Warning: You are using an outdated Browser, Please switch to a more modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox or Microsoft Edge.

China’s way of reshoring?

In this context, the “dual circulation” strategy is likely to take center stage in China’s 14th five-year plan as a way towards more sustainable growth, making the country less reliant on factors outside of its control. First introduced by President Xi Jinping in May 2020, this strategy prioritizes “domestic circulation” (increasing domestic demand and lowering dependence on foreign inputs), while “international circulation” (maintaining export market shares and liberalizing capital flows) works as a complement. While rebalancing towards domestic demand is not a new principle in China’s economic planning, China will aim in the long run to use domestic production to provide for increasing domestic demand, rather than imports.

Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and Chile are set to incur the most potential losses in the medium run as China moves towards industrial autonomy. Conversely, goods from the U.S., Japan and Germany are exposed to very limited risk of being substituted by Chinese goods in the medium term, thanks to their technological advancement. Losses for the Eurozone overall could amount to up to 0.9% of GDP in the medium run, with machinery & equipment, construction, agrifood and electronics the most exposed sectors.

China is likely to increase direct investment into innovating emerging economies, such as the electronics sector in Indonesia, India, Thailand, Mexico and Chile. Chinese outward investment has slowed but not stopped in the past years, and the Belt and Road Initiative remains part of Chinese authorities’ long term vision. Implementation challenges (e.g. related to financial risks) mean that Chinese policymakers are likely to aim for outward direct investment to be more disciplined around national economic targets (e.g. industrial autonomy).

Long-term risks include rising debt, zombification and slow technological advancement. China’s R&D spending relies far more on government funding compared to the U.S., Japan and Germany. Strong government intervention could risk leading to overcapacity issues and resource misallocation towards the overall less profitable and less innovative state-owned enterprises. 

Contact

Francoise Huang
Euler Hermes