（本文英文版发表于 SSRG International Journal of Economics and Management Studies (SSRG-IJEMS) – Volume 7 Issue 6 – June 2020，中文版本附后）
Where Does Globalization Go in the Outbreak of the Epidemic? —— Thinking based on Supply Chain Configuration in ChinaJia Kang#1, Ou Chunzhi#2*Jia Kang, Research Fellow and Ph.D. Instructor in Chinese Academy of Fiscal Sciences, the President of China Academy of New Supply-side Economics, Beijing, the People’s Republic of ChinaOu Chunzhi, distinguished professor in Business School of Guizhou Education University, Special Research Fellow of New Supply-side Economist 50 Forum, the People’s Republic of ChinaAbstractThe COVID-19 epidemic has caused the global supply chain to break, especially the failure of epidemic prevention materials to enter the epidemic area, which urged countries to rethink the re-configuration of supply chain and the local layout of the whole supply chain of public crisis emergency protection industry. There is no doubt that the anti-globalization and supply chain reconfiguration under the epidemic are quietly going on and changing the world. This article analyzes the operation logic of globalization from three perspectives of economy, value and rules, and investigates the current supply chain configuration in China. It is believed that the construction of themed industrial parks to form a supply chain cluster should attract more international capital with cost advantage, and heavy investment in research and innovation of digital industry should combine closely with the mechanical optimization in the supply-side structural reform, and upgrade China’s digital industry with capital advantage to achieve high-quality development.Keywords: epidemic situation; globalization; anti-globalization; supply chainAt the beginning of the year, the COVID-19 epidemic raged on the land of China. In March, the epidemic spread to foreign countries. The countries have closed their doors and the production has stalled. The global supply chain seems to be on the verge of breaking. The unemployment rate has soared. The economy has been hit severely. The COVID-19 epidemic created a world that was no longer open, prosperous and free. In response to this situation, the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee held a meeting on April 17, 2020, proposed to maintain the stability and competitiveness of China‘s industrial chain supply chain, promote the coordinated resumption of industrial chain with the production resumption, and closely follow the principal tasks of “six guarantees” “ensuring employment”.
With regard to the issues of globalization and supply chain, the academic community has accumulated abundant achievements. Globalization is not achieved overnight, but is the result of process practice and negotiation.1 Although economic benefits are the primary consideration for the global supply chain, ideology also affects the configuration of globalization and the transformation of social and institutional structures under globalization.2 Don‘t try anti-globalization easily. Closing the door may lead to excessive competition, social stratification and inequality within a country.3 Under normal circumstances, there are also divergent opinions on the standard of supply chain configuration.4 Environmental sustainability5, cost6, efficiency, quality and profit7, and customer satisfaction8 all affect the global configuration of the supply chain. However, under extraordinary circumstances, the supply chain has the risk of interruption, such as this epidemic, thus there should be a plan and emergency response system established in advance.9 In addition, in the grand context of Industry 4.0, high technology can dominate the configuration of the global supply chain, such as the transfer of knowledge and innovation10, 11. Seemingly, there are many factors that dominate globalization and supply chain configuration layout. But after carefully combing, we can find that the deep logic underlying the signs has always dominated the globalization.
II. THE DEEP RUNNING LOGIC OF GLOBALIZATION
The signs of broken global supply chain caused by the epidemic urge countries to reflect on the problem of supply chain reconfiguration and set off a wave of anti-globalization. In fact, the anti-globalization headed by the United States began as early as Trump took office, but the epidemic has accelerated this trend. The development trend of globalization in the future will depend on the prevention and control of the epidemic in the near future, and in the long run, it will also depend on the comprehensive political, economic, and institutional responses of various countries. Under the epidemic situation, the relations between major powers may be adjusted or even reorganized. The international coordinated emergency cooperation mechanism may be deconstructed and reconstructed. The global supply chain configuration will also undergo structural adjustments. Where will globalization go? 1. Will Globalization End? Globalization is the changing process of human beings from isolated regions, countries and nations to a global society. Looking back on world history, human society has experienced at least 6 globalizations.
The first time: 1600-1500 BC. Ancient Egypt‘s 17th and 18th dynasties were the world‘s top powers at that time. King Yahmos and his successors formed a regional division of labor and remote trade centered on the eastern Mediterranean through continuous external expansion. The prototype of globalization dominated by the first empire in the world history (Egyptian Empire) has basically taken shape. The first globalization ended with the decline of the Egyptian Empire.
The second time: After the Egyptians and Greeks, the Romans took the stage of the Mediterranean history and established the Roman Empire across Europe, Asia and Africa. Under its leadership, the trade division system was gradually formed. The Roman Empire and the Eastern Han Empire were called the poles of the world at that time. However, the expansion of the Roman Empire encountered bottlenecks, stalled development, and then collapsed, which directly led to the end of the second globalization.
The third time: In the 13th century, the woolen textile industry gradually emerged in Flanders. Geographically, the division of labor system linked the Mediterranean, Western Europe and Middle East regions and formed a Mediterranean trade zone spontaneously. Industrially, Italy started from the processing of cloth and woolen cloth in England and the Netherlands and gradually entered the peak of development. Funds, raw materials, and labor were closely dependent on the world market. However, the Westward Expedition of the Mongolian Empire brought the Black Plage and ended the third globalization.
The fourth time: In the geographical discovery at the end of the 15th century, the world trade had been further expanded geographically, and the transportation network had been gradually formed. Eurasia, Africa and the New American Continent were linked by trade and flourished unprecedentedly. At the end of the 17th century, the small ice age in Europe caused a food failure, which further exacerbated famine and competition for resources. The 30-year war that swept the Europe covered the entire Europe with death threats, and the fourth globalization ended.
The fifth time: The British Glorious Revolution in 1688 established constitutional monarchy and the capitalist state system, and actively developed overseas colonies to become “sunless empire”. Besides, the industrial revolution a hundred years later laid a solid political, economic and technological foundation for the vigorous development of the capital. However, the two world wars in the first half of the 20th century greatly weakened the strength of the United Kingdom. The United States took over the position of the globalization leader from the United Kingdom in a timely manner and opened the sixth globalization. The fifth globalization led by the British Empire announced to be ended.
The sixth time: namely the current globalization dominated by the United States. Compared with the past, the form of globalization has quietly changed. The world is subverting the traditional trade pattern based on comparative advantage, replacing the regional competition of the traditional complete supply chain (or finished product) with the global division and cooperation of labor in the supply chain, and gradually changing from competition-orientation to cooperation-orientation. The supply chain is a light move in one part that may affect the whole situation. The worldwide shutdown led to by the epidemic was a broken link in the supply chain. The broken chains were one after another. So a country as a part of the supply chain cannot resume work alone. It was also the reason that the resumption of production cannot be fundamentally solved. The world was inseparably linked or tied together by supply chains and became a community of destiny.
Throughout the six globalizations in the history of humankind, the first five times all have traces of colonial expansion. Non-sovereign states are all passive globalization. This time the globalization has changed the core nature, and the countries have actively joined, which are active globalization. Any globalization that has been frustrated by external forces in history will eventually regain its strength in a more rapid manner. The scale is larger than once, showing the rule that “the world will certainly unit after experiencing a long period of division and then divide after a long period of union. It cycles again and again.” It can be clearly recognized from the overall situation in a long-term perspective that in the long history of human society‘s evolution and progress, globalization is the general trend, and anti-globalization is just the formatting and reshuffling of the interest pattern, which is a short-term adjustment. The current anti-globalization dominated by the United States does not require each country to close its doors to each other‘s development, but to weaken the economies that have comprehensive competitive strength and have the potential to challenge them, to form alliances to combat dissidents, to economically obtain interests from other countries, and to adjust the operation of globalization to a direction that is more beneficial to themselves.
Undoubtedly, globalization can bring economic benefits to the participating countries. This is also the most important reason why different countries are actively integrating into globalization. However, anti-globalization will weaken this benefit. So in any case, anti-globalization is no good for the world economy. For some countries that have initiated anti-globalization, if they can readjust the pattern of interests in a way that “hurts one thousand enemies with eight hundred soldiers”, then although the economic aggregate may become smaller, they will gain a larger share of it. At this time, looking at the behavior of anti-globalization again, it seems to be rational. This is the true portrayal of group irrationality in practice caused by individual rationality. However, globalization will also bring challenges to national sovereignty: First, cross-border cooperation, such as global supply chain, environmental pollution, pandemic, transnational crime and other issues, etc., requires coordination and cooperation of international organizations, which may also weaken traditional national sovereignty. The second is value assimilation, which is usually carried out by means of the value output in a silent and soft way. When the value of a country is not recognized by other countries, it may be subject to interference and pressure from other countries. The third is the conflicts in the rules. The political and economic system of the host country may be changed more or less due to the conflicts. This institutional change poses a challenge to the sovereignty of the host country to some extent. 2. Mainstream Factors Affecting the Process of Globalization As we all know, the development of things is often not determined by one factor, but the result of the interaction of many factors, just like the vector sum of various external forces. The external force has direction and different magnitudes. Therefore, there are many factors dominating the globalization, which are not only as simple as supply chain configuration and profitability, but also more or less mixed with factors related to value and rules. Judging from the current characteristics of globalization, there are three mainstream factors that determine the development trend of globalization. The globalization of the economic system. The spontaneous flow of the capital, labor, technology and other factors in the market links the world‘s most competitive supply chains together for common development. The division of labor and cooperation in the industrial chain makes the economies of each country more interdependent and integrated, with higher production efficiency and lower costs. In the past, the technical threshold and capital threshold required for a country to establish an entire industrial chain no longer constitute a ban on any link in the current supply chain. As long as it can complete a task in the entire supply chain, it can participate in globalization. Thus, it greatly drove the industrialization of the emerging developing countries.
Globalization of the value system. The members of the social community maintain inner cohesion by sharing beliefs and emotions, which are called “collective consciousness” and “common consciousness” by French sociologist Durkheim.12 Ideally, under globalization, the members of different ideologies and different cultural customs form a “common consciousness” in the process of continuous collision and integration. However, this process is long and difficult, and the result may not be successfully integrated into a whole. Sometimes, various civilization conflicts may occur, and the battle will follow.Globalization of the rule system. The “head sheep” takes the lead in formulating common rules, and establishes a comprehensive coordination mechanism to ensure the orderly operation of the common rules.13 The formulation of the common rules is more beneficial to the countries that believe in the same value system as the “―head sheep” country, so the rule system has a distinct effect of value assimilation. The Congress of such country will make rule system infinitely close to that of the “head sheep” country in the rule system. From government to judiciary, from law compilation to implementation, every step of the legal system will be impacted and affected by common rules to varying degrees. This is an inevitable result of globalization.14 Academically speaking, the authority of rule comes from the consent of the ruled, which is the most important source of legitimacy. The leading countries in the globalization export a set of widely accepted economic systems, value systems and rule systems to the world, which require strong military, technological, capital, labor, order and other hard power to support, but also require the cooperation of other soft power factors such as credibility and appeal.
In the 18th century, Britain and France fought for hegemony. As the war required a lot of money, the imperial dictatorship in France was unable to cancel the tax privileges of the nobility and could not raise enough war funds. It could only issue the debts. Later, it not only defaulted quantities of public debts, but also digested the debts left by the old French dynasty with high inflation. However, the development trajectory of the United Kingdom was quite different. Instead of tax looting, it decided to borrow without restrictions. It took a whole century of fiscal surplus to pay off the national debt. It used the fiscal surplus of almost a whole century to repay the states. The public debt processing of the United Kingdom in the 19th century was a classic case of the textbook level. The hegemony between the French and the British was not that Britain defeated France, but that the democratic system defeated the imperial dictatorship. The imperial dictatorship cannot bring security expectations to the capital. It was the capital that chose the United Kingdom and continuously contributed war funds to the United Kingdom.15
We saw that the value systems and rule systems of the Britain and France in the 18th century were very different, which resulted in the different fates of the countries. The International capital‘s understanding of authoritarian and democratic system is much deeper than ours. The British Glorious Revolution and the French Revolution were the roads that their ancestors traversed in tears. The elite republic, market freedom, and power checks and balances have penetrated into the concept of the western world and became a belief. With the outbreak of World War I and World War II, capital and talents gradually left Europe, where war was raging, and flocked to the United States, where were peace and no war, a safer and more stable place for capital, forming the sixth globalization led by the United States in the last century. Capital pursuing for profit and security is an ever-changing truth. The value system will lead to conflicts in cooperation and the rule system will lead to disordered cooperation. Therefore, the value system and the rule system will weaken globalization. But is the original intention of globalization to get products more efficiently and at lower costs?The current status of the global supply chain layout (globalization of the economic system), common belief (globalization of the value system), and the supporting factors that support the operation order of globalization (globalization of the rule system) are three critical factors to be considered when deciding on the global investment layout of international capital. The decision-making process is difficult and complicated. Under the condition that other prerequisites are the same, the more complete the supply chain region, the better the profitability of the capital. For the host country having the same value system with that of the international capital, the cooperation is safer and more predictable. For the host country having the same rules system with that of the international capital, the cooperation is smoother. Therefore, for the current discussion on the reallocation of supply chain, if we only talk about economic globalization and avoid value globalization and rule globalization, we may misjudge the trend of globalization and the reallocation of supply chain. Blindly emphasizing that the US imperialisms‘ wild ambition of destroying us has not disappeared yet.‖ and continuing conspiracy theories, and ignoring the strong scale advantages and cost advantages of the current layout of Chinese supply chain, it is not conducive for us to find the crux of the problem, learn from each other, retain and further attract International capital.Therefore, we should not simply and mechanically judge the US anti-globalization strategy. We must look at the essence through phenomena, know what it is and why it is, recognize and clarify the deep operation logic of globalization from a broader perspective, and respond positively and precisely in a targeted manner.3. Why should the United States “de-sinicize” its global supply chain?The United States is worried about China‘s growing economic and military power in recent years, and is determined to initiate a “de-sinicize” anti-globalization act, which not only forcibly promotes the decoupling of Sino-US high-tech and intellectual property rights, but also attempts to force the allies to follow and suit. In addition, the long-term social and political pressure that international capital has imposed on the ever-increasing carbon emission reduction targets, coupled with the supply chain cut off by the epidemic, have begun to question the dependence on long-distance cross-border supply chains. Therefore, COVID-19 epidemic may be the last straw to overwhelm economic globalization, forcing the governments, enterprises and society to improve their ability to cope with economic isolation in the long term. Certain de-sinization, anti-globalization and supply chain restructuring factors are quietly changing this world. The epidemic will not only aggravate the continued deterioration of Sino-US relations, but also accelerate the decline of European integration. Against this background, it is almost impossible for the world to return to the state of mutual benefit and win-win situation at the beginning of the 21st century. The future of globalization depends on the recognition, acceptance, and integration of the international capital in the economic system, value system, and rule system built by the United States. At present, although the US economy has been hit hard by this epidemic, its dominant position is still solid, and it continues to wave large shears to the world‘s wool to bail out the homeland.Globalization has always been dominated by the western world, and has incorporated other countries that want to integrate into globalization incorporated into the economic, value, and rule systems of the dominant country. As a non-dominant country in globalization, China can only actively integrate in the general trend. However, how to avoid cutting the foot to fit the shoes is also a problem worthy of in-depth study. This article focuses on the discussion of how to integrate. The so-called active integration is a subjective attitude, and whether it is accepted objectively is not determined by the subjective attitude. Whether China will not be marginalized by the global supply chain in the future is not only an apparent economic issue, but also a deep political issue. Even if China has the prospect of investment profits that international capital is chasing, and it has a huge consumer market that any capital cannot bear to give up, China is still constrained by the United States on the road to globalization and cannot be bypassed. To make a more figurative metaphor, the contradiction between the Europe and the United States is “the contradiction among the people” and is reconcilable economic differences while the contradictions between us and the Europe and the United States are “class conflicts” and contradictions difficult to reconcile in values and rules. Without China‘s presence, the Europe and the United States will pinch each other because of interests. With China‘s presence, the Europe and the United States will stand together and temporarily put aside their differences to deal with China that has different cultures, different colors, and different rules with them. Therefore, the ultimate confrontation caused by different value systems and rule systems is to disintegrate China‘s system of “uniting the power of the whole country”. The European and American system is different from the Chinese system. The state rarely intervenes in the market. Different interest groups or interest group alliances are vulnerable to the entire Chinese system. Fragmented interest groups and interest group alliances will eventually be broken down by the Chinese system. It is the cruelty of struggle. Developed economies are facing a China that can “lift the whole country‘s strength” with constant supply chain agglomeration and huge production capacity. They do believe that they have been equally and unfairly treated. When China‘s total economic volume exceeds 2/3 of their economic volume, the United States will be no longer calm and will be proactive. This is a war of interests and it has nothing to do with justice.After carefully studying the American history, especially the history of nearly half a century, we found that there was a consistent theme in American politics – conservatism, which is flourishing. Implemented in the economic system and rule system, it is a neo-liberalism that advocates maximum market freedom. Implemented in the value system, it is neo-conservatism that contends against the totalitarian system and is based on the pragmatism of Jewish Christian theology.16 The epidemic has provided an excuse for the US to “de-cinisize”. The US actively seeks allies to jointly marginalize China in the name of the globalization of the value system, and continues to challenge China with the globalization of the rule system, but it underestimates the power of the globalization of the economic system. At the initial stage of the epidemic, the United States and its allies may be more inclined to nationalism, but in the long run, democratic countries will gradually get rid of the predicament and find a new kind of pragmatism and protective internationalism. This is because that this globalization is no longer traditionally the competition of similar products in various countries. Countries are linked to the global economic system by the front and rear processes of products or the upstream and downstream of the supply chain, and the deconstruction and establishment of the layout of the global supply chain cannot be finished in one day. After the reform and opening up, especially after China‘s entry into the WTO, the breadth and depth of the integration of Chinese companies into the global supply chain destined that it will be very difficult for the US to “de-cinisize”. But we should also be soberly aware that even so, there will certainly be some international capital moving out of China while the epidemic supply chain breaks down.III. CHINA’S DOMESTIC SUPPLY CHAIN CONFIGURATION LAYOUTThe essence of the globalization of the economic system lies in the orderly division of labor and cooperation between the upstream and downstream of the entire supply chain. Countries rely on their own endowment advantages to do things that they are relatively good at. They have become a link (s) in the global supply chain, and only a few strong countries will build a complete supply chain.1. China is deeply embedded in the global supply chain already.Under globalization, the leading companies that can lead the global supply chain configuration are responsible for product development, design, production, sales, and branding while non-leading companies combine their own resources and capabilities to join the division of labor and cooperation according to the requirements of leading companies, and are responsible for component production or product assembly.China is the biggest beneficiary in the prosperity and development of the global supply chain in the past 30 years. Since joining the WTO in 2001, it has actively integrated into the global supply chain. In this process, a large number of Chinese companies have gained capital accumulation, brand influence, technology upgrades, product innovation, and the wholesale and retail network spillover effects brought by the global market. More and more Chinese local companies have successfully entered the international market without going abroad, creating Chinese export performance and driving rapid economic growth.In 2001, China's import and export surplus was RMB 186.5 billion Yuan. In 2019, the import and export surplus was already RMB 2,918 billion Yuan. The total accumulated import and export surplus during the 19 years of accession to the WTO was RMB 3,145.1billion Yuan. From a statistical perspective, exports have made great contributions to China‘s economic development. As a "world factory", China has the largest, most comprehensive and most complete manufacturing supply chain system in the world, and the output of more than 220 industrial products ranks first in the world. As a world market, China has a huge consumer group and constantly upgraded personalized consumer demand, which makes the international capital “difficult to give up”. As a manufacturing country, the 20-year entrance examination expansion of the colleges and universities has trained a large number of excellent engineers and mature industrial skilled workers for China. These advantages have attracted international capital to continue to gather in China to present the Matthew effect. The more concentrate the upstream and downstream of the supply chain is, the more it will attract longer chains. Recently, a survey by the China American Business Association revealed that more than 60% of the companies surveyed said that they would still consider increasing investment in China in 2020. In the tense atmosphere in which Sino-US relations have been fragile in the past two years, Tesla and Mobil have suddenly made large investments in China to build foreign investment ultra-large-scale single-factory. This is a very typical case.Currently, China has gone beyond the stage of relying solely on the advantage of cheap labor costs and gradually upgraded from the downstream to the midstream of the high-end supply chain. According to statistics, in 2019, China‘s share in the longer global supply chain and higher value-added links has increased to nearly 60%. With the R & D and innovation of its own brands, China is moving towards a technology-intensive and capital-intensive high-end supply chain and has achieved great achievements in the fields of integrated circuits, new energy vehicles, electricity, photovoltaics, communications, medical equipment and other fields. However, even if China‘s supply chain layout is booming, it still cannot be blindly optimistic. Miao Wei, Minister of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, pointed out in a comprehensive interpretation of Made in China 2025 that the current global manufacturing industry has basically formed a four-tier echelon development pattern, China is ranked in the third echelon, and it is very difficult for China to upgrade to the second echelon in the near future.2. China’s Role of Division in the Global Supply ChainAfter nearly 30 years of unremitting efforts, China has actively participated in the division of labor in the global supply chain. At present, it not only has a full industrial chain of labor-intensive low-end supply chain (hereinafter referred to as low-end supply chain), but also participates in the component production (midstream participation) and assembly (downstream participation) of the capital-intensive and technology-intensive high-end supply chain (hereinafter referred to as high-end supply chain).—— The whole industrial chain of low-end supply chain. Although China ranks in the third echelon in the global manufacturing industry, it still has a dominant position in the low-end industrial chain. As a supplier of leading enterprises based on contracts, it participates in traditional labor-intensive industries such as clothing, shoes, hats, furniture, and toys. There are currently about 50,000 suppliers specially supplying Wal-Mart, the world‘s largest retailer. The exported low-value products were approximately US $50 billion annually, which was about 10% of China‘s share of exports to the United States. The low-end supply chain is characterized by low technology content, low capital threshold, labor-intensive and short supply chain. Because it is relatively easy to make the entire supply chain, it is not too difficult to transfer, relocate and copy, and it is extremely replaceable.—— Production of the components in high-end supply chain (midstream participation). The demographic dividend of New China, the expansion of college entrance examinations, the popularization of vocational and technical education, and the accumulation of reform and opening up have trained a large number of skilled engineers and front-line industrial workers. The R&D and design capabilities of China‘s manufacturing industry have continued to increase from the initial downstream participation to the midstream participation in high-end supply chain, and from the initial assembly of products for foreign leading companies to providing foreign leading companies with higher value-added components. 60% of China‘s 650 billion US dollars‘ high-tech exports are to reprocess and assemble the foreign core components, which are then sold in overseas markets through OEM labeling. The United States is the only first-tier echelon country in the international manufacturing industry, and it is in the upstream of the high-end supply chain. It has been dedicated itself to linking the R&D and innovation of the advanced technology including the native human intelligence, quantum sciences, etc. with the manufacturing industry, which have been provided with various subsides, tax reductions and policy supports. Meanwhile, it restricts the export of core technologies to China and curbs the development of China‘s science and technology. Currently, China can only take the path of independent research and development in the high-end original field, and it is more difficult than ever to upgrade upstream from the midstream to the upstream of the high-end supply chain. If China‘s technology is stagnant, this part of industry will continue to shrink.—— Assembly of the components in the high-end supply chain (downstream participation). As cooperative enterprises in a supply chain, China participates in the assembly of core components in high-end supply chain by virtue of labor cost advantage, which is also the initial stage of China‘s participation in the global supply chain. In order to minimize the cost of high-end supply chain, the assembly of less important components in the high-end supply chain is placed in the cost depression. Due to the technical threshold for the education requirements of front-line production workers and the cost advantage brought by the supply chain agglomeration, it is difficult for the downstream industries of China‘s dominant low-end supply chain to reconfigure globally in the short term. This broken epidemic makes transnational production encounter unprecedented challenges, such as high freight rates, indefinite extension of shipping time, and bankrupt enterprises or broken links brought by the epidemic in various places, which have caused the various countries to rethink the configuration of the supply chain. The re-arrangement of the entire local industrial chain will be the policy guide for the countries in the post-epidemic era.As a member of the third-tier echelon in international manufacturing, generally speaking, the situation is not optimistic for China. In low-end supply chains with short chains, labor-intensive, low technology and low capital, China occupies a leading position and has leading enterprises while in high-end supply chains with long chains, technology-intensive and capital-intensive, China is still in the middle and downstream positions, under the control of international capital, lack of dominance and even often suppressed by upstream companies. Vigorously developing the upstream industry of high-end supply chains with the technological breakthroughs should become a major strategic force for China‘s future supply chain layout. Under the urgent situation of global reconfiguration of the supply chain, which is caused by the superposition of epidemics, the supply chain will inevitably undergo structural adjustments. There will be both roll-in and roll-out. The challenges and opportunities will also coexist.3. The impact of global reconfiguration of supply chain on China under both the epidemic situation and anti-globalizationSince the global outbreak, COVID-19 has continued to suppress the economic activity and intensify tensions between countries, which are likely to severely hurt the global economic output capacity. The risks caused by this chaos have a particularly great impact on newly emerging industrialized countries and their industrial workers, and may lead to unstable and extensive conflicts within and between countries. The global supply chain will definitely be reorganized.The Sino-U.S. trade friction, which began in the spring of 2018, appears to reduce China‘s huge trade surplus with the United States, but in essence it is the United States seeking to weaken China‘s development strength in all directions, which may evolve into other forms such as financial friction or technological friction in the future. It aims at eliciting China‘s “color revolution” or de-cinisizing. In the past few years, the United States has used more moderate appeasement methods. After Trump took office, he began to de-cinisize openly. Taking the opportunity of the epidemic, which has caused serious damage to the global economy, he tried to States, and continued to steadily maintain its position as a global leader. The current epidemic has caused China to be controversial on many international occasions. The United States uses this opportunity to call for Japan and Europe to build an anti-China alliance, jointly shapes the global strategic coordination of the supply chain, and accelerates de-cinisization in disguise. If the United States succeeds, the Europe, Japanese, and the United States will jointly deploy a de-cinisized global supply chain that will have a significant and far-reaching impact on the world‘s manufacturing pattern, and will also send bad signals to the capital market and completely change the investment or relocation strategy of international capital. It will disintegrate China‘s existing supply chain layout and have the following negative impact on the Chinese economy.—— The whole industrial chain of low-end supply chain. The United States announced that it will impose a 25% tariff on Chinese exports worth US $ 250 billion. This is to completely uproot made in China from Wal-Mart, and the tariff will almost completely offset China‘s cost advantage. What is more serious is that if the products exported to the United States contain a large number of foreign imported parts, these parts will also face a 25% tariff. Therefore, due to the low capital and technology threshold, short supply chain, and strong substitutability, it is a high probability that this part of capacity will move to a more cost-effective area. Most of such capacity is currently concentrated in the southeast coast. As for whether to move out of China, it depends on the cost comparison between China and foreign countries. It depends on whether China has a region with more cost advantages than foreign countries. Under the premise of ensuring safety, profit-seeking is the priority of the capital. International capital will inevitably flow to cost depressions. US tariffs only accelerate the flow of low-end supply capacity to cost depressions.—— Production of the components in high-end supply chain (midstream participation). In 2017, the tax reform of Trump lowered the US corporate tax rate from 35% to 20%. American high-tech companies represented by HP, Intel, IBM, etc. began to return to the United States. Other large multinational companies such as South Korea‘s Samsung, LG, Foxconn, China Haier and others have also decided to invest and build factories in the United States. After the Sino-U.S. Trade friction, the United States has frequently shot against China, investigated Chinese high-tech enterprises in the name of “national security”, sent supervisors to Chinese high-tech enterprises, restricted exports of high-tech products to China, and coerced European allies to abandon Huawei 5G mobile network development plan. The upstream of the high-end supply chain is the R & D and innovation capabilities of technology, which can spontaneously attract the main force of international capital. Therefore, we say that the upstream layout of the high-end supply chain is the vane of international capital, and we lack the dominance of the layout of the high-end supply chain. It can also be said that if we rely solely on the spontaneous adjustment of the market, the current technological level of China cannot affect the layout of the international high-end supply chain. Our advantage lies in the system. The state has taken the initiative to invest in the high-end supply chain with the “national strength”, which is supplemented by various subsidies and preferential policies, and increased the application of high-end supply chain products to stimulate international capital to invest in China. And this is precisely what we have been criticized by Europe and the United States. We must bear in mind that to ensure the safety and stability of international capital, the nature of capital-for-profit is not governed by any country, but only followed up with the investment of real money.—— Assembly of the components in the high-end supply chain (downstream participation). The vast consumer markets with cost advantages are important reasons for the international capital to invest in China. The Goldman Sachs research report shows that the production cost of Apple smartphones in China accounts for 25% to 35% of the total cost, of which about 15% is the labor costs invested in the part processing (midstream participation of high-end supply chain) and final assembly (downstream participation of high-end supply chain). If all the production and assembly of iPhone China is moved to the United States, its production cost will increase by at least 37% (it can be seen that although the United States reduced corporate tax in 2017, China still has a cost advantage). Even if Apple replaces labor with machines, the price of iPhone finished products will rise by 15%. Therefore, the migration of the iPhone from China back to the United States lacks practical operability, but recently Apple announced that it has transferred 10-15% of its production capacity in China to ASEAN, which shows that ASEAN is currently a less mature cost depression. The downstream link of the high-end supply chain is limited by the number of mature skilled workers in the immigration country and the current status of the supply chain layout. It will not move away immediately, but it will form a gradual relocation trend. It is worth noting that ASEAN has already diverted our industrial chain. If China does not respond in time to reverse this trend, then this part of supply chain will gradually move away from China with the wave of anti-globalization.In addition, the sudden COVID-19 epidemic will prompt countries to rethink the relevant issues of the local distribution of the entire supply chain of the public crisis emergency protection industry. Subsequently, the countries may introduce a series of preferential policies and even coercive measures to urge the public crisis emergency protection industry to return to the country. As for whether to move back all production capacity, or only part of the production capacity that guarantees local consumption, it depends on the cost comparison of the countries after subsidies. It is impossible to make a conclusion now.IV. CHINA SHOULD GUIDE THE LAYOUT OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN IN A PRAGMATIC AND CRITICAL WAYThere is no economy that is not mixed with political factors, nor politics that is not mixed with economic factors. International capital will make comprehensive considerations when making investment decisions, which will consider both the capital gains and the safety and smoothness of cooperation, that is, compared with the profits, the capital pays more attention to the safety. As mentioned earlier, the status quo of supply chain allocation (economic globalization), common belief (globalization of values), and supporting factors that support the operation order of globalization (globalization of rule systems) are the most important factors that need to be weighed by international capital before investment. Therefore, we must devote great efforts to the supporting factors of supply chain configuration, de-politicization, and global order of operation. Not only must we gather and extend the supply chain as much as possible, but we must also strive to climb up the supply chain.1. To attract more international capital investment with the cost advantages of supply chain aggregationGlobalization enables companies to organize production globally by participating in the supply chain and putting products on the market in a timely manner, thereby reducing storage costs. The production, supply and marketing of the products are circulated around the world after careful market research, planning and design. Under the epidemic situation, the entire real-time production system in the world was destroyed, and the upstream and downstream supply chains were cut or even cut off due to the scattered configuration and cannot be operated normally. The world‘s real economy has been blocked, which shows that ―resuming work cannot resume production‖. In ordinary times, capital flow, information flow, and logistics operate in an orderly manner, but in extraordinary times, such as during the epidemic, space barriers can completely cut off the supply chain. This phenomenon urgently requires the world to rethink the configuration and layout of the supply chain.The previous global supply chain layout lacks a global perspective to a certain extent. It is fragmentally scattered around the world, resulting in long transportation distance and time-consuming. Unsynchronized localities require coordination. Inconvenient transportation will also increase storage costs, which hinders the smooth operation of the supply chain. The loose and fragile supply chain layout may also have the risks of broken chains. Increasing the stickiness of the supply chain through chain aggregation will be the key for us to think about the configuration and layout of the supply chain in the future.As we all know, global supply chain layout and capital are mutually causal and mutually supplementary. The longer the upstream chain of the supply chain, the more it gathers, the more it can attract capital investment, which is a cost advantage. While the more capital investment, the more the supply chain gathers and the longer the chain, the easier it is to occupy the upstream chain, which is the advantages of the capital. To this end, the industrial parks that have already formed a supply chain in China and the surrounding new parks will become the key areas for attracting international capital investment. In the future, the construction of parks with themed industries will set off a wave of upsurge. UNCTAD‘s World Investment Report 2019 emphasizes that the construction of high-tech industrial parks has become an important investment policy tool for economic transformation and upgrading, and may become an engine for future international capital to follow up investment and drive economic growth. The state can actively guide and encourage the construction of high-tech industrial parks in terms of favorable policies such as taxation and subsidies, and provide basic services for gathering and extending high-end supply chains.The location of industrial parks is particularly critical. It must take into account factors such as logistics hubs, mature upstream and downstream industrial chains, comparative advantages in production costs, sufficient industrial workers and engineers, business-friendly political ecology, and livable natural environment. “A good bird chooses a tree to rest in”, and “planting phoenix trees attracts golden phoenix”.There must be a theme in the construction of industrial parks. Identify a leading enterprise in the industry as the center, and the supporting enterprises of other link chains will follow, gradually forming the scale effect of chain aggregation and production management, and extending the chain as much as possible. Economic globalization is always the primary factor in the consideration of international capital investment. Helping it maximize the economic benefits should become the core of the host country‘s investment attraction.The operation of industrial parks must be depoliticized. The globalization of value systems should be respected, and international capital must be assured. For international capital, even if you can make more money in China, if there is no guarantee, everything is equal to zero. War-wolf diplomacy, large-scale organized boycotts of Japanese capital (due to Diaoyu Island) and Korean capital (due to Sade missile), and the lack of evidence-based conspiracy theories will greatly enhance the worry of international capital investment in China. Divestment is largely a helpless move for some companies.The management of industrial parks must be in line with the world, the business environment of rule of law, internationalization and marketization must be guaranteed, and the globalization of the rule system must be maintained and strictly observed. In the past, we have been paying attention to the globalization of the economic system, focusing on the supply chain layout, and often not paying enough attention to the globalization of the value system and the rule system. At present, although some high-tech enterprises will bear some economic losses due to their moving out of China, they still resolutely move out of China. There are indeed some places in which we deserve to think deeply.According to the estimates by global manufacturing consulting company Kearney, China-US trade frictions in 2018 led to a decline of US $ 90 billion in Chinese exports to the US that year, of which US $ 31 billion was diverted to lower-cost Southeast Asian countries. The reality was cruel and grim. We know that the supply chain layout cannot be completed in an instant, which is a gradual adjustment process. China‘s supply chain pattern today is the fruit accumulated in the process of the reform and opening up in the past 40 years. Taking advantage of the lack of technical training for industrial workers, the uncompleted infrastructure and the upstream and downstream supply chain facilities needing to be replenished in neighbouring countries, we must start as soon as possible to build an industrial park that can support supply chain aggregation, retain the existing supply chain and attract more international capital investment in China. Once the supply chain agglomeration is formed, the Matthew effect will make a region‘s comprehensive cost advantage more obvious, the supply chain will be longer and the supply capacity will be stronger.Recently, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China announced that Hainan would legislate separately to become the largest free trade port in the world. This is not only the freedom of taxation and trade, but also the freedom of institutional arrangements, demonstrating China‘s courage, determination and strength to open to the outside world. Sovereign differences such as the globalization of the value system and the globalization of the rule system, which were difficult to resolve in the inland areas, will be resolved in the free trade port. In addition, Hainan is the nearest coastal province to Southeast Asia. In recent years, the Asia-Pacific economies have become a new growth point for the world economy. The formation of supply chain agglomeration towards the growth point is both an urgent need for the globalization of the economic system and the needs of the development of the times.2. The Strategy of maintaining the midstream to strive for upstream in High-end supply chainThe US sanctions against high-tech companies such as Huawei and ZTE are not just to curb China‘s development of digital technology, but to firmly occupy the upstream of the high-end supply chain to guide international capital investment. Technology is the most important and also the only element in determining the configuration of the global high-end supply chain. Therefore, China‘s R&D and innovation capabilities of digital technology are the key factors that determine whether the high-end supply chain moves out of China. Independent research and development has become the only way for Chinese manufacturing to climb to the second-tier echelon.R&D breaks through technical bottlenecks. The vast majorities of Chinese companies are currently embedded in the midstream and downstream of the global high-end supply chain at a low cost, and are in the low value-added link of manufacturing and assembly. If there is no breakthrough in the R&D and innovation of the core key technologies in the upstream of the supply chain, and the technical difficulties cannot be overcome in the short term, the independent industrial development pattern cannot be achieved, and a new approach is needed. Relevant companies can use the global patent library data shared by various countries to query the R&D and patent holder information of such technologies in a targeted manner, and actively carry out technical cooperation with the actual technology controller. This is n shortcut to upgrade from the midstream to the upstream of the supply chain.Go out to embrace the world. Chinese companies must look at the world, actively implement the strategy of “going out”, closely track the supply chain, especially the capital movements, restructuring trends and strategic trends of the leading companies in the high-end supply chain, actively strengthen their linking, supporting and outsourcing relations with the leading companies, and transfer part of the production capacity in a timely manner to the location of the leading enterprises to facilitate upstream and downstream links, especially invest in key parts and raw materials enterprises in the upstream and upstream of the high-end supply chain. The Chinese companies should actively invest in R&D and cooperation, and then master core technologies. At present, our strategy is to strengthen and consolidate the Chinese chain in the global supply chain by using capital investment as a link while ensuring the midstream position of the high-end supply chain, and strive to gradually catch up with the world‘s first-class technology and move to the second-tier echelon of the global manufacturing industry.China – Japan - Korea co-prosperity circle. The China-Japan-Korea Free Trade Agreement urgently needs to be signed and implemented as soon as possible, making it a link that connects the fate of the three countries. This move can not only consolidate China‘s position in the global supply chain, but also alleviate the crisis of China‘s manufacturing industry brought by the anti-globalization initiated by the United States to a certain extent. It can also form a strong attraction to international capital. However, it is not optimistic that in the division of labor in the supply chain of China, the leading position of the upstream supply chain of core technology product R&D and design is still occupied by Japan and South Korea, and China is in the process of assembly and processing of products with low-added value, that is, the midstream and downstream of the supply chain. Therefore, in the process of future cooperation, we must continuously improve our technological R&D and innovation capabilities, firmly grasp the opportunity of climbing to the upstream of the supply chain, and continue to advance towards the upstream of the supply chain.Taking advantage of the new infrastructure. In March and April 2020, the Political Bureau meeting of the CPC Central Committee successively proposed to accelerate the pace of new infrastructure construction. This measure is conducive to complementing the disadvantage of being unable to spontaneously guide the deployment of high-end supply chain layouts due to the lack of scientific and technological strength. The new infrastructure with a volume of 30 trillion Yuan will provide a broad application market for high-end supply chain products and services, which will not only help Chinese companies climb from the midstream to upstream of the high-end supply chain, but also guide international capital to follow up the investment layout to extend the chain configuration of high-end supply chain. It should be emphasized that for the above-mentioned ways to main the midstream and strive for upstream, only the new infrastructure is not restricted by objective factors, and the rest of the methods must be limited by various external factors. It is not east to predict to what extent can it be achieved in the end, so the new infrastructure appears to be especially important. According to the research and calculation of the China Academy of Information and Communications Technology, China‘s digital economic aggregate has accounted for 34.8% of GDP in 2018, and its contribution rate to GDP growth has reached 67.9%. In terms of driving employment, it will contribute about 540,000 jobs in 2020. In 2025, it will contribute about 3.5 million jobs, and in 2030 it will provide more than 8 million jobs. The prospect of the new infrastructure is broad, and the future is predictable.Practically speaking, China‘s manufacturing upgrading will be an arduous and systematic project, and a time-consuming battle. It is related to the success or failure of high-quality development. We must continue to face the difficulties and step forward unswervingly. Under the epidemic, the unemployment rate has soared, and traditional infrastructure has been put back on the agenda to alleviate the current unemployment problem. This is a short-term trade-off of national strategy, and it is understandable. But if we want to truly realize industrial upgrading, we still have to invest huge funds in actively building China‘s digital industry, which is the country‘s medium- and long-term strategy.17 We should not use short-sighted ―economic accounts‖ to judge the country‘s major development strategies. Today‘s endurance of hardship is to accumulate energy for tomorrow‘s development and to make great strides for tomorrow. Only if we truly master the cutting-edge core technology of the digital industry can we occupy the leading position in the upstream of the high-end supply chain, and relevant enterprises in China can be regarded as the head enterprises of the high-end supply chain. Thus, we can truly dominate the global configuration of the high-end supply chain and attract international capital investment. There is no need to worry about employment by then. The combination of traditional infrastructure and new infrastructure is an organic combination of the national short-term strategy and the medium- and long-term strategy. The traditional infrastructure is used to solve the urgent need for employment, and the new infrastructure is used to continuously accumulate energy to expand future employment.Like the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the Lehman Brothers, the COVID-19 epidemic is a sudden event that shocked the world. Its far-reaching consequences can only be imagined today. But one thing is certain, it will have a profound impact on politics, economy, and society, and the world will make adjustments to deal with this sudden disaster. Relevant issues such as globalization and supply chain reconfiguration have become hot spots due to the epidemic. The mainstream views of China‘s business, academia, and politics are roughly divided into two opposites. The pessimistic view is that the global supply chain, especially the production capacity not corresponding to China‘s consumer market, will move away from China gradually. The optimistic view is that the supply chain will gather in China after the epidemic. We believe that no matter whether there is an epidemic or not, industrial transformation and upgrading will inevitably bring about structural adjustments to the supply chain configuration. The epidemic situation will only speed up the adjustment speed, but cannot subvert the adjustment trend. China should completely abandon the dualism of black and white. Globalization is not only as simple as the profit on the economic account. The globalization of the value system and the rule system must be highly valued, comprehensively analyzed, carefully studied, and actively responded so as to strive to make up for shortcomings, strengthen the weaknesses and consolidate the advantages. We should seize the opportunities of reform and opening up to welcome challenges, take the greatest common divisor of the globalization of economic system, value system and rule system to make a balance, and work with all countries to promote the inherent win-win spirit of the globalization. This is the “certainty” that China must grasp and handle well in face of various “uncertainties”.
REFERENCES
[1] Jesse Heley, Marc Welsh, Samantha Saville. “The Fantasy of Global Products: Fizzy-Drinks, Differentiated Ubiquity and the Placing of Globalization [J]”. Globalizations, 2020, 17(4).
[2] Geoff Pfeifer. “From State-Bound Subjects to Global Subjects: Notes Toward An Althusserian Theory of Globalized Subjectivity [J]”. Globalizations, 2020, 17(4).
[3] Matthew Ming-tak Chew. “Assessing Localization with Its Local Sociocultural Dynamics: How Hong Kong’s Localized Club Culture was Undermined By Wealth and Power Disparities [J]”. Globalizations, 2020, 17(4).
[4] Science - Mathematics in Applied Science; Researchers from Galatasaray University Detail New Studies and Findings in the Area of Mathematics in Applied Science “(Intuitionistic Fuzzy Cognitive Map Approach for the Evaluation of Supply Chain Configuration Criteria) [J]”. Journal of Mathematics, 2020.
[5] Mohammad Hossein Zarei, Ruth Carrasco‐Gallego, Stefano Ronchi. “On the Role of Regional Hubs in the Environmental Sustainability of Humanitarian Supply Chains [J]”. Sustainable Development, 2019, 27(5).
[6] Selvaraj Hemapriya, Ramasamy Uthayakumar. “A Neoteric Approach to Geometric Shipment Policy in an Integrated Supply Chain with Setup Cost Reduction and Freight Cost Using Service Level Constraint”. 2020, 54(3): 653-673.
[7] Fouad El Ouardighi, Matan Shniderman. “Supplier’s Opportunistic Behavior and the Quality-Efficiency Tradeoff with Conventional Supply Chain Contracts [J]”. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 2019, 70(11).
[8] Taycir Ben Abid, Omar Ayadi, Faouzi Masmoudi, et al. “An Integrated Production-Distribution Planning Problem under Demand and Production Capacity Uncertainties: New Formulation and Case Study”. 2020, 2020
[9] Kirstin Scholten, Pamela Sharkey Scott, Brian Fynes. Building Routines for Non-Routine Events: Supply Chain Resilience Learning Mechanisms and Their Antecedents. 2019, 24(3): 430-442.
[10] Marcela Marçal Alves Pinto, João Luiz Kovaleski, Rui Tadashi Yoshino, et al. “Knowledge and Technology Transfer Influencing the Process of Innovation in Green Supply Chain Management: A Multicriteria Model Based on the DEMATEL Method”. 2019, 11(12).
[11] Vander Luiz da Silva, João Luiz Kovaleski, Regina Negri Pagani. “Technology Transfer in the Supply Chain Oriented to Industry 4.0: A Literature Review [J]”. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 2019, 31(5).
[12] “[French] Emile Durkheim, De la division du travail social [M].” Translated by Qu Dong, Shanghai: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2000, 42.
[13] “[Germany] Max Weber, Confucianism and Taoism [M]”, Translated by Hong Tianfu, Nanjing: Jiangsu People‘s Publishing Ltd., 1993, 174.
[14] “[USA] John King Fairbank, The Great Chinese Revolution [M]”, Translated by Liu Zunqi, Beijing: China INTL Culture Press, 1989, 79.
[15] “[French] Thomas Piketty, Capital in the Twenty-First Century [M]”, Translated by Ba Shusong, Beijing: CITIC Press Group, 2014, 129-130.
[16] “[USA] Abraham Harold Maslow, Motivation and Personality (The Third Edition)”. Translated by Xu Jinsheng, Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2009, 79.
[17] Jia Kang, “New Infrastructure Construction: Both Urgent and Long Term Support”, [J/OL], Studies on Party and Government, 2020 (04).
疫情下全球化何去何从？——基于中国供应链配置的思考
摘要：疫情导致全球供应链有断裂现象。尤其是包括防疫物资运不进疫区等敏感问题，敦促各国反思供应链的再配置以及公共危机应急保障产业的全供应链本土布局。毫无疑问，疫情下有逆全球化特征的供应链再配置正在悄悄进行，客观上在改变这个世界。本文从经济、价值和规则三个视角深入分析全球化的运行逻辑，考察中国现阶段的供应链配置情况，认为引导供应链的布局要务实和切中要害，注重构建有主题的工业园区形成供应链的集聚，以综合成本优势吸引更多的国际资本，重金投入数字产业的研发和创新，并紧密结合供给侧结构性改革中的机制优化，注重以资本优势升级中国的数字产业以支持实现高质量发展。年初新冠疫情肆虐中华大地，三月份疫情扩散传播到国外，各国纷纷闭关锁国，生产停滞，全球供应链似乎处于断裂边缘，失业率飙升，经济遭受重创，新冠疫情创造出一个不再那么开放繁荣和自由的世界。针对此种情况，2020年4月17日中共中央政治局召开会议，提出保持我国产业链供应链的稳定性和竞争力，促进产业链协同复工复产达产，紧扣“六保”的首要任务——“保就业”。有关全球化和供应链的问题，学界已经积累非常丰硕的成果。全球化不是一蹴而就的，而是过程实践和谈判的结果。虽然经济收益是全球布局供应链的首要考量，但意识形态也会影响全球化的配置以及全球化下社会和制度结构的转变。对逆全球化不要轻易尝试，闭关锁国有可能导致一国内部产生过度竞争，社会分层和不平等等问题。常态下有关供应链配置标准的问题也是众说纷纭，环境可持续性、成本、效率质量利润、客户满意度，都会影响供应链的全球配置。然而在非常情势下，供应链有中断的风险，比如本次疫情，应该有提前建立的预案和应急应变体系。此外，在工业4.0的大背景下，高科技能够主导全球供应链的配置布局，比如知识技术的转让创新。从表象上，看主导全球化、供应链配置布局的因素很多，但认真对其梳理，我们可以发现，潜伏在表象之下的深层逻辑一直在支配全球化运行。疫情造成的全球供应链断裂迹象，敦促各国反思供应链的再配置问题，掀起逆全球化浪潮。实际上以美国为首的逆全球化早在特朗普上任之初就已经开始，只是疫情加速了这个趋势。有关未来全球化的发展趋势，近期内取决于对疫情的防控，而长期看，还要取决于各国在政治、经济、制度诸方面的综合应对。疫情下，大国关系可能调整甚至重组，国际协调应急合作机制有解构并重新建构的可能，全球供应链配置也会因此进行结构性调整。全球化将何去何从？全球化是人类从各个彼此隔绝的地域、国家和民族走向全球性社会的变迁过程。回顾世界历史，人类社会至少经历过6次全球化：第一次：公元前1600-1500年古埃及第17、18王朝是当时世界上的头号强国，国王雅赫摩斯以及后继者通过不断对外扩张形成了以地中海东部为中心的区域大分工和远程贸易，世界史上第一个帝国（埃及帝国）主导的全球化雏形基本形成。第一次全球化随着埃及帝国的衰落而结束。第二次：继埃及人、希腊人之后，罗马人登上了地中海的历史舞台，建立起地跨欧、亚、非的罗马帝国，在其主导下贸易分工体系逐渐形成，与东方的汉帝国并称为当时世界的两极。然而，罗马帝国的扩张遭遇瓶颈，发展停滞，继而崩溃，这直接导致第二次全球化结束。第三次：13世纪毛纺织业逐渐在弗兰德地区兴起。地域上，分工体系将地中海、西欧、中东地区链接在一起，自发地形成地中海贸易区。产业上，意大利从对英格兰和荷兰布匹和呢线加工起步并逐步进入发展高峰期，资金、原料、劳动力紧紧依赖世界市场。然而蒙古帝国西征带来黑死病，终结了第三次全球化。第四次：15世纪末地理大发现，世界贸易在地域上得到进一步拓展，交通运输网也在逐步形成。欧亚非与美洲新大陆因贸易而链接在一起，空前繁盛。17世纪末欧洲的小冰河期造成粮食歉收，进一步加剧饥荒和对资源的争夺，席卷欧洲30年的战争使整个欧洲笼罩着死亡威胁，第四次全球化落下帷幕。第五次：1688年的英国光荣革命为其带来君主立宪制，并建立资本主义国家体制，积极开拓海外殖民地成为“日不落帝国”，加之百年后的工业革命为资本的蓬勃发展奠定了厚实的政治、经济和科技基础。然而20世纪上半叶的两次世界大战大大削弱了英国的实力，美国适时地从英国手里接过全球化盟主的地位，开启第六次全球化，大英帝国主导的第五次全球化宣告结束。第六次：也就是当下由美国主导的全球化，与既往的形式相比，全球化形式已然悄悄发生变化。世界正在颠覆以比较优势为基础的传统贸易形态，以供应链的全球分工合作代替传统的完整供应链（或产成品）的地域竞争，由竞争导向逐渐转变为合作导向。供应链牵一发而动全身，本次疫情导致世界性的停产停工就是链条的某一环节突然断裂，而断裂的链条此起彼伏不同频，所以某一国家作为供应链条的一环单独复工并不能从根本上解决复产就是这个原因。世界被供应链链接或者说捆绑在一起密不可分，成为命运共同体。纵观人类历史上的六次全球化，前五次都有殖民扩张的痕迹，非宗主国都是在被动全球化；本次全球化由于内核本质发生改变，各国纷纷积极加入，是在主动全球化。历史上任何一次因外力而受挫的全球化，最终都会以更迅猛的方式强势回潮，规模一次比一次浩大，呈现出“天下大势分久必合合久必分”的规律，周而复始循环往复。已可在全局、长期视野内明确地认清：在人类社会进化、进步的历史长河里，全球化是大势所趋，逆全球化只是利益格局的格式化洗牌，是短暂调整。当前以美国主导的逆全球化不是要各国闭关锁国各自发展，而是要削弱拥有综合竞争实力并有对其发起挑战潜在可能的经济体、结盟打击异己、并在经济上从别国薅更多的羊毛，将全球化运行调整到更有利于自己的方向上。毋庸置疑，全球化能给参与国带来经济好处，这也是当前各国积极融入全球化的最重要原因，然而逆全球化会削弱这种好处，所以无论如何逆全球化对世界经济的总盘子来说都不是好事。但是对于某些发起逆全球化的国家来说，如果能够以“伤敌一千自伤八百”的方式重新调整利益格局，那么虽然经济总盘子有可能变小但是自身会获得更大的份额，这个时候再来审视逆全球化行为就显得分为理性，这是个体理性导致群体非理性在实践中的真实写照。然而，全球化也会给国家主权带来挑战：一是跨国界合作，比如全球供应链、环境污染、瘟疫大流行、跨国犯罪等问题需要国际组织协调合作，这种合作也有可能削弱传统国家主权；二是价值同化，通常以“润物细无声”的价值输出方式搞价值同化，当一国的价值不被他国认同，可能会受到来自他国的干涉和压力；三是规则冲突，东道国的政治经济体制或多或少会因冲突做出改变以适应合作，这种体制变迁在一定程度上对东道国主权构成挑战。我们知道，事物的发展往往不是由一个因素决定的，而是众多因素相互作用的结果，就如同各种外力的矢量和。外力有方向，作用有大小。所以说能够主导全球化的因素很多，不仅仅是供应链配置与盈利那么简单，还会或多或少地掺杂有关价值、规则层面的因素。从当前的全球化特征来看，有三个主流因素决定全球化的发展态势：经济体系的全球化——资本、劳动、技术等要素的市场化自发流动，将全球最具竞争力的供应链条链接到一起，共同发展。产业链上的分工协作使各国经济互相依赖互相融合的程度更好、生产效率更高、成本更低。既往需要一国建立全产业链所需的技术门槛、资本门槛对当前供应链条的任一环节不再构成禁入，只要能够完成全供应链的某一环节任务即可参与全球化，这极大地带动了新兴发展国家的工业化之路。价值体系的全球化——社会共同体成员通过共有信仰和分享情感的方式维系内在凝聚力，法国社会学家涂尔干将其称为“集体意识”和“共同意识”。理想中在全球化下，不同意识形态、不同文化习俗的成员在不断碰撞与融合的过程中形成“共同意识”。但这个过程漫长而艰难，结果未必能成功融合成一个整体，有时甚至可能产生各种文明冲突，征战随之而来。规则体系的全球化——由“头羊”带头制定共同规则，全面建立协调机制以确保共同规则有序运行。共同规则的制定更有利于与头羊国家信仰同一价值体系的国家，所以规则体系具有鲜明的价值同化作用，他国会在规则体系上无限靠近头羊国家。从政体到司法，从法律编订到实施，法制前进的每一步都会受到共同规则不同程度的冲击和影响，这是全球化不可避免的结果。从学理上讲，统治的权威来源于被统治者的同意，这是合法性的最重要来源。全球化的主导国向全世界输出一套能够被广泛接受的经济体系、价值体系和规则体系，这些需要强大的军事、科技、资本、劳动力、秩序等硬实力做支撑，也需要公信力、感召力等软实力因素的配合。18世纪英法争霸，由于战争需要大量的金钱，皇权专制的法国因无法取消贵族的税务特权，而无法筹集到足够的战争资金，只能发债，后续不但对公共债务余额进行大规模违约，还以高通胀的方式消化掉法国旧王朝遗留的债务。然而，英国的发展轨迹与之截然不同，不搞税收掠夺而是决定无限制地借款，用了整整一个世纪的财政盈余，才把国债还完，英国在19世纪的公共债务处理，属于教科书级的经典案例。英法争霸与其说是英国战胜了法国，不如说是民主制度战胜了皇权专制，皇权专制不能给资本带来安全预期，是资本选择了英国，为英国源源不断地贡献战争资金。我们看到18世纪英法的价值体系、规则体系截然不同，也看到这种不同导致的各国宿命。国际资本对专制制度和民主制度的理解，比我们深刻得多，英国光荣革命和法国大革命是他们祖先含着泪走过的路。精英共和、市场自由、权力制衡已经深入西方世界的观念骨髓，成为信仰。随着一战二战爆发，资本与人才逐步离开战火纷飞的欧洲，涌向和平没有征战的美国，就是奔向更安全稳定的资本乐土，形成上世纪以美国为主导的第六次全球化。资本逐利更逐安全，是亘古不变的真理，价值体系会导致合作冲突，规则体系会导致合作无序，所以说价值体系、规则体系都会削弱全球化，但全球化的初衷不就是为了更高效、更低成本地获得产品吗？全球供应链条布局现状（经济体系的全球化）、共同信仰（价值体系的全球化）以及支撑全球化运行秩序的配套因素（规则体系的全球化）是国际资本全球投资布局决策时需要权衡取舍的三个关键因素，决策的过程艰难而复杂。在其他前提条件一致的情况下，供应链条越完整的地域，则资本的盈利性越好；东道国与国际资本属于相同价值体系的国家，则合作更安全可期；东道国与国际资本属于相同规则体系的国家，则合作更顺畅。所以，当前有关供应链再配置问题的讨论，如果只谈经济全球化，避而不谈价值全球化以及规则全球化，则有可能导致我们对全球化走势和供应链再配置发生误判；如果一味强调“美帝国主义亡我之心不死”，阴谋论不断，无视当前中国供应链布局所具有的强大规模优势和成本优势，则不利于我们找准问题症结，扬长补短，挽留并进一步吸引国际资本。所以，我们不要简单、机械地研判美国逆全球化战略，要透过现象看本质，知其然并知其所以然，以更宽广的视角认明和厘清全球化的深层运行逻辑，有的放矢地积极精准应对。美国对中国近年来不断增长的经济与军事实力感到担忧，下决心发起“去中国化”的逆全球化行为，不但强行推动中美高科技和知识产权脱钩，还试图迫使盟国仿效。此外，国际资本长期而对不断加码的碳减排目标造成的社会和政治压力，加之被疫情切断的供应链，开始纷纷质疑对长距离跨国供应链的依赖。所以说，新冠疫情可能是压垮经济全球化的最后一根稻草，迫使政府、企业和社会提升长期应对经济孤立的能力，某些去中国化、逆全球化、供应链重组因素正在悄悄改变这个世界。疫情不但会加剧中美关系的持续恶化，还会加速欧洲一体化的衰退。在这样的背景下，世界几乎不可能回到21世纪初那种互利共赢的状态。有关全球化的未来，取决于国际资本对美国主导构建的经济体系、价值体系和规则体系的认同、接受和融入。目前看，美国经济虽然深受本次疫情重击，但主导地位依然稳固，继续向全世界的羊毛挥动大剪，纾困本土。全球化一直由西方世界主导，将想融入全球化的他国纳入主导国的经济、价值、规则体系。中国作为全球化的非主导国家，在大势上只能积极融入，但是如何避免削足适履，也是一个值得深入研究的问题，本文在此先侧重于如何融入的讨论。所谓积极融入是主观态度，在客观上是否被接纳不是由主观态度决定的。中国未来能否不被全球供应链边缘化，不仅仅是表象上的经济问题，更是深层的政治问题。即便中国拥有国际资本竞相追逐的投资盈利前景，还拥有任何资本都不忍放弃的庞大消费市场，但中国在全球化的路上依然受制于美国，无法将其绕过。做个形象些的比喻，欧美之间是“人民内部矛盾”，是可调和的经济分歧；我们与欧美之间是“阶级矛盾”，是很难调和的有关价值和规则的分歧。没有中国在场，欧美会因为利益而互掐；有中国在场，欧美会站在一起暂时放下分歧共同对付不同文化、不同颜色、不同规则的中国。所以，这种由不同价值体系、规则体系导致的终极对抗，说到底就是要瓦解中国的“举全国之力”体制。欧美体制不同于中国体制，国家甚少干预市场，一个一个的利益集团或者利益集团联盟在中国的整个体制面前不堪一击，碎片化的利益集团和利益集团联盟终将被中国体制逐一击破，这是斗争的残酷性。发达经济体面对的是一个动不动就可以“举全国之力”、供应链集聚且产能巨大的中国，他们认为不对等，受到了不公正待遇。当中国经济总量超过其2/3时，美国不再淡定，要先发制人，这是利益之战，无关乎正义。认真研究美国历史，尤其是近半个世纪的历史我们发现，在美国政治中有一个一以贯之的主旋律——保守主义兴盛不衰，落实到经济体系和规则体系上是主张最大市场自由的新自由主义，落实到价值体系上是与极权制度抗衡的新保守主义，立足于犹太基督教神学的实用主义。疫情给美国“去中国化”找到借口，美国以价值体系的全球化为名积极寻找盟友共同边缘化中国，以规则体系的全球化为抓手不断挑衅中国，但却低估了经济体系全球化的力量。疫情初始阶段美国和盟国可能更倾向于民族主义，但从长远来看，民主国家会逐渐摆脱困境，找到一种新的实用主义和保护性的国际主义。这是由于本次全球化已经不再是传统上各国同类产品的竞争，国与国均被产品的前后工序或者供应链的上下游链接在世界范围内的大经济体系里，而全球供应链条布局的解构建构并非一日之功。在改革开放以后，尤其是中国加入世贸组织以后，中国企业融入全球供应链的广度和深度注定美国的“去中国化”之路步履维艰。但我们也应该清醒地意识到，即便如此，也一定会有一些国际资本趁着疫情供应链断裂期间搬离中国。经济体系的全球化其本质在于全供应链上下游有序分工协作，各国凭借自身要素禀赋优势做自己相对更擅长的事情，成为全球供应链中的某一（些）环节，只有极少数实力强的国家才会构建完整的供应链条。全球化下，能够主导全球供应链配置布局的龙头企业负责产品的研发、设计、生产、销售、品牌；非龙头企业结合自己的资源能力按照龙头企业要求加入分工合作，负责零部件生产或者产品组装。中国是近30年全球供应链繁荣发展的最大获益者，自2001年加入世贸组织以后，积极融入全球供应链。大批中国企业在此过程中获得资本积累、品牌影响、技术升级、产品革新以及全球市场带来的批发和零售网络溢出效应。越来越多的中国本土企业不必迈出国门就已经成功打入国际市场，创造中国出口业绩，带动经济快速增长。2001年中国进出口顺差是1,865亿元人民币，2019年进出口顺差已经是29,180亿元人民币，加入世贸19年间共累计进出口顺差是314,151亿元人民币，从数据上看出口为中国经济发展腾飞做出巨大贡献。作为“世界工厂”，中国拥有世界上规模最大、门类最全、配套最完备的制造业供应链体系，220多种工业产品产量居全球第一；作为世界市场，中国拥有庞大消费群体，不断升级的个性化消费需求，让国际资本“难以放弃”；作为制造业大国，20年高考扩招为中国培养了大批优秀的工程师和成熟的产业技术工人。这些优势吸引国际资本不断集聚中国呈现马太效应，供应链的上下游链条在越聚集的地方越会吸引更长的链条。近日，中国美商协会调查显示，超过60%受访企业表示2020年仍会考虑继续在华增加投资。近两年中美关系动辄剑拔弩张的氛围中，特斯拉和美孚却先后突然大手笔投资中国内陆建外商投资超大规模单体工厂，是很有代表性的案例。当前，中国已经超越单纯依靠廉价劳动力成本优势的阶段，逐步从高端供应链的下游升级到中游。据统计，2019年中国在全球供应链更长、附加值更高环节上的比重已提高到接近60%，凭借对自主品牌的研发创新，中国正在向技术密集、资本密集的高端供应链攀爬，在集成电路、新能源汽车、电力、光伏、通讯、医疗器械等领域均有不俗表现。然而，即便中国供应链布局配置呈现欣欣向荣态势，但依然不容盲目乐观。工信部部长苗圩在对《中国制造》进行全面解读时指出，当前全球制造业基本形成四级梯队发展格局，而中国排在第三级，且近期内还很难升级到第二梯队。中国经过近30年的不懈努力，积极参与全球供应链分工，目前既拥有劳动密集型的低端供应链（以下简称低端供应链）全产业链，也同时参与资本密集、技术密集的高端供应链（以下简称高端供应链）的元器件生产（中游参与）以及组装（下游参与）。——低端供应链的全产业链。中国虽然排在全球制造业第三梯队，但依然对低端产业链拥有主导地位，以龙头企业合同供应商身份参与服装鞋帽、家具和玩具等传统劳动密集型产业，目前大约有5万家供应商专供全球最大的零售商沃尔玛，每年出口低价值产品大约500亿美元，是中国出口美国份额的10%。低端供应链的特征是技术含量低、资本门槛低、劳动密集、供应链条短。因为把全供应链做起来相对容易，所以转移搬迁、复制就不会太难，替代性极强。——高端供应链的元器件生产（中游参与）。新中国人口红利、高考扩招、职业技术教育普及以及改革开放积累培养了大批技术熟练的工程师和一线产业工人。中国制造业的研发和设计能力不断增强，已经从最初的高端供应链下游参与晋升到中游参与，从最初为外国龙头企业组装产品逐渐升级到为国外龙头企业提供技术附加值较高的元器件。中国6500亿美元的高科技出口中，有60%是利用外国核心部件再加工组装，以代工贴牌的方式在海外市场销售。美国是国际制造业唯一一级梯队国家，处在高端供应链上游，一直致力于本土人工智能、量子科学等先进科技对接制造业的研发创新，并给予各种资金补贴、税收优惠和政策扶持，同时对华限制核心技术出口，遏制中国科技发展。目前看中国在高端原创领域只能走自主研发的道路，从高端供应链中游向上游升级，比以往更加艰难。如果中国技术停滞不前，这部分产业将会不断萎缩。——高端供应链的元器件组装（下游参与）。中国以供应链合作企业身份凭借劳动成本优势参与高端供应链的核心元器件组装，这也是中国参与全球供应链的初级阶段。高端供应链为了成本最小化，将不太重要的元器件组装放在成本洼地。出于技术门槛对一线生产工人的受教育程度要求以及供应链条集聚带来的成本优势，中国有主导性影响的低端供应链的下游产业短期内在全球难以重新配置，但是本次疫情使跨国生产遭遇了前所未有的挑战，运费高企、运时无限延长以及各地疫情导致有些环节由于企业彻底破产而断裂等问题，敦促各国重新思考供应链的配置布局。重新布局本土全产业链，将会是各国后疫情时代的政策导向。作为国际制造业第三梯队成员的中国，总体来说形势不容乐观。中国在链条短、劳动密集、技术低、资本低的低端供应链中占据主导地位，拥有龙头企业；而在链条长、技术密集、资本密集的高端供应链中还处于中游、下游位置，受国际资本支配，缺乏主导权，甚至经常被上游企业卡脖子打压。以技术突破带动而大力发展高端供应链上游产业，应该成为我国未来供应链布局的一大战略性发力点。在疫情叠加而造成逆全球化的供应链全球再配置紧迫形势下，供应链必然要经历结构性调整，有转出有转入，挑战与机遇并存。（三）疫情叠加逆全球化情况下供应链全球再配置对中国的影响新冠疫情自全球爆发以来，持续抑制经济活动并加剧国家间的紧张态势，很可能重创全球经济产出能力。这种混乱造成的风险对新兴工业国家及其产业工人来说，影响尤为巨大，并可能导致国家内部和国家间不稳定且广泛的冲突，全球供应链必将重组。肇始于2018年春的中美贸易摩擦，表象上看是缩小中国对美巨量贸易顺差，但从本质上看是美方在寻求全方位削弱中国发展实力，后续还有可能演变成金融摩擦、科技摩擦等形式，意图引出中国“颜色革命”或去中国化。前些年美国用温和绥靖的方式相对多些，特朗普上台后开始赤裸裸地去中国化，借着疫情对全球经济造成重创的时机，试图解构有中国参与的经济全球化，建构相同价值的全球化，输出共同规则的全球化，逐步瓦解中国强大的“举全国之力”体制，遏制中国发展、消除中国对美国的潜在挑战，继续稳稳地保持住全球化盟主位置。当下疫情使中国在不少国际场合饱受争议，美国借此会拉拢日欧构建反中联盟，共同塑造供应链全球战略协同，变相加速去中国化。如果美国得逞，那么欧美日三方联手配置去中国化的全球供应链，将会对世界制造业格局产生重大而深远的影响，也会给资本市场传递不良信号，彻底改变国际资本的投资或搬迁战略，瓦解我国现有的供应链布局，对中国经济将产生如下负面影响：——低端供应链的全产业链。美国宣布对价值2500亿美元的中国对美出口商品征收25%关税，这是要将made in China彻底从沃尔玛连根拔起，关税几乎把中国的成本优势完全抵消掉。更为严重的是，如果出口美国的产品含有大量的外国进口零部件，这些零部件也要面临25%的关税。所以说，这部分产能由于资本与技术门槛低、供应链条短、可替代性强等特点，迁到更具成本优势的地区是大概率事件。这部分产能目前大多集聚在东南沿海，至于是否搬离中国，取决于中外的成本对比考量，要看中国是否有与国外在成本上更具优势的地域。资本在保证安全的前提下逐利是第一要务，国际资本必然会逐步流向成本洼地，美国的关税只是加速了低端供给能力流向成本洼地。——高端供应链的元器件生产（中游参与）。2017年，特朗普税改将美国公司税率从35%下调到20%，以惠普、英特尔、IBM等为代表的美国高科技企业开始陆续回流美国，其他大型跨国企业如韩国三星、LG，富士康、中国海尔等，也先后决定在美国投资建厂。中美贸易摩擦之后，美国对中国更是频频出手，以“国家安全”为名调查中国高科技企业、向中国高科技企业派驻监管人员、限制高科技产品对华出口，并胁迫欧洲盟友放弃华为5G移动网络发展计划。高端供应链上游拼的是技术的研发能力、创新能力，能够自发吸引国际资本的主力部队，所以我们说高端供应链上游布局是国际资本的风向标，而我们缺乏高端供应链布局的主导权。也可以这样说，如果完全单纯靠市场自发调节，以我国目前的技术水平无法影响国际高端供应链布局。我们的优势在于体制，国家出手以“举全国之力”投资布局高端供应链，辅之以各种补贴和优惠政策，并加大高端供应链产品的应用，以拉动国际资本对华跟进投资，而这恰恰是我们一直被欧美所诟病的。我们内心要铭记，保证国际资本安全稳定，资本逐利的天性不是哪个国家能左右的，要有真金白银的投入才有后续的跟进。——高端供应链的元器件组装（下游参与）。成本优势与广大的消费市场是国际资本布局中国的重要原因。高盛研究报告显示，苹果智能手机在中国的生产成本占总成本的 25%~35%，其中 15%左右为零部件加工（高端供应链的中游参与）和最终组装（高端供应链的下游参与）所投入的劳动成本。如将iPhone中国的生产与组装全部搬迁到美国，其生产成本将至少提高37%（可见虽然美国2017降低公司税，但中国依然有成本优势），即使苹果用机器替代人工，iPhone成品售价也将上涨15%。所以将iPhone从中国迁移回美国本土缺乏现实可操作性，但是近日苹果公司宣布已将在华的10-15%产能转移到东盟，可见东盟目前是不太成熟的成本洼地。高端供应链的下游环节，受迁入国成熟技术工人数量和供应链布局现状所限，不会立刻迁走，但会形成逐步搬迁趋势，值得关注的是东盟已经在分流我们的产业链。如果中国没有及时相应举措来逆转这种趋势，那么这部分供应链会随着逆全球化浪潮逐步迁离中国。
除此之外，突如其来的新冠疫情会促使各国重新思考公共危机应急保障产业的全供应链本土布局的相关问题。后续各国可能出台一系列优惠政策甚至强制措施敦促公共危机应急保障产业加速回流本土。至于是全部产能搬回，还是只搬回保障本土消费的部分产能，要看各国补贴后的成本比较，现在无法下结论。没有不掺杂政治因素的经济，也没有不掺杂经济因素的政治，国际资本在做投资决策时都会进行综合考虑，既会考虑资本收益也会兼顾合作的安全顺畅，即资本逐利更逐安全。如前所述，供应链配置现状（经济全球化）、共同信仰（价值全球化）以及支撑全球化运行秩序的配套因素（规则体系的全球化）是国际资本投资前需要权衡的最重要因素。所以我们必须在供应链配置、去政治化和全球化运行秩序的配套因素上下足功夫，不但要尽最大可能集聚、延长供应链，还要力求向供应链的上游攀升。（一）以供应链条集聚的成本优势吸引更多国际资本投资全球化使得企业通过参与供应链的方式在全球范围内组织生产，及时将产品投放市场，从而降低仓储成本。（产品的）产供销经过周密的市场调研、计划和设计，在世界范围内流通。疫情下，全球整个实时生产系统遭到破坏，供应链上下游链条因配置分散而被切割甚至切断，无法同时“转起来”，世界实体经济皆因此受阻，表现出来的是“复工不能复产”。在平常时期，资金流、信息流、物流运转得有条不紊，但在非常时期，比如本次疫情期间，空间阻隔完全可以切断供应链，这种现象亟待世界重新思考供应链的配置布局问题。既往全球供应链布局在一定程度上缺乏系统全局眼光，碎片化散落在世界各地导致运输距离长，耗时长，各地不同步需要协调，运输不便利还会额外加高仓储成本，不仅阻碍供应链的顺畅运行，而且松散、脆弱的供应链布局还可能导致链条断裂的风险。以链条集聚的方式增加供应链粘性，将是未来我们对其进行配置布局需要着重思考的关键所在。众所周知，全球供应链布局与资本互为因果，相辅相成。供应链上游链条越长、越聚集越能吸引资本投入，这是成本优势；而资本投入越多则供应链越聚集、链条越长，越容易占据上游链条，这是资本优势。为此，当前中国境内已经形成供应链条的工业园区以及周边新建园区将成为吸引国际资本投资的重点地区，未来有主题产业的园区投资建设将掀起一股热潮。UNCTAD的《2019 年世界投资报告》强调，高新产业园区建设已经成为经济转型升级的一项重要投资政策工具，可能成为未来国际资本跟进投资拉动经济增长的引擎。国家可以在税收、补贴等政策利好方面积极引导、鼓励高新产业园区建设，为聚集、延长高端供应链做好基础性的服务工作：产业园区选址尤为关键，要兼顾物流枢纽、成熟的上下游产业链条、生产成本的比较优势、充足的产业工人和工程师、宜商的政治生态、宜居的自然环境等要素。“良禽择木而栖”，“栽下梧桐树，引来金凤凰”。产业园区建设要有主题，确定一家行业龙头企业作为中心，其他环节链条的配套企业就会跟进入驻，逐步形成链条集聚和生产经营的规模效应，尽最大可能延长链条。经济全球化永远是国际资本投资考量的首要因素，助其实现经济利益最大化应该成为东道国招商引资的服务核心。产业园区运营要去政治化，尊重价值体系的全球化，要给国际资本吃定心丸。对于国际资本来说，即便能够在中国赚更多的钱，如果没有安全保障一切都等于零。战狼式外交、民众大规模有组织地抵制日资（因钓鱼岛）和韩资（因萨德导弹）、大讲缺乏依据的阴谋论等行为，均会极大地提升国际资本对华投资的安全忧虑，撤资对于一些企业来说在很大程度上是不得已而为之的无奈之举。产业园区管理要与世界接轨，要保障法治化、国际化、市场化的营商环境，维护并恪守规则体系的全球化。过去我们一直关注经济体系的全球化，专注于供应链布局，往往对价值体系的全球化以及规则体系的全球化重视不够。当前一些高科技企业虽然会因为搬离中国而承担一些经济损失，却依然毅然决然地搬离中国，这中间确实有一些值得我们深入思考的地方。据全球制造业咨询公司Kearney的估计，2018年中美贸易摩擦导致当年中国对美制造品出口下降900亿美元，其中的310亿美元份额被分流到成本更低的东南亚国家，现实既残酷又严峻。我们知道，供应链布局配置不是一蹴而就的，而是一个渐进的调整过程，中国今天的供应链格局是四十年改革开放积累的硕果。趁着周边国家产业工人缺乏技术训练、基础设施尚未建成、供应链上下游配套亟待补充的契机，我们要尽快开足马力建设能够承载供应链集聚的产业园区，留住现有的供应链并吸引更多的国际资本投资中国。一旦形成供应链集聚，马太效应会使该地域的综合成本优势更明显、供应链条更长、供给能力更强。近日中共中央宣布海南单独立法，成为全球最大的自由贸易港，这不仅仅是税收和贸易方面的自由，也是制度安排的自由，彰显中国对外开放的勇气、决心和力度。既往在内陆地区难以解决的价值体系的全球化和规则体系的全球化等主权分歧在自由贸易港里都将迎刃而解。此外，海南是国内离东南亚最近的沿海省份，近年亚太经济体成为世界经济新的增长点，向增长点靠近形成供应链条集聚既是经济体系的全球化的迫切需要，更是时代发展的需要。美国对华为、中兴等高科技公司制裁不仅仅是想遏制中国发展数字科技，而是想牢牢占据高端供应链上游以引导国际资本投资，技术是决定全球高端供应链配置的最核心要素，没有之一。所以中国数字技术的研发创新能力是决定高端供应链是否迁出中国的关键因素，自主研发成为中国制造业向二级梯队攀爬的必由之路。
研发突破技术瓶颈。当前绝大多数中国企业以拼价格的低成本方式嵌入全球高端供应链的中游和下游，处于生产制造组装的低附加值环节。如果没有对供应链上游核心关键技术的研发创新突破，短期内无法攻克技术难关，则无法实现独立自主的产业发展格局，需要另辟蹊径。相关企业可以利用各国共享的全球专利库数据，按图索骥、有的放矢地查询该类技术的研发和专利持有人信息，积极与技术实际掌控方开展技术合作，这是从供应链中游升级向上游靠近的捷径。走出去拥抱世界。中国企业要放眼世界，积极实施“走出去”战略，密切追踪供应链、尤其是高端供应链龙头的资本动向、重组趋势和战略走势，主动强化与其链接配套和外包关系，审时度势地把一部分产能转移到龙头企业所在地以方便上下游链接，特别要对高端供应链中上游关键零部件、原材料企业进行投资，以重资合作方式积极投入、研发创新、进而掌握核心技术。当前我们的战略是，在确保高端供应链中游地位的同时，以资本对外投资为纽带巩固和强化全球供应链中的中国链条，力争在技术上逐步赶超世界一流，向全球制造业二级梯队挺进。
中日韩共荣圈。中日韩自由贸易协定亟待尽快签署落地，使其成为联结三国命运共同体的纽带，此举既可以巩固中国在全球供应链地位，也可以在一定程度上缓解以美国为首发起的全球化“去中国化”造成的中国制造业危机，更可以对国际资本形成强劲吸引。然而不容乐观的是，在中日韩供应链分工当中，核心技术产品研发设计的供应链上游龙头位置依然由日韩占据，中国处于产品附加值较低的加工组装环节，即供应链中下游位置。所以在未来合作的过程中，我们要不断提升自己的技术研发创新能力，牢牢把握向供应链上游攀升的机会，不断向供应链的上游挺进。借势于新基建东风。2020年3月、4月中共中央政治局会议连续提出加快新基建步伐，该举措有利于补齐我们因为科技实力不足而无法由市场机制自发引导配置高端供应链布局的劣势。30万亿级体量的新基建将为高端供应链的产品和服务提供广阔的应用市场，不但可以助力我国企业从高端供应链中游向上游攀升，还可以引导国际资本跟进投资布局，以延长高端供应链的链条配置。有一点需要强调，上述各种保中游争上游的方式只有新基建不受客观因素限制，其余方式都要受限于各种外因，最终能做到什么程度，不好预测，所以新基建就显得尤为重要。根据中国信息通信研究院的研究测算，2018年我国数字经济总量已经占到GDP的34.8%，对GDP增长贡献率达到67.9%；在带动就业方面，2020年将贡献约54万个就业岗位，2025年,将贡献约350万个就业岗位，2030年将带动超过800万人的就业。新基建前景广阔，未来可期。实事求是地说，中国的制造业升级将是一项艰苦卓绝的系统工程，更是一场旷日持久的攻坚战，关系到高质量发展的成败，我们必须迎难而上坚定不移地走下去。疫情下失业率飙升，传统基建被重新提上日程以缓解当前的失业问题，这是国家战略的短期权衡，本无可厚非。但若想真正实现产业升级，还是要投入重金积极打造我国的数字产业，这是国家的中长期战略。我们不该用短视的“经济账”去评判国家重大发展战略，今天的卧薪尝胆是在为明天的发展积攒能量，是为了明天的大踏步前进。我们只有真正掌握数字产业的前沿核心技术，才能占据高端供应链的上游龙头位置，我国相关企业才算成为高端供应链的头部企业，才能真正主导高端供应链全球配置布局，吸引国际资本跟进投资——到那个时候何愁就业？传统基建和新基建双管齐下是国家短期战略与中长期战略的有机结合，以传统基建解就业的燃眉之急，以新基建为扩大未来就业不断蓄能。与柏林墙和雷曼兄弟倒闭一样，新冠疫情是一个震惊世界的突发事件，其深远的后果我们今天仅能开始想象。但有一点是肯定的，它将对政治、经济、社会产生深远影响，世界会为此做出调整以应对这突如其来的灾难。有关全球化和供应链再配置等相关问题因疫情而成为热点，我国商界、学界、政界的主流观点大致分为相反的两派：有悲观观点认为，全球供应链尤其是不对应中国消费市场的那部分产能将陆续搬离中国；也有乐观观点认为，疫情后供应链将聚集中国。我们认为，无论有否疫情，产业转型升级必将带来供应链配置的结构性调整，疫情只会加快调整速度但无法颠覆调整趋势。中国要彻底摒弃非黑即白的二元论思想，全球化不仅仅是经济账上的盈利那么简单，对价值体系的全球化以及规则体系的全球化要予以高度重视、综合分析、认真研判、积极应对，努力做到补短板、强弱项、固优势，不盲目乐观更不妄自菲薄，紧抓改革开放机遇并迎接挑战，以经济体系的全球化、价值体系的全球化以及规则体系的全球化为目标，携手各国共同打造“人类命运共同体”。
参考文献：
[1]Jesse Heley,Marc Welsh,Samantha Saville. The fanta-sy of global products: fizzy-drinks, differentiated ubiquity and the placing of globalization[J]. Globalizations,2020,17(4).[2]Geoff Pfeifer. From state-bound subjects to global subjects: notes toward an Althusserian theory of globalized subjectivity[J]. Globalizations,2020,17(4).[3]Matthew Ming-tak Chew. Assessing localization with its local sociocultural dynamics: how Hong Kong’s localized clubculture was undermined by wealth and power disparities[J]. Globalizations,2020,17(4).[4]Science - Mathematics in Applied Science; Researchers from Galatasaray University Detail New Studies and Findings in the Area of Mathematics in Applied Science (Intuitionistic fuzzy cognitive map approach for the evaluation of supply chain configuration criteria)[J]. Journal of Mathematics,2020.[5]Mohammad Hossein Zarei,Ruth Carrasco‐Gallego,Stefano Ronchi. On the role of regional hubs in the environmental sustainability of humanitarian supply chains[J]. Sustainable Development,2019,27(5).[6]Selvaraj Hemapriya, Ramasamy Uthayakumar. A neoteric approach to geometric shipment policy in an integrated supply chain with setup cost reduction and freight cost using service level constraint. 2020, 54(3):653-673.[7]Fouad El Ouardighi,Matan Shniderman. Supplier’s opportunistic behavior and the quality-efficiency tradeoff with conventional supply chain contracts[J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,2019,70(11).[8]Taycir Ben Abid, Omar Ayadi, Faouzi Masmoudi, et al. An Integrated Production-Distribution Planning Problem under Demand and Production Capacity Uncertainties: New Formulation and Case Study. 2020, 2020[9]Kirstin Scholten, Pamela Sharkey Scott, Brian Fynes. Building routines for non-routine events: supply chain resilience learning mechanisms and their antecedents. 2019, 24(3):430-442.[10]Marcela Marçal Alves Pinto, João Luiz Kovaleski, Rui Tadashi Yoshino, et al. Knowledge and Technology Transfer Influencing the Process of Innovation in Green Supply Chain Management: A Multicriteria Model Based on the DEMATEL Method. 2019, 11(12)[11]Vander Luiz da Silva,João Luiz Kovaleski,Regina Negri Pagani. Technology transfer in the supply chain oriented to industry 4.0: a literature review[J]. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,2019,31(5).[12][法]埃米尔·涂尔干.《社会分工论》[M].渠东，译.上海：三联书店,2000.42.[13] [德]马克斯·韦伯.《儒教与道教》[M]. 洪天富，译. 南京：江苏人民出版社，1993.174.[14] [美]费正清.《伟大的中国革命》[M]. 刘尊棋，译.北京：国际文化出版公司,1989.79.[15][法]托马斯·皮凯蒂. 21世纪资本论[M]. 巴曙松,译.北京：中信出版社,2014.129-130.[16] [美]亚伯拉罕·马斯洛. 动机与人格（第三版）[M]. 许金声，译. 北京：中国人民大学出版社，2009：79.[17]贾康.新基建：既是当务之急，又是长远支撑[J/OL].党政研究,2020(04).贾 康 介 绍
第十一届、十二届全国政协委员、现任全国政协参政议政人才库特聘专家，华夏新供给经济学研究院院长，中国财政科学研究院研究员、博导。曾长期担任财政部财政科学研究所所长。是北京、上海、福建、安徽、甘肃、广西、西藏等地方政府特聘专家、顾问或咨询委员，北京大学、中国人民大学、国家行政学院、南开大学、武汉大学、厦门大学等多所高校特聘教授。1988年曾入选亨氏基金项目，到美国匹兹堡大学做访问学者一年。1995年享受国务院政府特殊津贴。1997年被评为国家百千万人才工程高层次学术带头人。多次受党和国家领导同志之邀座谈经济工作。担任2010年1月8日中央政治局第十八次集体学习“财税体制改革”专题讲解人之一。孙冶方经济学奖、黄达—蒙代尔经济学奖和中国软科学大奖获得者。国家“十一五”、“十二五”、“十三五”规划专家委员会委员、国家发改委PPP专家库专家委员会成员。2013年，主编《新供给：经济学理论的中国创新》，发起成立“华夏新供给经济学研究院”和“新供给经济学50人论坛”（任首任院长、首任秘书长，第二届理事会期间任首席经济学家），2015年-2016年与苏京春合著出版《新供给经济学》、《供给侧改革：新供给简明读本》以及《中国的坎：如何跨越“中等收入陷阱”（获评中国图书评论学会和央视的“2016年度中国好书”）》，2016年出版的《供给侧改革十讲》被中组部、新闻出版广电总局和国家图书馆评为全国精品教材。2017年后又撰写出版《供给侧结构性改革理论模型与实践路径》、《供给侧改革主线上的未来财税》、《财政学通论》等多部专著。根据《中国社会科学评估》公布的2006～2015年我国哲学科学6268种学术期刊700余万篇文献的大统计分析，贾康先生的发文量（398篇），总被引频次（4231次）和总下载频次（204115次）均列第一位，综合指数3429，遥居第一，是经济学核心作者中的代表性学者。
