Search

When do political risks lead to divestment from a profitable market? Existing theories argue both that foreign investors may be sensitive to political tensions, but that they may only be sensitive to violent conflict. Using the crucial case of the US–China Trade War, we outline how political risks increased rates of exit among foreign firms while firm entrenchment mitigated these risks. Using a new dataset on all foreign-invested enterprises registered in China between 2017 and 2019, we implement triple interaction models to isolate the impact of increased political risks, investor national origin, and entrenchment on firm exit. Our findings show that heightened political risks during the trade war did increase firm exits by 34%–3% points over the pre-conflict baseline. Tariffs, the targeted effect of the trade war, increase US firm exits by 1% point. Firm exit is determined by the balance of heightened political risks against the availability of firm-level resources to mitigate these risks. These findings reconcile the conflicting expectations of the ‘business as usual’ and ‘follow the flag’ literatures about how firms respond to political risk, highlighting the tremendous collateral damage tariffs can cause in an age of global value chains.

We estimate the effects of the US–China Trade War on Brazilian exports in 2018 and 2019. We analyze the impacts from two perspectives: (i) on total Brazilian exports and (ii) on Brazilian exports of those products on which the United States imposed tariffs against China in the trade war. We used the statistical method of panel data. The results show that Brazil obtained export gains in the first analysis, while its exports were negatively affected in the second analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rules-based trade order confronts a crisis as both rule-making and enforcement have stalled in the World Trade Organization (WTO). Locked in great power rivalry, the United States and China are undermining the rules, making it necessary for middle powers like Canada and Japan to lead a coalition to reform the WTO. Working together they should advocate for greater transparency over subsidy policies and guidelines for how to balance security goals with economic cooperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, authors critically analyze the concept of derisking. Derisking is actively promoted by the Western expert community as a new strategic basis for US-China trade relations. Derisking refers to the transition from the policy of radical breakdown from the trade partnership with China to the rhetoric of risk reduction, which implies limiting dependencies and risks arising from them. It does not imply a complete rupture with a partner. Based on the extensive historical material study, as well as applying modern conflictological methods of risk analysis, authors come to the conclusion that derisking management strategy does not have the conceptual optics necessary for analyzing political dimension of international economic relations and is unable to explain what is the source of risks in reality.Conceptual non-viability of derisking is due to disregard for the uneven capital development regularity, which determines the interstate relations. Global economy is a space of unfading conflict within the economic competition, and therefore eternal risk activity. The constant presence of risks in international relations makes conflict either a source that generates risks, or their result. On the example of the US-China trade relations, authors demonstrate how an attempt to elevate a partner who was designated for the outsiders’ fate generates a response from the risk-beneficiary to return the outsider to his native bosom by minimizing the consequences of risk for himself at the expense of others.In fact, behind the derisking strategy, lies desire to increase the intellectual rents’ price paid for Western patents and technologies. The reaction to the possibility of losing one’s monopoly position creates an impulse to shake up relations and change their dynamics in the right direction for oneself. These impulses expose inherent systematical contradictions and determine the outbreak of a new round of a hot trade war. While staying in the negative unity relations, participants have no other choice but to achieve the goals of enrichment, which are the same for all participants, through denying each other, and aspire every time to establish unequal economic exchange in their favor.

Under the Trump presidency, the United States and China were embroiled in an open trade war that threatened the neoliberal world order. This paper attempts to put forward an explanation of the trade war from a world-systems perspective. Using the world-systems theory, systemic cycles accumulation theory, and the new international division of labor thesis, the paper contends that the rise of China and the protectionist stance of the United States were products of the neoliberal world economic and political order. It concludes that the trade war has not ended with the end of the Trump presidency. On the contrary, the trade war is systemic and will continue to be fought regardless of which party or persons who occupy the White House. The willingness of the American leadership to use international institutions as dispute resolution mechanisms and avoid unilateral undertakings would define the nature of the trade war and its possible outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Geopolitical conflicts, particularly economic ones, introduce significant uncertainties into the global supply chain. The impact of these conflicts on cross‐border buyer–supplier transactions remains underexplored, as does the capability of global suppliers to mitigate such risks by locking in their foreign buyers. Employing a combined perspective of resource dependence theory and transaction cost economics, we examine a natural experiment to investigate the effects of the 2018 U.S.–China trade war on the transactional relationships between Chinese suppliers and their U.S. buyers. Our study reveals that the trade war generally adversely affected these buyer–supplier transactional relationships, leading to a negative abnormal transaction value in the affected dyads, which amounted to 18.42% of their pre‐event level. However, we find that this adverse impact can be attenuated when Chinese suppliers demonstrate superior innovation capabilities, higher corporate social responsibility performance, or fewer local political ties. These findings yield insights for international suppliers and buyers on strategies to maintain buyer–supplier transactions and minimize the detrimental effects on global supply chain relationships during geopolitical conflicts. Highlights: The U.S.–China trade war slashed transactions between sampled U.S. buyers and Chinese suppliers by 18.42%.Innovative and socially responsible Chinese suppliers showed more resilient, effectively retaining U.S. buyers amid the trade war.U.S. buyers distanced themselves from Chinese suppliers with local political ties to navigate geopolitical uncertainties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractThe trade war between the United States and China since 2008 has opened strategic opportunities to increase the economic market in ASEAN countries. This research aims to answer whether the trade war led to an oligopoly or a systemic market structure as a strategy for increasing demands, especially in ASEAN countries. The research exploration refers to trade data between Indonesia and ASEAN at the start of the 2018 US-China trade war and compares it with the latest data for 2020. This research uses the Results Index of C5 Analysis of ASEAN Trading Partner Countries and the Herfindahl–Hirschman index to examine trade between China, America, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan in the ASEAN economy. Findings, in a way, empirically shows that the Results Index of C5 Analysis of ASEAN Trading Partner Countries before and after US-China trade made market concentration moderate and caused an increase in the value of C5 Analysis Results of ASEAN Trading Partner Countries. Discounts on Herfindahl–Hirschman the index needs to pay attention to import players in ASEAN before the trade war. However, after the trade war, there was an increase in the Herfindahl–Hirschman index, which has a trend toward a collusive oligopoly market structure.

Which factors make some American multinational corporations (MNCs) take political action in response to the US-China Trade War and cause others to stay on the sidelines? We identify China-based subsidiaries of US firms to identify firms' political actions in response to the trade war. We combine data on firms' tariff exposure, economic actions in China, and political actions in the United States during the trade war. Together these data highlight the divergent strategies with which firms engage. Even though more than 63 percent of MNCs in our sample were adversely impacted by tariffs, only 22 percent voice opposition and 7 percent exit in response to the trade war. Our analysis reveals that US MNCs in China differ in their business models, ownership structure, experience in China, and size of capital investments. These firm-level factors determine the degree to which US MNCs are embedded in China. This in turn shapes how firms perceive political risk and choose from the menu of options to deal with the trade war. Size and age increase voice while joint-venture status decreases it.

Due to the U.S.-China trade war, multinational firms may develop new contract manufacturers outside China to hedge against high tariffs on Chinese exports to the U.S. market. However, tariffs exhibit high uncertainty in recent years and developing a contract manufacturer incurs costs; hence, it is challenging to decide whether to develop a new contract manufacturer. We study two competing firms' contract manufacturer development decisions in a sequential game. First, we find that multinational firms prefer to develop new contract manufacturers when tariffs are expected to rise moderately rather than sharply. This is because the value of developing a new contract manufacturer for a multinational firm is the largest when the new contract manufacturer and the existing one compete most intensely, which happens for similar tariff-inclusive costs. This implies, when taking into account competition, an overly high tariff on Chinese exports to the United States does not necessarily serve the purpose of switching suppliers from China to other regions. Furthermore, higher tariff uncertainty can decrease development value and hence the incentive to develop a contract manufacturer. When there is an upward tariff shock that induces the equilibrium where both multinational firms develop a contract manufacturer, both firms must be worse off; only when it induces the asymmetric development equilibrium is it possible for the multinational firm developing a contract manufacturer to be better off, even with tariff increase and development cost. Second, the impact of development cost on multinational firms' incentives to develop new contract manufacturers is nonmonotone. As the development cost increases, the equilibrium can switch from both not developing new contract manufacturers to one developing a new contract manufacturer. Third, when the future tariff is expected to be high, multinational firms should diversify their development strategies in environments with fierce competition. Furthermore, increasing competition is not necessarily harmful for multinational firms. We also extend the analysis to consider asymmetric development costs and unobservable wholesale prices, and find the major insights are robust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined the effects of the trade war on US wooden furniture imports by product category (kitchen, bedroom, other) and exporting source (e.g., China, European Union, Vietnam) using a two‐stage demand procedure and general nested demand framework. There were significant competitive relationships across exporting countries. However, when both trade creation and diversion were considered, competitive relationships either diminished or became complementary. Consequently, elimination of the trade‐war tariffs would increase imports from China but would also benefit countries like Vietnam. However, results indicate that imports from China would still be significantly less than pretrade war levels if the tariffs are eliminated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Under the Trump presidency, the United States and China were embroiled in an open trade war that threatened the neoliberal world order. This paper attempts to put forward an explanation of the trade war from a world-systems perspective. Using the world-systems theory, systemic cycles accumulation theory, and the new international division of labor thesis, the paper contends that the rise of China and the protectionist stance of the United States were products of the neoliberal world economic and political order. It concludes that the trade war has not ended with the end of the Trump presidency. On the contrary, the trade war is systemic and will continue to be fought regardless of which party or persons who occupy the White House. The willingness of the American leadership to use international institutions as dispute resolution mechanisms and avoid unilateral undertakings would define the nature of the trade war and its possible outcomes.

The trade war between the United States and China can affect the Indonesian economy. It is because the United States and China are Indonesia's main trading partners in International trading. Indonesia's macroeconomic indicators affected by the trade war are exports, imports, interest rates, and inflation. This research examines the trade war's partial and simultaneous effect on Indonesia's macroeconomic conditions, such as exports, imports, interest rates, and inflation. The data used in this study is secondary data from the Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS) and Bank Indonesia (BI) in 2017 – 2020. The data analysis technique used is MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance). The empirical results showed that trade war simultaneously affects exports, imports, interest rates, and inflation. Meanwhile, the trade war partially affects exports, imports, and interest rates but not inflation. Our research concluded that trade conflicts between Indonesia's two main trading partners, namely the United States and China, affect Indonesia's macroeconomic conditions, especially on exports, imports, interest rates, and inflation. Indonesia must take strategic steps to anticipate the impact of the trade war, especially on export, import, and interest rate policies.

Using monthly trade data from January 2018 to December 2019, we empirically examine the effects of the US‐China trade war on Taiwan's exports as well as imports. On the export side, the tariff hike in the US against imports from China may increase Taiwan's exports to the US, (i.e., the substitution effect). To investigate this hypothesis, we examine how US tariffs on goods from China affect Taiwan's exports to the US. More directly, we also explore how China's exports to the US change Taiwanese exports to the US. On the import side, decline of China's export to the US may boost Taiwan's export while increasing its demand on Chinese intermediate inputs. Our empirical analyses confirmed the validity of these hypotheses. By contrast, we did not find a substitution effect in exports from neighboring countries—that is, Japan and South Korea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The China-US trade war, which was the result of differences in the production structure of the two countries, systemic contradictions in foreign economic policy principles and the struggle for global leadership, has a significant impact on global trade flows and market conditions. The article aims to identify the key beneficiaries of the trade war, to assess the situation in individual industry markets, as well as global legal effects, which remain out of academic discourse. US pharmaceutical companies and manufacturers of electronic integrated circuits, diodes, transistors, semiconductors and other high-tech components are the main beneficiaries of the trade war, while US consumers are facing rising import prices. Chile, Malaysia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada are external beneficiaries due to the growth in the supply of agricultural products and metals. Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Japan win in electronics, while Vietnam, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Cambodia, as well as India get additional advantages in textile production. The United States aimed at ousting China from the world rare earth metals market, forming an investment coalition consisting of Australia and Japan. The systemic spread of sanctions and trade restrictions is shifting the trade disputes resolution from the global level towards the US legal system, which seems to be relatively more efficient in resolving trade disputes.

The relevance of the research subject is conditioned upon the deterioration of diplomatic ties between the United States of America and the People's Republic of China. Clarifying this issue is, in addition, crucial considering the current unstable geopolitical situation. The purpose of the study was to identify the main stages of development of economic, political and social relations between the two countries and the problematic issues faced by the respective states. Methods used in the study: historical method, statistical method, systemic method, method of analysis and synthesis, comparative method etc. The chronology of China-US diplomatic relations was clarified, and the historical events that accompanied the development of the relevant relations were considered. The author examines the impact of these relations on the state of China-US ties, including the impact of World War II, the communist regime in the People's Republic of China, etc. In addition, the study includes statistics related to the so-called “trade war” between China and the United States. The main aspects of the Taiwan issue and the position of both the US and Chinese sides on this territory are clarified. In addition, attention was paid to the US and China's response to the Ukrainian-russian war, etc. The results of the research can be used by sociologists, lawyers and historians to write essays and dissertations. The data obtained can serve as a foundation for improving and enhancing diplomatic relations between the countries examined

This paper discusses the new protectionism between the United States of America and China and examines international trade policy amid worldwide geopolitical turbulence. The primary research task is to comprehensively analyze the current trends in foreign trade theory and policy, and in particular, the foreign trade policy models, trade interests indicated by export orientation and import sensitivity, the types and degrees of protectionist pressures in different political systems, new trends in international business, and the USA's motives for imposing tariffs and import restrictions. China will be significantly impacted by an import tariff trade war in all indicators, including welfare, gross domestic product (GDP), manufacturing employment, and trade. However, it has been pointed out that although China will be significantly affected, the costs should be sustainable and not severely damage the Chinese economy. As for the United States, the simulation results indicate that there will be welfare, GDP, and non-manufacturing production gains, but employment and trade losses.

The carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) of the European Union (EU) may become a significant global climate policy milestone. The EU trade partners most willing to accept CBAM could help it gain the critical mass necessary for survival and broader adoption. The cooperation of the world's major economies would be particularly important, while major recipients of EU development aid may be most likely to fall into line. The stances of countries will depend on their climate outlook and how CBAM affects them. This paper assesses which countries are likely to be most accepting the EU's CBAM by constructing an index with the following dimensions: export structure, national carbon policy, innovation capacity, trade agreements with the EU, and the carbon intensity of their economies. The CBAM Support Index is applied to three different groups of countries to identify a variety of possible allies.

We investigate dynamic conditional correlations between Trade War on the stock markets of G-7 Countries using DCC Garch Modeling evidencing that strong market efficiency has an inverse relationship with stock market volatility. However, as the Trade War is between China and USA, there is probability that the stock markets of other countries may react differently to this situation. For this purpose, the Trade War series was created to capture multidimensional aspects of the event. The study's findings reveal that past residual shocks exist for all series. However, time-varying correlations do not exist for America, France, Japan and UK. The study has implications for policymakers and investors in the financial markets.

AbstractIndonesia has been the largest palm-oil producer in the world since 2006. The country’s palm-oil products are exported globally, including to member states of the European Union. In recent years, European countries have implemented increasingly stringent regulations on palm-oil imports, including from Indonesia, through policies such as the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) II. This study qualitatively analyzes Indonesia’s responses to these policies. We collected data using in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions with government policymakers, activists from nongovernmental organizations, and oil-palm smallholders and entrepreneurs in Indonesia. We demonstrate that the European Union policy has experienced a shift in recent years which has made it more difficult for Indonesian palm-oil products to enter European markets. The Indonesian government views these policies as an environmental issue, a form of trade war, and a challenge to the sovereignty and dignity of the nation. The government’s responses have included improvements to cultivation and business practices, demands for broader and more inclusive policies, and “resistance,” for example, by referring the case to the World Trade Organization.

The article focuses on the impact of tariffs on imported steel, particularly tin-plated steel, on the U.S. canned food sector. It explores the competing special interests of steel producers and canned food manufacturers, examines the lobbying efforts, and discusses the implications for canned food prices and domestic food security, highlighting the broader context of trade protections and their effects on concentrated gains and losses within specific industries.

By presenting an investigation of the impact of international trade protectionism on the reconfigurations of the global value chains (GVCs), this paper challenges the perceived assumption of ongoing globalization and the free flow of goods and services. Building on the de-globalization and GVCs' literature, we performed a historical content analysis on 174 articles from 2016 to 2020 published in leading and major national and international newspapers. Our findings suggest that international trade protectionism has altered the landscape of GVCs by causing widespread disruption to their functioning, thus making them prone to future external policy risks. Such disruption is having a varying impact on various industries, whereby it is causing greater harm to those industries that are more global in nature and thus rely on global suppliers. We draw implications of our findings for research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we investigate the scale of the drop in American imports after it imposed punitive tariffs on Chinese goods. Our analysis spans the whole period of Donald Trump’s presidency (January 2017 – January 2021). In contrast to existing studies, which are mainly devoted to the impact of reduced trade flows on the key macroeconomic indicators, we focus on the specific market of textile products, which was among the most affected by the protectionism measures. The quantitative analysis allows us to conclude that the imposed duties severely hit the textile industry, bringing a noticeable drop in US imports of selected groups of products from China. Furthermore, the review of long‑term consequences indicates that the ongoing trade war has not only adversely affected the macroeconomic fundamentals of the US economy, but it is also likely to have a long‑lasting impact on global supply and production chains.

The purpose of the article is on the deglobalization processes currently taking place in international economic interactions, and also attempts to examine how the trade blocs of the major economies affect the rest of globalization. The Kinked Exponential Model was used to determine decadal growth rates based on 31 years of panel data from 1990 to 2020 for 15 large countries (gross domestic product). Three different regression models i.e., Pooled OLS, Fixed- and Randomeffect models were estimated to examine the effects of trade blocs and wars between nations on the world economy. Over the study period, disparities and increasing economic inequality between variables have widened. In addition, international conflicts have had a negative impact on international trade and have significantly affected globalization. More importantly, trade blocs, particularly the OECD, APEC, and BRICS have slowed trade with the rest of the world, reflecting a process known as regionalization, in which countries cooperate rather than at the global level. In particular, during the third decade of the twentieth century, when the growth rate of trade flows among major countries declined rapidly by 8.8 per cent, this regionalization did not stop and expanded significantly.

This paper provides evidence on the effects of US and Chinese trade policies on the 2020 US presidential election. In response to a series of US tariffs imposed on Chinese goods, China imposed retaliatory tariffs, especially on US agricultural products, which largely affected Republican‐leaning counties. The US government then subsidized US farmers by providing direct payments through the Market Facilitation Program (MFP) to mitigate the Chinese retaliatory tariffs. Using the universe of actual county‐level MFP disbursement data, we document that MFP payments relative to the Chinese retaliatory tariff exposure were higher in solidly Republican counties, implying that the Trump administration allocated rents in exchange for political patronage. We also find that MFP payments outweighed the estimated impact of Chinese retaliatory tariffs and led to an increase in the Republican vote share in the 2020 presidential election. Finally, we uncover evidence that China's retaliatory trade policy and the corresponding US agricultural policy exacerbated political polarization in the US, especially the rural–urban divide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Kavilando is the property of Kavilando and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Based on official PRC statistics and analytical data obtained from modern scientific and public research, it follows that the so-called Chinese economic miracle has ended. The rapid development of China was driven using cheap labor and the open-door policy for Western investment under the rules of basic market laws after Deng Xiaoping's 1977 reforms. All three factors have exhausted their resources. Further growth in living standards and education began to pose a danger to the Communist regime. Ignoring the laws of the free market economy, creating artificial plans for stimulating growth, repressing the entrepreneurs, sanctions pressure, an arms race, aggressive plans in the region and demographic changes inevitably lead to dangerous consequences - a slowdown in economic growth, debt load and capital outflow.

Despite numerous studies of the US and China trade war effect being published over the last seven years, this topic has remained equivocal. The portfolio formation model that underlies the arbitrage pricing theory is still relatively small, especially for the portfolio performance of the Fama-French five factors (5FF) model that examines the global economic crisis. Focusing on the trade war year, the study aims to examine the effect of accounting information on portfolio performance by using the 5FF model. This study employs a dummy panel least square regression model, the data are analyzed from Indonesia, US, and China stock markets with 864 portfolio monthly combinations ranging from 2016 to 2019. The result of the study shows that the US-China trade war strengthens the beneficial impact of market risk on portfolio performance in the Indonesian Stock Exchange. On the other hand, the war has no impact on the relationship between market risk and the performance of a portfolio of US stocks. However, it lowered the beneficial impact of size on portfolio performance for both the US and China stock markets. The robust 5FF of accounting information within the study is size and investment. According to the study, systematic risk and idiosyncratic risk should be given more consideration by both investors and companies to prevent unneeded economic losses and manage the risk that could have a greater impact on the stock market.

The United States and China are by far the most powerful countries on the planet by many indicators, and both of these countries can influence the course of many processes around the world. In particular, the United States has a substantial influence on the world stage, so it is necessary to investigate the significance of the confrontation with Beijing in the context of their foreign policy, and what are the prospects for its continuation. Thus, the relevance of the subject is determined by the fact that the results of this confrontation have an impact on the policy of all countries in the future. The main purpose of the study is to determine the level of priority of the confrontation with China for the United States, by analysing the foundations of the geopolitical theory of the United States and considering the history of this conflict. When writing the study, the following methods were used: analysis, synthesis, comparison, specification and generalisation of information. As a result of the study, the following conclusions can be drawn: the confrontation between the United States and Beijing takes place in three main areas of activity: trade, economic, and ideological; it was determined that the United States is the most influential country in the world and is trying to maintain this influence; it was identified that the key aspect of the US foreign policy influence is trade, which is one of the main reasons for the confrontation with China; the impact of this conflict on the whole world was established; certain problems of US internal policy and possible prospects for the development of this conflict were considered. The originality of the study is that it considers the conflict between the United States and China as broadly as possible, considering various fields of activity. The results of this study will be useful for economists who study the economic problems of the whole world, and Ukraine in particular, including researchers in the United States, to draw attention to the problems and threats of their own country

Copyright of Brazilian Business Law Journal / Administração de Empresas em Revista is the property of Administracao de Empresas em Revista and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study empirically investigates the impact of the U.S.-China trade war on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure readability. We first propose a measure of CSR disclosure readability with the latest word embedding model of Word2Vec. Using the U.S.-China trade war as an exogenous shock, we conduct a difference-in-differences analysis and find that firms release more readable CSR disclosures in response to the trade war. We interpret this finding to indicate that CSR disclosure can be a strategic tool to enhance the firms' reputations when they suffer a negative shock. Moreover, such an effect is more pronounced for firms with tighter internal governance or external supervision. Our results are robust to confining our sample with a Coarsened Exact Matching algorithm and a battery of robust checks. Finally, we find that the trade war leads to increased charitable donations, indicating that our CSR readability measure is more likely to reflect actual CSR activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The EU deforestation regulation promises global green leadership, however, loopholes may lead to an increase in the trade of deforestation-implicit agricultural products. Ratification of the EU-MERCOSUR free trade agreement could exploit this situation.

This paper is devoted to the causes, manifestations, circumstances, results and global consequences of US-China trade war in 2018–2021. Based on the analysis of management decisions, expert assessments, statistics and opinion polls, the author makes judgments and assumptions about the continuity of US policy, provoking and aggravating conflict relations between the two countries, as well as contributing to their penetration into all spheres of politics, economy, culture and even sports. At the same time, consistent and adequate measures on the part of the People’s Republic of China, which have a predominantly defensive orientation, are taken into account. At the same time, the anti-Chinese trade, investment, and technology policy, which was already carried out under Donald Trump in the name of ensuring the national security of the United States, and under Joe Biden actually turned into a hybrid cold war, is interpreted in the context of causal relationships characterizing the crisis of the neoliberal model of capitalism and the intentions of the world elite to restart the Bretton Woods system by switching to “green” energy. The most important resource of the transformation that has begun is the ideology of justifying any sanctions and other strong-willed decisions of the “democratic” Western states led by the United States against the “authoritarian” losers of the energy transition. Consequently, the “trade war” of the USA and China, objectively acting as an instrument of disorganization of the global world and a powerful limiter of globalization based on “market fundamentalism”, becomes the demiurge of the new globalization projected on the platform of “ideological fundamentalism”. In the situation of a multipolar world and the intensified rivalry of nuclear powers, restarting the world economy through a global war seems impossible. On the contrary, the mechanism of collecting a “green” contribution in favor of potential beneficiaries of the new globalization has not yet been tested. Within this perspective, the US-China trade war becomes not only an existential concern of the US and its allies, but also a problem of China’s survival. Obviously, this circumstance explains the emerging rapprochement between the PRC and the Russian Federation in the direction of pooling resources and forming a military-political alliance.

Continuation of the article. Devoted to the causes, manifestations, circumstances, results and global consequences of US-China trade war in 2018–2021. Based on the analysis of management decisions, expert assessments, statistics and opinion polls, the author makes judgments and assumptions about the continuity of US policy, provoking and aggravating conflict relations between the two countries, as well as contributing to their penetration into all spheres of politics, economy, culture and even sports. At the same time, consistent and adequate measures on the part of the People’s Republic of China, which have a predominantly defensive orientation, are taken into account. At the same time, the anti-Chinese trade, investment, and technology policy, which was already carried out under Donald Trump in the name of ensuring the national security of the United States, and under Joe Biden actually turned into a hybrid cold war, is interpreted in the context of causal relationships characterizing the crisis of the neoliberal model of capitalism and the intentions of the world elite to restart the Bretton Woods system by switching to “green” energy. The most important resource of the transformation that has begun is the ideology of justifying any sanctions and other strong-willed decisions of the “democratic” Western states led by the United States against the “authoritarian” losers of the energy transition. Consequently, the “trade war” of the USA and China, objectively acting as an instrument of disorganization of the global world and a powerful limiter of globalization based on “market fundamentalism”, becomes the demiurge of the new globalization projected on the platform of “ideological fundamentalism”. In the situation of a multipolar world and the intensified rivalry of nuclear powers, restarting the world economy through a global war seems impossible. On the contrary, the mechanism of collecting a “green” contribution in favor of potential beneficiaries of the new globalization has not yet been tested. Within this perspective, the US-China trade war becomes not only an existential concern of the US and its allies, but also a problem of China’s survival. Obviously, this circumstance explains the emerging rapprochement between the PRC and the Russian Federation in the direction of pooling resources and forming a military-political alliance.

Copyright of Revista UNISCI is the property of Unidad de Investigaciones Sobre Seguridad y Cooperacion International (UNISCI) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Indonesia has been the largest palm-oil producer in the world since 2006. The country's palm-oil products are exported globally, including to member states of the European Union. In recent years, European countries have implemented increasingly stringent regulations on palm-oil imports, including from Indonesia, through policies such as the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) II. This study qualitatively analyzes Indonesia's responses to these policies. We collected data using in-depth interviews and focus-group discussions with government policymakers, activists from nongovernmental organizations, and oil-palm smallholders and entrepreneurs in Indonesia. We demonstrate that the European Union policy has experienced a shift in recent years which has made it more difficult for Indonesian palm-oil products to enter European markets. The Indonesian government views these policies as an environmental issue, a form of trade war, and a challenge to the sovereignty and dignity of the nation. The government's responses have included improvements to cultivation and business practices, demands for broader and more inclusive policies, and "resistance," for example, by referring the case to the World Trade Organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Comparative Economic Research is the property of Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Over the past four decades, Intellectual Property (IP) has been one of the main controversies of US-China trade relations. But the current US-China trade war contains a new focus - technology transfer. This article adopts a socio-legal and economic approach to examine the current technology and trade tensions between these two countries and why China became an Information Technology (IT) powerhouse. It first provides an overview of IP and technology transfer rules under the Phase One US-China Economic and Trade Agreement (POA). It then explores different forms of forced technology transfer activities and the in-depth reasons for the US to shift its main IP concerns from IP enforcement to technology transfer. It explains why the US and China trade war is inevitable, why the current US-China IP-trade war is significantly different from previous ones, and the economic and political reasons behind the global technology leadership competition by the two countries. Finally, the author concludes that the POA and its technology transfer rules are not the ends of the game but just the start of the global technology leadership competition between the US and China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multinational corporations have benefited tremendously from free trade in the past few decades. However, the dynamism of international relations, paired with the global recession, has rekindled the debate over frictionless trade. In this study, we examine how trade friction, created by tariff trade barriers, affects the operational performance of domestic firms which source from the affected countries. We also investigate how various supply chain characteristics and strategies can moderate the impact of such trade friction. Motivated by the 2018 U.S.–China trade war, we conducted a difference‐in‐difference analysis to examine the impact of trade tariffs on performance indicators of U.S. firms with direct supplier connections in China. Specifically, we found that U.S. firms with direct supply partners (i.e., first‐tier suppliers) in China had a worse performance than the U.S. firms without direct supply partners in China in terms of inventory (i.e., days of supply) and profitability (return‐on‐assets). We further found that the negative impacts were more severe for firms with a higher degree of outsourcing, and horizontal and spatial supply base complexity. We discuss the implications for international operations management, supply chain networks, supply risk management, and provide suggestions to supply chain practitioners and trade policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The US-China trade war, initiated in March 2018, substantially transformed the trading partnership between the two largest economic powers. It directly influenced the profitability of domestic enterprises related to the export chain and harmed the domestic economy in China and its stock market. This study empirically examines the effects of the trade war on China's stock market based on chronological events and tests whether it is the contagion effect or the present value effect. The empirical study supports the contagion effect because the impact of the US-China trade war differed significantly in different sectors only when the US announced its imposition of more tariffs on US$50 billion worth of Chinese products. However, there is no apparent difference between the industries for other events, nor is there any significant difference between the industries in terms of long-term impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the time of mercantilism onwards, international trade has always been an arena of geopolitical rivalry, and the unipolar international order that emerged after the end of the cold war essentially created a special security architecture in the strategic Middle East so that it could maintain its status quo. Powers inevitably have to choose between two options to work within the framework or to challenge it. This paper examines the competition between the US and china in the form of strategic hedging and under the global value chain structure. The authors will seek to answer the question: What is china's middle east economic strategy in competition with the US? The research hypothesis is that China's middle East economic strategy in competing with the US is targeted influence through the most effective sections of the international value chain. The research findings are based on its explanatory-analytical method, that in the Middle East look, China according to the United States' efforts to build a unified trade front to counter Beijing's state-owned capitalism and in order to reduce its energy security risk, has focused on technology security at targeting growth in the value chain hierarchy and gaining a foothold at its highest levels.

To this end, mathematical and statistical methods are used to model the effect of tariffs, ex-ante and ex-post, after implementing this trade policy, on exports of aluminum and steel from Mexico to the United States, versus US imports of these metals from the ROW. The results show that the protectionist tariff policy had a structural effect on US imports; likewise, the tariff shock implemented by the United States in June 2018 adversely affected its imports of these goods, both in terms of volume and value. This suggests that bilateral trade may be affected, but the effect is differentiated. The United States may be achieving its objective of protecting its domestic industry or it may impact upwards on the domestic prices of these metals, which could influence the prices paid by the final consumer. For Mexico, trade may be diverted or its export capacity reduced, adversely affecting its trade balance of these metals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study analysed the dynamics of the international soybean market using econometric techniques and economic models to study the impacts of the US–China trade war. It considered the analysis of "spatial" (horizontal) price transmission during an approximately ten-year period from September 2009 to May 2019 using monthly time-series data. The research focused on the leaders in the international soybean market, namely, China, the USA, the EU, Brazil and Argentina. Several econometric techniques were employed. The stationarity of the price time series was determined using the augmented Dickey–Fuller (ADF) unit root test. Structural breaks were inferred using the ADF test with a breaks test and a Bai–Perron multiple break test. The long-term relation/cointegration amongst the series was determined using the Johansen cointegration test (1988), with the previous breaks input as dummy variables. The direction of the causality was inferred using the Granger causality test (1969). The long-term and short-term causal relations were determined using the vector autoregression model (VAR) and the vector error correction model (VECM). The results showed a highly efficient and cointegrated market. The incidents of the trade war, as represented by tariffs and subsidies, had minor effects on the market efficacy, cointegration and price transmission. The arbitrage process of the studied market managed to get around the tariffs. In other words, there was no empirical evidence to support the claim that the law of one price (LOOP) did not hold. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the impact of the pandemic coronavirus (COVID-19) on Sino-US relations. It describes Sino-US relations before and after the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic. Particular attention is paid to the ongoing trade war between the PRC and the US, as well as the development of the information war caused by the politicization of the epidemic. The reasons for the deterioration of Sino-US relations under the influence of the coronavirus are considered. The author highlighted the following factors: US fears about the transition of world economic and political leadership from Washington to Beijing; the disagreement between China and the United States over the anti-epidemic in the framework of multilateral cooperation; problems caused by objectively accelerated changes in the world order. It is concluded that the epidemic plays a limited role in the deterioration of economic and political relations between China and the US. The fundamental reason remains the discrepancy between the unilateralism advocated by the US and multilateralism called for by China.

This work was set to investigate empirically the possible impact of economic policy uncertainties as well the trade conflict between China and the US on the Official Development Assistance to the West African Sub-region. From the bivariate test for linear association, we found a co-movement of the War with ODA. This implies that aids can increase even as the war goes on as such aids may be used as a penetration strategy for trade and other economic purposes. It was also found that there is a greater sensitivity of ODA to US uncertainty than the Chinese Uncertainty. The error correction model shows that it is obvious that Official Development Aids adjust to the shocks and dynamics of the raging economic uncertainties and trade war between China and the US.

This article analyzes trends in international trade regarding trade contradictions and attempts to define "trade wars". The growth of global trade has changed the economic impact and political contours of trade protection. The study revealed that today trade disputes and wars, which have turned into the biggest problems for the global trading system, this is a matter of great concern, and certain contradictions in trade relations between states are characterized as “trade wars”. Since the establishment and development of international trade relations, in the context of competition between countries for markets, serious trade conflicts have begun to arise and escalate, and in connection with the development of the international trading system, the consequences of trade clashes have become increasingly large-scale. Countries have used a variety of methods - from diplomacy to military intervention-to protect their own markets from foreign competitors ' goods and strengthen their positions in foreign markets. The article examines the history of development and the reasons of world trade wars. The study of the evolution of international trade contradictions and disputes from the time of Ancient Greece to the present day, showed that the objects of disputes were different, different methods and tools were used during trade wars. Although trade wars have always been destructive, at the present stage, these conflicts causing divisions can escalate into new geopolitical confrontations and lead to a prolonged global recession.

This paper examines how power transition theory could provide insights into the trade war between the United States and China. The paper shows that the trade war between the United States and China is a manifestation of power transition in the international system. As a rising power with growing economic might, China seeks to increase its influence and position in the international system through various global initiatives. In responding to this, the United States tries to maintain its position as a global leader by imposing trade barriers to suppress the rise of China. This strategy intends to slow the U.S.’ decline as a global hegemon. This article aims to contribute to understanding the relations between power transition, hegemony, and trade wars.