The Multinational Enterprise in Global Production and Trade Networks - Individual Essay

profileclarencekwa
Lecture6-JW.pptx

— The Political Economy of International Business

Week 6: The political economy of production 1: Multinational firms, global value chains (GVCs) and global production networks (GPNs)

BUSM 4694_2120 Lecturer: Jaime Wong 25 February, 2021

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

To create Em dash above headline:

Same size and weight as the headline and set using a soft return.

PC: Em dash (—): Alt+Ctrl+ - (minus)

Mac: Em dash (—): Shift+Alt/Option+hyphen

1

Old models of MNEs

The “vertically integrated” firm

Internationalisation through subsidiaries wholly or partially controlled by the firm

This is still common, but it is not the dominant model today in most tangible industries

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Global Value Chains

“International production, trade and investments are increasingly organised within so-called global value chains (GVCs) where the different stages of the production process are located across different countries. Globalisation motivates companies to restructure their operations internationally through outsourcing and offshoring of activities” (OECD, 2019)

Note that this is a different and more specific term than “globalisation”

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

As the growth of international production and exchange extended further, we started seeing the unbundling of the MNC as a single coherent and discrete entity with clear boundaries. The GVC literature developed a concept of value chains that was first floated by Michael Porter in his Competitive Advantage work.

The GVC approach was developed around a question about whether an unequal relationship existed between where value was being created and where it was captured. In value chains there may be places where exchange is unequal where, for instance, a grower of coffee may get less than the value created when selling to a merchant, or paying debts from a finance company.

Given that GVC began with a special focus on industries in developing countries, it is perhaps no surprise that the approach is associated with the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) at Sussex University, and has been picked up by international policy institutions like the International Labour Organisation.

GVC decentres the analysis of IB on companies and what companies do themselves. GVC is instead interested in relations of power and control up and down industries. These relations are recast not in terms of ownership but in terms of governance, and there are several forms of governance developed here.

GVC also offers policy action and especially through notions of economic and social upgrading.

https://www.oecd.org/industry/ind/global-value-chains.htm

3

History of “Global Value Chain” (GVC)

“Global commodity chain” (Gereffi)

“Value chain” (Porter)

GVCs are industrial patterns where production of single goods occurs in multiple countries and is done by multiple firms/actors.

A product of “fine slicing” of activities towards new locations and suppliers

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

“Value Chain” of a product

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Elements of GVCs

“Lead firms”

“Supply firms”

“Clusters” of production

States/governments

Geography, resources and endowments

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Cluster examples

Silicone Valley: a hub of tech R&D and management Bangladesh: textile processing

Korea: computer parts and screens

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Different types of GVCs

“Producer-driven”

Electronics, Automobiles

“Buyer-driven”

Clothing, Agriculture

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Inter-firm relationships

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

The momentum of GVCs

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Regional Hubs in GVCs

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

High-Value Activities

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

The Changing Smile Curve of Global Production

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Forward and backward linkages in GVCs

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Average Length of GVCs by Industry

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Length of GVCs by industry

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Intermediate goods trade: Imports as a function of Exports

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Example 1: Automobile industry

More hierarchical structure than other industries, “producer-driven”

“First tier” suppliers: airbags, air conditioning systems, brakes, sound systems/radios, etc. Often global

“Second tier” suppliers: raw materials, ball bearings, fuel tanks, sub assemblers, etc. Often local

High transportation costs and political sensitivity lead to regional GVCs: North America, East Asia, Europe

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

1990s- boom in north-south trade

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Japanese cars in Asian factories

(Cited in Baldwin:2011)

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Example 2: Agriculture industry

“Buyer-driven” value chain led by relatively few food conglomerates and retailers

Supermarkets work with growers to set standards

Less regional, more global. Countries like Vietnam, Cambodia, Brazil have highest percentage of exports

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Nutella GVC

10 factories: local supply of packaging, milk. Global supply of: hazelnuts (mainly from Turkey) palm oil (from Malaysia

Papua New Guinea and Brazil) cocoa (mainly from Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana

Nigeria and Ecuador) sugar (mainly from Europe) and the vanilla flavour

(from the United States and Europe)

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Example 3: Consumer electronics industry

Producer-driven. Major lead firms (Apple, Samsung, HP, Sony, etc.) with extremely long value chains. Low transport costs lead toa global industry clustered mainly in East Asia.

High modularity/standardisation of intermediate products

Lots of intellectual property impacting governance.

Firms moving up the value chain from contract manufacturers to lead firms: Acer, Huawei, Lenovo

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Global Production Networks

Production networks are inherently dynamic; they are always, by definition, in a process of flux—in the process of becoming—both organizationally and geographically. The spatio-temporality of production networks, therefore, is highly variable and contingent. As Hudson (2004, p. 462) points out, ‘[...] economic processes must be conceptualized in terms of a complex circuitry with a multiplicity of linkages and feedback loops rather than just ‘‘simple’’ circuits or, even worse, linear flows’

Global production networks: realizing the potential Neil M. Coe*, Peter Dicken* and Martin Hess* (2008) Journal of Economic Geography, 8: 271 – 295.

xt

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Global Factories/Factory-less production

Understanding the factory-less goods producer as a new and novel form of business entity.

Nike, Apple, own no factories.

What enables firms to produce without producing?

Imagines this system as highly centralised.

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Global production: some major questions

Governance: where does the power lie?

Should we look at GPNs/GVCs instead of firms?

What is the future of global production?

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Global Production Networks (GPN)

Production networks are inherently dynamic; they are always, by definition, in a process of flux—in the process of becoming—both organizationally and geographically. The spatio-temporality of production networks, therefore, is highly variable and contingent. As Hudson (2004, p. 462) points out, ‘[...] economic processes must be conceptualized in terms of a complex circuitry with a multiplicity of linkages and feedback loops rather than just ‘‘simple’’ circuits or, even worse, linear flows’

Global production networks: realizing the potential Neil M. Coe*, Peter Dicken* and Martin Hess* Journal of Economic Geography, 8: 271 – 295.

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

The other main network/chain approach is Global Production Networks, developed by economic geographers, notably out of the University of Manchester. Just like the GVC approach the conceptual focus of GPN is on the spatial and institutional relationships between production, exchange, distribution and consumption. It recognises that the way global production is being organised and reorganised is extending across all sorts of countries, producing lots of small components and organised in complex ways.

It is also based on an explicit recognition of the fluidity and changeability of those relationships. As Coe, Dicken and Hess note:

“Production networks are inherently dynamic; they are always, by definition, in a process of flux—in the process of becoming—both organizationally and geographically. The spatio-temporality of production networks, therefore, is highly variable and contingent. As Hudson (2004, p. 462) points out, ‘[…] economic processes must be conceptualized in terms of a complex circuitry with a multiplicity of linkages and feedback loops rather than just “simple” circuits or, even worse, linear flows’. Some networks are long-lived, others are more ephemeral; some are geographically extensive, others are more geographically localized. None remain completely unchanged for very long.” (‘GPN – realising the potential’, Journal of Economic Geography, p 271, 2008)

The claim for GPN then is that like GVC it recognises the increasing fluidity and extended nature of global production. It also claims it is more expansive and comprehensive than GVC, because it opens up non-linear, multi-level relations and transactions.

28

Chains and Networks

Sturgeon, 2000, p. 6

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Chains, Networks and Companies

Value chains: the full range of activities that firms and workers do to bring a product/good or service from its conception to its end use and beyond.

Production networks:  interconnected nodes and links extend spatially across national boundaries 

Global Company: a business that operates in two or more countries.

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

GPN

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Organising Value Chains

‹#›

RMIT Classification: Trusted