By Eiichi Tomiura, Professor Otsuma Women’s University; President and Chief Research Officer Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI). Originally published at VoxEU.
After a period of rapid growth, recent trends in world trade reveal a phase of stagnation. Rising geopolitical tensions have been accompanied by trade restrictions in the name of national and economic security. This column argues that analysis of economic security measures should consider multiple dimensions, including the effect on global supply chains, efficiency, costs, foreign direct investment, trade in services, and international competition.
Recent trends in world trade reveal that the rapid growth at the beginning of this century appears to have ended, ushering in a phase of stagnation. While the factors that caused this paradigm shift should be cautiously identified, it is undeniable that soaring wages in China, which has been supplying vast amounts of low-wage labour to the global economy since the adoption of reform and open policy in the 1980s, and changes in China’s fundamental policies concerning market economy and international order, have had a significant impact.
The conflict between the US and China has intensified. Not only has the Biden administration maintained the majority of US tariffs against China imposed abruptly during the Trump administration, but export controls targeting advanced technology have been strengthened. Chief Economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Gita Gopinath described the current situation as ‘Cold War II’ (Gopinath 2023). It might be correct to say that we have stepped into an era that can be called the Second Cold War, transitioning away from the era of deepening globalisation that followed the end of the US-Soviet Cold War.
Indeed, trade between the US and China declined in 2023, and foreign direct investment (FDI) into China experienced a sharp decrease. The global value chains, which rely on the intricate international division of labour incorporating imported intermediate goods into exports, have shifted to a phase of stagnation or reversal due to the apparent vulnerability to disruption revealed in recent years. The US-China rivalry has escalated beyond the past economic disputes that characterised the Japan-US trade friction into national conflicts involving security concerns including dual-use technology. This is increasing the division of the global economy into the following two rival blocs: market economies with well-developed institutions based on the rule of law, and economies in which the state commonly intervenes and has wide and deep involvement in economic and social activities.
In this column, I would like to discuss the challenges related to conducting economic analyses in such circumstances.
Economic Analysis of Economic Security
There does not appear to be a well-established definition of economic security, but it can be understood as either securing the economic welfare of the nation (economic aspects of a nation that need protection) or as utilising economic measures to ensure national security. Protecting national security is more relevant to recent discussions involving economic coercion. There are various economic measures employed in this context, but trade restrictions are pivotal. When large countries impose import or export restrictions, the terms-of-trade effect amplifies the impacts on trade.
The main topics of economic analysis concerning economic security all involve clarifying the extent and nature of the impacts of security-oriented measures on the economy. A typical example is the analysis of the impact of supply restrictions or import regulations on the production in other countries connected through global supply chains. According to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) White Paper on International Economy and Trade 2024, it is important to measure not only how dependent the overall trade of a country is on other specific countries, but also to determine on a granular level of item classification and specific input-output relationships the degree of such dependence.
In addition to directly regulated trade, it is necessary to consider the wider effects of reduced efficiency and increased costs resulting from rerouting and substitution. The increased security requirements narrow the range of choices available to firms for profit maximisation and optimisation. Furthermore, measures adopted to reduce risks, such as stockpiling, also incur costs. The benefit of importing a wide variety of goods from around the world at low prices is also diminished, representing a significant burden on consumers, which should also not be overlooked as a significant sacrifice.
As long as we expect that the global conflict can be managed as a cold war rather than leading to kinetic combat like in Ukraine, the scope of regulation should be kept as narrow as possible (as with the ‘small yard, high fence’ concept). It is important for the international division of labour and international trade to continue in relation to a wide range of goods that are not considered advanced strategic technologies in order to mitigate the burden of economic security concerns.
However, the impact of the global division due to this cold war extends beyond trade. One phenomenon characterising the globalisation that has occurred since the end of the last century is the rapid increase in FDI. Recently, FDI is beginning to show a significant decline, and particularly toward China, and since many multinational firms from developed countries (including Japan) conduct much of their production of goods outside of their home country, the impact on FDI is a crucial topic alongside trade.
Regarding trade, it is important to consider not only goods recorded by traditional customs data, but also the impact on trade in services, including intellectual property. While the global trade in goods has entered a period of stagnation, the importance of services in the global economy is increasing as trade in services continues to grow. If the distributions of goods, funds, technology, and information, and even labour are affected, there are concerns that a long-term productivity decline could have persistent negative impacts beyond any decline in short-term production.
International competition for foreign investment based on government subsidies to attract production is increasing in intensity, and advanced semiconductors are a prime example of this competition. A wide range of domestic industrial policies are indirectly related to economic security, so it is necessary to exercise caution to prevent discussions on economic security from expanding too far afield. Regarding domestic support measures, it is necessary to deepen consideration of the economic effects of increased domestic production, of the security risks related to procurement from like-minded allied nations, and the necessity and effectiveness of industrial policy interventions themselves.
Research Activities at RIETI
At the Research Institute of Economy, Trade, and Industry (RIETI), research related to economic security has been conducted, particularly focusing on the global supply chains which characterised the globalisation that has occurred since the end of the last century. Professor Yasuyuki Todo of Waseda University, the Programme Director for the International Trade and Investment Programme at RIETI, and his colleagues have pointed out the possibility of experiencing a decline in domestic production that greatly exceeds the amount of imported intermediate inputs in the event of a disruption in Japan, using data from Japan’s input-output tables and other sources. In practice, changes in prices and technology will lead to the substitution of goods from other sources, so it would be beneficial to undertake and accumulate estimates based on alternate scenarios going forward.
Furthermore, while the input-output tables compile detailed data on the transactions between industries, it should be noted that the tables are ultimately aggregated industry figures, representing averages of heterogeneous companies in the same industry. In light of this, there is a need for the use of microdata concerning transaction networks at the firm level. Additionally, the analysis of the influence of security-related export controls on trade flows is closely related to economic security. Senior Fellows Hongyong Zhang and Willem Thorbecke have been focusing on this research area at RIETI.
As economic security has been composed of a broad range of topics that are typically unsuited to economic analysis, RIETI, which primarily focuses on economic analysis, is also engaged in legal research related to trade rules under the leadership of Faculty Fellow Tsuyoshi Kawase (Professor, Sophia University) and his colleagues. With the increasing number of trade restriction measures taken under the justification of economic security and the need to rebuild the now dysfunctional dispute settlement mechanism in the WTO, it is necessary to hold detailed discussions to maintain a rules-based international order.
Research Collaboration With Think Tanks in Like-minded Countries
Aiming for globally recognised, high-level research, RIETI has been conducting research exchanges with think tanks around the world. Recently, there has been a noticeable trend toward topics related to economic security in such research exchanges with RIETI. Almost all of the international symposiums and workshops held by RIETI recently can be related to economic security. It is important for RIETI to further deepen research collaboration with think tanks from ‘like-minded countries’ that face a similar security environment in mature market economies underpinned by the rule of law, as there are many common topics that must be analysed and issues that need to be addressed.
Visualisation of Relevant Research Findings
Because of the recent situation, RIETI is prioritising research on economic security as a critical issue for Japan’s economy and industries. However, since comprehensive research is inevitably very time-consuming, RIETI has established a ‘Special Feature on Economic Security’ on our website. The site highlights and visualises the relevant research findings that RIETI accumulates. We hope that this information will be of help to those who are interested in economic security in their search for relevant information.
The Berlin Wall stood for 30 years from construction to collapse. The subsequent progress in globalisation also lasted for approximately 30 years. Similarly, many factors indicate that the current new Cold War between the US and China could last for a long period. On the other hand, the security situation is ever-changing, and we must be prepared for the unexpected. RIETI intends to promote research on economic security in a way that is agile enough to contribute to policy through close exchanges of views with policymakers, while simultaneously ensuring that the research can withstand future academic scrutiny.
Author’s note: This column was reproduced with permission from the Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
References available at the original.
13 comments
Comments are closed.
Never use one word when 10 will do.
Reads like a marketing brochure that I throw in the bin.
Summary
The Chinese are paying their workforce too much and they are not playing by the rules of the rules based order. For some reason like-minded allies and the US are allowed to not obey these rules because of security risks. Protectionism is recommended. The US was not happy with Japan when they were outperforming them and are now not happy with the Chinese. The WTO is no longer working to the advantage of the west. Give us more money please think-tanks. Something about the Berlin Wall which is apparently relevant.
Ask Yves and Lambert to get a role summarising stuff.
Thanks!
Countries are starting to prioritize security over utility when it comes to international trade. As economists, we’ll help you understand what the consequences are and what you should do. Don’t worry – it’ll still involve calls for low regulation and free trade. We have no real expertise in this field but that never stopped us before. We’ll just drop a name or two and it’ll work out.
It’s not enough to just say we buy shit from China – we need to look at what kind of shit we buy. We have to avoid sweeping statements and look at the detail. Unless it’s about the rules-based international order, in which case sweeping statements will do just fine.
Lots of things seem to last for around 30 years. We think the new Cold War in trade might be one of them. Unless it’s not! The trick is to keep your options open and avoid falsifiable predictions. That way you’re covered no matter what happens.
Somewhat less facetious reply: it seems pretty self-evident that countries are moving more towards security-maximizing over utility-maximizing, or in some cases populist moves that are intended to tap into voter concerns (like Trump’s wall). I’m sure a true believer would just assume perfect knowledge of all information including security and just roll it all into utility, but that’s outside of the realm of practicality.
What I don’t see here is much in the way of answers, just a lot of questions (frankly mostly rather self-evident).
Thank You TF
It’s good to have someone of vastly greater experience than me come to similar conclusions. I sometimes question if my observations and judgement are too compromised by age and alcohol. My immediate reaction to the article was baffelgab for the purpose of self substantiation.
Don’t put yourself down. I suffer from cognitive impairment due to long COVID-19. Today’s a good day….. But when I “think a lot” or “do a lot” I’m a vegetable the next day. Today happens to be a good day so I read this stuff and go WTF?
Other days I stay quiet.
The pressure to ‘Publish’ means a lot of dross.
It is not possible to lie effectively unless words are used. The more words …
Thank you to all for confirming my suspicions. (I don’t have time to waste.)
beware, when ever i hear economists speak about efficiency and free trade, i always respond, efficient for whom?
is it efficient to lose your standard of living, your technology, and in many cases, food security, and incur massive un-payable debts so that a rich few benefit?
that’s not efficient, its economic suicide.
It is a form of climate change denial to talk about supply chains and economic security and be silent about disruption from mass migrations, crop failure, heat, and floods. Helene and Milton in the US are a new normal.
The same denial is exhibited in comments about the war in Ukraine and in Gaza. You can’t fight wars and climate change at the same time. Climate change is an enemy and mobilizing. This type of comment is obvious, even banal, but climate change has arrived and must be included in the analysis.
This article confirmed my suspicions that women are indeed, not always, but usually both smarter and wiser than men and I don’t say this to suck up to females, my kick-ass Beijing wife can confirm what I say, glad to be back on line, death to international censorship, Mike Liston