiveness and attract a larger share of investment that is consistent with national development priorities.
At this point, an important statistical distinction must be made. Myanmar’s Directorate of Investment and Company Administration (DICA) publishes statistics on foreign investment approved under the country’s investment framework, while international organizations such as ASEAN and UNCTAD publish FDI inflow statistics based on internationally recognized balance-of-payments concepts. These measures are related but are not identical. An approved investment represents an investment that has received approval, whereas an FDI inflow measures capital actually flowing into the economy under the relevant statistical framework. Therefore, policymakers and readers should not treat the two figures as interchangeable.
This distinction is not merely technical. It has direct implications for investment policy. If Myanmar reports a large amount of approved investment but actual inflows remain lower, policymakers need to understand why projects are not being implemented at the expected scale. Possible explanations may include financing constraints, infrastructure limitations, changes in market conditions, foreign-exchange issues, administrative procedures or delays in project implementation. Better statistical monitoring can help identify these gaps.
DICA maintains separate statistical series for foreign investment by country, foreign investment by sector and actual FDI inflows. These datasets provide an important foundation for developing a more detailed understanding of Myanmar’s investment landscape.
The country distribution of investment provides another important policy signal. DICA’s recent investment information shows that Singapore, China and Thailand remain among the most prominent investors in Myanmar, while investment has come from a much broader group of countries. In January 2026, DICA reported that investors from 53 countries had invested in Myanmar, with Singapore, China and Thailand identified as the leading investors.
This pattern suggests both strength and opportunity. Existing major investors are important because they provide established commercial relationships, capital, technology and market connections. At the same time, reliance on a limited number of major investment partners can create concentration. Myanmar can therefore benefit from expanding investment promotion towards a wider range of countries while continuing to strengthen relations with existing investors.
The sectoral composition of FDI is equally important. Investment figures should not be evaluated only according to their monetary value. Policymakers should also examine which industries receive investment and what economic outcomes those investments generate. Manufacturing, energy, transport and communications, agriculture and agro-processing, tourism, logistics, digital services and other productive sectors can have different effects on employment, exports, technology transfer and domestic business development.
Manufacturing deserves particular attention because it can connect FDI with domestic production and employment. Manufacturing investment can create demand for local raw materials, packaging, logistics, maintenance, professional services and other inputs. If foreign-invested manufacturers are connected effectively with Myanmar enterprises, particularly micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, the benefits of FDI can extend beyond the individual investment project.
The ASEAN experience provides a useful comparison. The ASEAN Investment Report 2025 found that FDI inflows into ASEAN increased by 8 percent to US$226 billion in 2024 despite an 11 per cent decline in global FDI. Manufacturing and services were major targets for greenfield investment, while investment was increasingly associated with supply-chain restructuring and industries such as electronics, electric vehicles, pharmaceuticals and the digital economy.
The latest 2025 data reinforce this trend. ASEAN attracted US$243.9 billion in FDI, while announced greenfield investment remained significant in communications, semiconductors, electronics, renewable energy and digital infrastructure. These sectors reflect the direction of modern global investment: investors are increasingly looking for locations that can participate in technology-intensive production, regional supply chains and the digital economy.
For Myanmar, this suggests that future investment promotion should increasingly focus on sectors connected to regional and global value chains. Traditional sectors will continue to have an important role, but investment promotion can also target higher-value manufacturing, agricultural processing, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, renewable energy, logistics, digital services and technology-related industries.
Agriculture provides another strong opportunity. Myanmar has significant agricultural production, but greater economic value can be generated by moving further into processing, packaging, cold-chain systems, quality certification and international marketing. FDI can support this transition by providing capital, technology, management expertise and access to international distribution networks. Therefore, investment promotion should focus not only on agricultural production but also on the complete agricultural value chain.
Energy is equally important. Reliable electricity is a basic requirement for industrial development. Investment promotion cannot be separated from infrastructure policy because investors consider the availability, reliability and cost of electricity when selecting investment locations. If Myanmar wants to attract more manufacturing and technology-oriented investment, strengthening energy infrastructure must therefore remain a central investment-policy priority.
Myanmar’s geographical position also creates an important statistical and policy opportunity. The country is situated between South Asia, China and mainland Southeast Asia and has access to the Indian Ocean. This provides potential for investment in ports, logistics, transport, warehousing, industrial zones and cross-border trade infrastructure. However, geographical advantage alone does not guarantee investment. The data should be used to identify which infrastructure constraints are preventing the country from converting its geographical position into actual investment opportunities.
Another important lesson from the numbers is that investment promotion should become more targeted. Instead of simply promoting Myanmar as a destination for all types of investment, policymakers can use data to identify specific investor groups and sectors. If the statistics show strong interest from a particular country in manufacturing, for example, investment promotion activities can focus on that country’s manufacturing companies. If investors are increasingly interested in renewable energy or digital services, relevant projects and investment opportunities can be developed and promoted accordingly.
This approach can make investment promotion more efficient. Investment authorities can move from general promotion towards evidence-based targeting. Country-level data can identify potential investment partners, sector-level data can identify promising industries, and project-level data can identify implementation barriers. Together, these forms of information can create a much more precise investment-promotion strategy.
Better FDI data are also necessary for evaluating policy effectiveness. Suppose Myanmar introduces an investment incentive for a particular sector. It is not enough to know how many projects were approved after the incentive was introduced. Policymakers should also examine whether actual capital inflows increased, whether projects became operational, how many jobs were created, whether exports increased and whether domestic enterprises became involved in the supply chain.
This means that future FDI statistics should increasingly measure outcomes rather than approvals alone. Important indicators could include actual capital inflows, project implementation rates, employment created, exports generated, reinvestment by existing investors, domestic procurement, technology transfer, training provided and linkages with Myanmar enterprises.
Project implementation is particularly important. An approved investment project and an operational investment project are two different stages of the investment lifecycle. Tracking the movement from approval to implementation can help policymakers identify where projects face difficulties. Such information can then be used to improve investor facilitation and aftercare.
Reinvestment is another indicator that deserves greater attention. When existing foreign investors expand their operations or reinvest their earnings, this can provide an important signal of investor confidence. A country should therefore monitor not only new investors entering the market but also existing investors choosing to expand.
Investment statistics can also help identify regional disparities. If investment is concentrated heavily in a limited number of locations, policymakers can examine whether infrastructure, utilities, transport connections, workforce availability or other factors are limiting investment in other areas. This does not mean that every region should receive the same level of FDI. Rather, investment should be encouraged where there are genuine economic advantages and where infrastructure and local conditions can support commercially viable projects.
Digitalization provides an opportunity to strengthen the entire investment information system. Investment authorities could increasingly connect investment approval information with company registration, trade, employment and other relevant administrative datasets, subject to appropriate legal and data-protection safeguards. Such an integrated system could allow policymakers to monitor investment projects throughout their lifecycle and produce more timely information for decision-making.
Statistical coordination is also important. DICA, the Myanmar Investment Commission, the Central Statistical Organization, relevant ministries and other institutions hold different types of information related to investment and economic activity. Greater coordination can improve data consistency, reduce duplication and provide a more complete picture of FDI performance.
International comparability should remain another priority. ASEAN and UNCTAD use internationally recognized statistical frameworks that allow countries to compare FDI trends across economies. Myanmar can use these international datasets together with its domestic administrative statistics to assess its position within the ASEAN investment environment. The purpose is not simply to compare rankings but to identify the structural reasons why some economies attract substantially more investment.
The regional evidence is particularly instructive. ASEAN attracted US$243.9 billion in FDI in 2025, while Myanmar attracted approximately US$1.067 billion. The difference demonstrates the scale of the competitive environment in which Myanmar operates. At the same time, it also demonstrates the size of the potential market for investment promotion. Even a relatively small increase in Myanmar’s share of regional investment could generate significant economic value if that investment is directed towards productive and sustainable sectors.
The objective, however, should not simply be to maximize the volume of FDI. The quality of investment matters. A large investment with limited domestic economic linkages may produce fewer long-term benefits than a smaller investment that creates substantial employment, develops local suppliers, transfers technology and expands exports. Investment policy should therefore consider both the quantity and quality of FDI.
This is where statistical analysis can contribute directly to policymaking. Statistics can help identify not only where investment is coming from but also what investment is doing within the economy. By combining investment data with employment, trade, production and enterprise information, policymakers can evaluate the broader economic contribution of FDI.
The policy implications are therefore clear. First, Myanmar should strengthen the quality and timeliness of FDI statistics. Second, approved investment and actual FDI inflows should be clearly distinguished in public reporting. Third, investment promotion should be increasingly targeted towards sectors and investor groups identified through evidence. Fourth, project implementation and investor aftercare should be monitored systematically. Fifth, FDI statistics should increasingly measure economic outcomes such as employment, exports, technology transfer and domestic linkages.
Myanmar should also use its international economic relationships strategically. Established investors from Singapore, China and Thailand remain important, while broader engagement with India, Japan, Korea, ASEAN partners, Russia, Belarus and other potential investors can contribute to diversification. Recent international engagements can support these efforts, but investment promotion must ultimately be supported by commercially attractive projects and a predictable investment environment.
The central lesson from the numbers is therefore not simply that Myanmar needs more FDI. Myanmar needs the right FDI, supported by better data and better policy decisions. The statistical evidence shows that international capital continues to move strongly towards Asia and ASEAN, while Myanmar’s share remains relatively small. This creates a clear policy opportunity.
The next stage should be to build a stronger relationship between statistics and investment policy. Data should identify the trend; statistical analysis should explain the trend; policymakers should respond to the evidence; and new data should then be used to evaluate the results. This creates a continuous cycle of evidence-based investment promotion.
Ultimately, the numbers behind Myanmar’s FDI are more than figures in statistical tables. They are indicators of investor confidence, sectoral opportunities, economic competitiveness and policy performance. If Myanmar can strengthen its investment statistics and use them systematically to guide investment promotion, the country can move from simply measuring FDI towards managing it more strategically.
The future of Myanmar’s investment policy should therefore be increasingly data-driven. The question is no longer only how much FDI Myanmar can attract, but from where it should come, which sectors should receive priority, where investment can create the greatest economic value, and how policy can convert investment into jobs, exports, technology, stronger domestic enterprises and sustainable economic development. Better statistics can provide the evidence needed to answer these questions, while sound FDI policy can turn that evidence into practical results.
References
ASEAN Secretariat. (2025). ASEAN Investment Report 2025: Foreign direct investment and supply chain development. ASEAN Secretariat. ASEAN Investment Report 2025
ASEAN Secretariat. (2026). ASEAN attracts record FDI in 2025 amid a shifting global investment landscape. ASEAN Investment. ASEAN Investment information on 2025 FDI
Directorate of Investment and Company Administration. (2026a). Foreign investment by country. Ministry of National Planning, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Republic of the Union of Myanmar. DICA Foreign Investment by Country
Directorate of Investment and Company Administration. (2026b). FDI actual inflow. Ministry of National Planning, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Republic of the Union of Myanmar. DICA FDI Actual Inflow
Directorate of Investment and Company Administration. (2026c). Archive for documents. Ministry of National Planning, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Republic of the Union of Myanmar. DICA Investment Statistics Archive
Directorate of Investment and Company Administration. (2026d, February 26). MIC approves 17 projects, generating 2,400+ jobs. Ministry of National Planning, Investment and Foreign Economic Relations, Republic of the Union of Myanmar.
United Nations Trade and Development. (2026). World Investment Report 2026: International investment in a turbulent era. United Nations. UNCTAD World Investment Report 2026
#TheGlobalNewLightOfMyanmar