DYNAMICS OF GVC POSITION OF V4 AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLIERS: IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY

In the post-covid world, governments explore options to enhance their policies so that corporations can act as successful motors of recovery and sustainable growth. Countries select various objectives related to global value chains (GVC), such as participation, value capture, inclusiveness and resilience, yet might be unaware of the position of corporations they are supposed to motivate. In this paper, we aim to (re-)investigate the position of Visegrad Four (V4) suppliers within the regional automotive value chains and to compare results with suppliers in other EU member states using the trade in value added (TiVA) statistics. We set two research questions: How does the position of V4 in automotive GVCs differ from the positions of other EU member states and significant other automotive-producing countries? What is the link between the domestic value added in gross exports of final automotive products and the selected policy variables? A multiple linear regression model is run with TiVA in the automotive industry as the dependent variable and independent variables embodying proxies of GVC-oriented policy consequences. The analysis identifies significant differences in value-added levels between V4 countries and other EU countries, and other large automotive-producing economies. Labour costs, productivity, investment in R&D and innovation support are among the factors where V4 countries fall behind. Implications for Central European audience: The results of our research might be helpful for respective authorities and governments in V4 and other Central and Eastern European countries. They can be of use when setting goals and implementing policies targeted at promoting innovation, upgrading within existing GVCs and in cooperation between universities and research centres on the one hand and the automotive industry on the other. © 2023, Central European Business Review. All Rights Reserved.

Emissions intensity comparisons and consumption-based CO2 accounting of transportation services

As the international division of labour becomes more entrenched, the distance goods travel before they reach the final consumer increases;at least this was the case before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. International trade and cross-border cargo movements generate significant carbon emissions. Despite theoretical advances, empirical studies frequently draw contradictory conclusions and the influence of international trade on a country's decarbonization efforts is inconclusive. This study examines the carbon emissions caused by countries' transportation services on global value chains. The input–output (IO) model and the 2015 multi-regional environmental input–output table from the UNCTAD-Eora database are employed. The input–output approach was used to determine the carbon emissions generated by the transport sector, along global value chains, in 190 countries. Environmentally extended IO analysis then reallocates emissions responsibilities of the transport sector from production to consumption. The study identifies which country's transport sectors add more value or emit more CO2. Our findings indicated that: (1) the transportation industry of a country may have a detrimental effect on the environment while generating minimal economic benefit;and (2) a country's transport industry may be tightly related to global value chain operations, but does not create considerable environmental impact. Given the significant differences in emissions intensity, we propose not only calculating the production-based accounting (PBA) of CO2 emissions, but also the consumption-based accounting (CBA). If CBA emissions are lower than PBA emissions, a country's transport sector is in carbon-leakage credit. The top three countries with the highest carbon-leakage credit for the transport sector were China, Russia and USA. If carbon emissions are taken into consideration, some nations may cease to possess a comparative advantage in manufacturing and trade. © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Rethinking Global Value Chains in Latin America under Covid 19: Challenges and Opportunities for Exporting Firms

This article examines the debate regarding regional integration and Global Value Chains (GVCs) in Latin America, and the challenges and opportunities that a deepening integration would have for exporting firms. The Latin American region had been progressively taking part in these integrated economic systems when COVID 19 hit. The pandemic has exposed weaknesses in its participation due to several factors, including its dependence on extra-regional hubs. Nevertheless, the disruption has brought back the need to consider the advantages of Latin American GVCs that could enhance the resilience and performance of regional firms. The review shows various benefits in carrying out a regional integration that is GVCs-oriented, similar to Asian and European countries. However, achieving the same level of regional GVC is not without challenges for firms, governments, and institutions. This article examines these alternatives in the context of an economic and health crisis.

China and global value chain restructuring

Global value chains have been a major means of manufacturing and trading goods internationally. Economic efficiency was the sole factor driving the proliferation of GVCs and the China-centered GVCs were established in a variety of manufactured products. In recent years, the China-US trade war and the unfolding COVID-19 pandemic have sent shock waves and disrupted smooth operations of GVCs, which has triggered the geographic restructuring of GVCs, in particular value chain diversification away from China. This paper analyzes the centrality of China in value chains and the vulnerabilities of GVCs exposed to the trade war and the pandemic. This paper provides comprehensive empirical evidence on GVC restructuring from different perspectives and discusses policy options that China could cope with the tide of the value chain diversification.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the internationalization of production: A review of the literature.

Motivation: The COVID-19 pandemic has substantially altered the context for cross-border business. This is reflected in trade flows but the conditions for conducting dispersed production functions across countries are also affected. This "new normal" period presents the need to examine the main problems and challenges in international trade and business. Purpose: The article aims to establish the scope, aspects, and implications of the COVID-19 pandemic on international trade and on international production by reviewing recent articles which deal with international trade and global value chain (GVC) issues, encompassing both changes that were already taking place and the challenges that began in 2020. Methods and approach: The findings of recent articles on trade flows and changes in GVCs (mainly the period 2019-2021) are described in theoretical terms, compared, and systematically reviewed. Special focus is given to the impact of the pandemic on GVCs, renationalization, and GVCs and the impact of the pandemic on GVC governance, and GVCs in the production of vaccines for the COVID-19 virus. Findings: A drop in trade was recorded in 2020, alongside the introduction of protective trade policy measures. Reduced GVC activities had a negative impact on welfare and the "renationalization" of GVC-related activities is not a real solution. For the development of GVCs it is important to find a trade-off between efficiency and resilience, starting with reorganization (re-engineering) of GVCs, and probably focusing on regional frameworks. Liberal trade policies are essential to ensure the involvement of GVCs in producing the COVID-19 vaccines, since the various inputs are produced in different countries. Policy implications: The possible directions for the future development of GVCs are elaborated: reshoring, resilience in supply chains, adjustments in governance, diversification, and development of risk-management strategies. The process of internationalization is not in question, but presents challenges which create the need for adjustments in its future development. Current problems with vaccine production arise in part from the erection of trade barriers and rising nationalism. There is a need for greater cross-country co-operation to avoid placing national short-term interests before long-term and broader objectives.