Since the 1980s, Asian economies have seized the historical opportunity of low international oil prices and economic globalization. They have successfully transferred the world's factories from Europe and the United States to the region, and have transformed Europe and the United States into two of the world's largest consumer markets. However, since 2003, with the continuous rise of international oil prices, the recent level of 147 US dollars has only eased back. High oil prices have directly led to a significant increase in shipping costs, and fuel now accounts for 20% to 30% of shipping company costs. According to the report of the Malaysian Shipowners’ Association, the fuel cost per ton of ships has risen from US$250 a year ago to the current US$700. Obviously, this is unacceptable for Chinese producers and US dealers. Chinese exporters have already experienced the impact of high sea freight fees. In the first half of 2008, China's export growth rate was 21.9%, which was a significant drop from 27.6% in the same period of last year. Among these, Guangdong, which is China's export-oriented manufacturing province, experienced an even lower export growth of 13% in the first half of 2008 from 26.5% in the same period last year. If we zoom in on the globe, I believe that the following three trends may be increasingly clear: First, the global production chain of multinational corporations will gradually shrink. In the era of globalization, multinational corporations have become accustomed to purchasing parts and components globally, then assembling them in China or India, and finally returning to the entire business process of sales in the United States or Europe. However, with the dramatic increase in shipping costs, this model has become increasingly uneconomical, and the cost of shipping has greatly surpassed the savings in labor costs. Some companies that used to source parts from Asia, in the face of high transportation costs, have begun to switch to companies that manufacture parts in the United States to save on shipping costs. For example, the American electric car manufacturer Tesla Motors gave up the production process that originally produced batteries in the United Kingdom, assembled in the United Kingdom, and then shipped back to the United States. Instead, it focused all production links around its headquarters in California. In addition, American furniture dealers used to transport timber from the United States to China and processed them into sofas, cabinets, tables and chairs and then sold them back to the United States; now these woods are processed directly in Virginia or North Carolina, making the locals quiet. The long-established wood processing industry has revived. Second, globalization will give way to regionalization. In the era of high oil prices, the biggest obstacle to globalization is not the tariffs disputes between countries in the Doha Round negotiations, but the cost of shipping. It can be said that the rise in shipping costs is enough to nullify all the efforts made by countries in the world for trade liberalization in the past 30 years. Therefore, the development of economic and trade relations with neighboring countries becomes a more realistic approach. For example, as labor costs and transportation costs continue to rise, European companies have begun to drastically reduce their investment in China. According to estimates of the German Institute of Engineers, up to one-fifth of member companies plan to withdraw from China; at the same time, they are in Eastern Europe and Russia. Extensive expansion. British "Financial Times" reported that in 2007 the European Union's direct investment in China was only 1.8 billion euros, far below the level of 6 billion euros in 2006; while in Russia, the investment from the European Union soared from 10.6 billion euros to 17.1 billion euros. The same situation also occurred in North America: In stark contrast to China’s decline in exports to the United States, Mexico’s exports to the United States have steadily progressed at a rate of 7% in recent years, especially in furniture, steel, rubber (information, quotation) and paper. In the products and other industries, Mexico is gradually taking over China’s market share. Of course, the above bad news is only one side of the coin. From a more positive perspective, East Asian countries can also use this to promote the promotion of intraregional trade and mutual investment. The East Asian economic integration process may be greatly accelerated. Finally, China and East Asia will realize industrial upgrading faster and complete a thrilling leap. Even without the plagued exchange rate appreciation, high seaborne costs will make East Asia's traditional labor-intensive export model unsustainable. Some economists, such as Jeffrey Sachs, believe that although rising trade costs will have an impact on globalization, they are by no means deadly. From the perspective of East Asian countries, it is obviously necessary to support this point of view. That is, goods exported to the United States market must be more competitive in terms of price than those produced by Mexico or other Central American countries, or they may not have the capacity for the time being. which provided. In contrast, the latter result may be more in line with the logic of this article. In the process of reforming the global economic map, for Chinese companies, there are both challenges and opportunities. The key depends on what kind of mentality to face. If you simply indulge in the "who has moved my cheese" type of complaints, wait for the government to pull one, I am afraid that sooner or later the market will be eliminated.
Global trade pattern of auto parts faces reshuffle