Resetting The Course To The Revival Of Us Industrial Capacity

 
PIIS013122270021866-3-1
DOI10.20542/0131-22227-2022-66-08-61-69
Publication type Article
Status Published
Authors
Occupation: Leading Researcher
Affiliation: Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO)
Address: 23, Profsoyuznaya Str., Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation
Journal nameMirovaia ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia
EditionVolume 66 Issue 8
Pages61-69
Abstract

The article examines the effectiveness of the strategy for restoring the competitiveness of the manufacturing industry in the United States, which was elevated by the Biden administration to the rank of the national ideology of American revival. The main vulnerabilities of the “produce more in America” policy, the course to restore and reformat broken supply chains are considered using the example of key manufacturing industries. It is stated that the policy of rehabilitation of the manufacturing industry is not a unique phenomenon for the United States. It was adhered to, to a greater or lesser extent, by the Obama and Trump administrations. However, only the Biden administration ordered to put it at the center of the ideology of the American revival. It is noted in this article that structural reforms to transform the industrial sector, implemented with unprecedentedly high financial support from the federal authorities, are directed at creating new jobs, forming new industrial clusters and innovation centers. The main efforts are aimed at targeted manufacturing industries: pharmaceuticals, strategic metals and minerals, electric vehicles, and semiconductors. The use of nationally produced goods, reshoring and the formation of supply chains within the United States are proclaimed as the main preconditions for building a truly strong economy. The concept of “real energy independence” promoted by Biden, relies on renewable energy sources. A new impetus to the “greening” of the energy sector may be given to compensate companies investing in renewable energy sources for the costs associated with the forced replacement of foreign suppliers with national ones. Meanwhile, in effect, the attitude of Washington towards hydrocarbon energy remains fairly loyal, at least at the time of high fuel prices. In the domestic economic agenda, the priorities of industrial policy are being revived, aimed at achieving sole technological leadership. However, Washington's achievements cannot be interpreted solely as the successes of Biden's economic policy. An equally significant role was played by the expansion of domestic demand against the background of overcoming the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The vector of further development is determined by the slogan “surpass China and the rest of the world”. The White House is trying to persuade American companies to build new manufacturing facilities in the US in order to compete with Chinese suppliers. However, against the background of China's obvious desire to develop its own research and production base, the opportunities for American diсtate are narrowing. Import substitution is a slow process – “money speaks louder than economic patriotism”. Only a small portion of the business returns to the country, because of global instability, China is considered by a large part of American investors as a fairly safe haven. Washington's attempts to squeeze China out of the supply chains have only accelerated the implementation of Beijing's programs aimed at achieving technological self-sufficiency and “de-Americanization”. In recent years, the epicenter of the policy of technological containment, pursued by the United States against China, has shifted towards Russia. Our country is accused by Washington of deliberately orchestrating disruptions in the supply chains in energy and agricultural commodities markets. The experience of anti-Chinese actions, accumulated in the competitive struggle against companies and state organizations, and coordinated with US allies, is being used now against Russian exporters.

KeywordsUSA, China, economic nationalism, supply chains, energy policy, technological leadership, import substitution, protectionism, trade policy
Received15.04.2022
Publication date07.09.2022
Number of characters29957
Cite  
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.
Размещенный ниже текст является ознакомительной версией и может не соответствовать печатной
1 “Новое экономические ви́дение” администрации Байдена состоит в том, что построение лучшей Америки должно осуществляться “снизу вверх”, с опорой на средний класс и при поддержке профсоюзов. Предложенная его командой стратегия по восстановлению и наращиванию потенциала отечественного производства заявлена как единственно приемлемое решение для укрепления экономической конкурентоспособности и национальной безопасности США. В качестве главных условий для построения действительно сильной экономики провозглашены ставка на американских рабочих, создание в стране новых высокооплачиваемых рабочих мест, проведение курса на самообеспечение по стратегическим товарам, решоринг и строительство цепочек поставок внутри страны, а не на аутсорсинге за границей (supply-chain internalization). Структурные реформы по трансформации промышленного сектора реализуются при беспрецедентно высокой финансовой поддержке федеральных властей и нацелены на поддержку критически важных отраслей обрабатывающей промышленности, создание новых производств и формирование центров инноваций.
2

АКЦЕНТ НА НАЦИОНАЛЬНОЕ ПРОИЗВОДСТВО

3 Вина за неудовлетворительное состояние реального сектора американской экономики возложена на просчеты экономической политики администрации Д. Трампа, хрупкость глобальных технологических и логистических цепочек и несправедливую конкуренцию на внешних рынках. При этом замалчивается, что ситуация в обрабатывающей промышленности страны неуклонно деградировала на протяжении как минимум последних двух десятилетий. В настоящее время лишь чуть больше половины совокупного конечного спроса на промышленные товары удовлетворяется национальным производством, а по многим видам потребительских товаров и продукции машиностроения зависимость от импортных поставок выглядит как критическая [ист. 1].
4 Президентский указ “Гарантирование того, чтобы будущее создавалось во всей Америке всеми американскими рабочими” содержит указания на необходимость создания преференций для компаний, замыкающих цепочки поставок на национальных производителей или переносящих критически важные производства из Китая и других азиатских стран обратно в США [ист. 2]. Федеральным учреждениям предписано использовать закупки для государственных нужд в целях “поддержания максимального спроса на товары, продукты и материалы, произведенные в стране, и услуги, предлагаемые в Соединенных Штатах”. Руководителям американских корпораций настоятельно рекомендовано инвестировать в промышленное производство, противодействие изменениям климата, чистую энергетику, “покупать американское и нанимать американцев” и добиваться, чтобы все – “от палубы авианосца до стали для дорожных ограждений – было сделано в Америке” [ист. 2].

Number of purchasers: 1, views: 266

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Mullen A. US-China Trade War: Was the Phase-One Trade Deal a ‘Historic Failure’, and What’s Next? South China Morning Post, 27.02.2022. Available at: https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3168399/us-china-trade-war-was-phase-one-trade-deal-historic-failure (accessed 01.05.2022).

2. Armstrong M. Infographic: China Leads The 6G Charge. International Business Times, 21.09.2021. Available at: https://www.ibtimes.com/infographic-china-leads-6g-charge-3300418 (accessed 01.05.2022).

3. Taggart F. US Lawmakers Advance China Competition Bill. International Business Times, 04.02.2022. Available at: https://www.ibtimes.com/us-lawmakers-advance-china-competition-bill-3390573 (accessed 01.05.2022).

4. Tubb K. Russian Oil Import Ban Just a Distraction from Biden’s Anti-Energy Policies. The Heritage Foundation, 09.03.2022. Available at: https://www.heritage.org/coal-oil-natural-gas/commentary/russian-oil-import-ban-just-distraction-bidens-anti-energy-policies (accessed 01.05.2022).

5. Puzder A. John Kerry’s Financial Crusade against Oil and Gas. The Heritage Foundation, 06.01.2022. Available at: https://www.heritage.org/energy-economics/commentary/john-kerrys-financial-crusade-against-oil-and-gas (accessed 01.05.2022).

6. Yeping Y. China’s Photovoltaic Industry Undisrupted by US’ Move to Build Industrial Cluster in India. Global Times, 21.12.2021. Available at: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1243042.shtml (accessed 01.05.2022).

7. Ramkumar A. Koch Industries, Built on Oil, Bets Big on U.S. Batteries. The Wall Street Journal, 22.03.2022. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/koch-industries-built-on-oil-bets-big-on-u-s-batteries-11647946147?mod=hp_lead_pos7 (accessed 01.05.2022).

8. Bowker T., Krisher T. Tesla Inks Deal to Get Key Battery Component Outside China. AP News, 16.01.2022. Available at: https://apnews.com/article/technology-business-china-environment-and-nature-austin-899ed03506cb9d40bff20739db0bbd9b (accessed 01.05.2022).

9. Xue Y. Clean Energy: US Faces Big Challenges as It Takes On China’s Supply-Chain Dominance. South China Morning Post, 06.03.2022. Available at: https://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/3169430/clean-energy-us-faces-big-challenges-it-takes-chinas-supply (accessed 01.05.2022).

10. Akpan N. U.S. Has Only a Fraction of the Medical Supplies It Needs to Combat Coronavirus. National Geographic, 03.03.2020. Available at: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/03/us-america-has-fraction-medical-supplies-it-needs-to-combat-coronavirus (accessed 01.05.2022).

11. Pager T., Diamond D. Biden Administration Will Invest Billions to Expand Coronavirus Vaccine Manufacturing. The Washington Post, 17.11.2021. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2021/11/17/biden-covid-vaccine-manufacturing/ (accessed 01.05.2022).

12. Kotova Yu. The White House Warned Chipmakers about the Risk of Problems with Supplies from Russia. Forbes, 11.02.2022. (In Russ.) Available at: https://www.forbes.ru/tekhnologii/455349-belyj-dom-predupredil-proizvoditelej-cipov-o-riske-problem-s-postavkami-iz-rossii (accessed 01.05.2022).

13. Cerulus L., Posaner J. Europe Has a Chips Plan — Here Are 6 Things that Could Kill It. Politico, 08.02.2022. Available at: https://www.politico.eu/article/european-union-chips-industrial-policy-european-chips-act-semiconductors/ (accessed 01.05.2022).

Система Orphus

Loading...
Up