Abstract

АннотацияСтатья посвящена усложнению организации производственного процесса в эпоху цифровых коммуникаций и интерактивных инноваций. В XXI веке этот процесс окончательно выходит за пределы национальных границ, дробится на специализированные операции и распределяется по звеньям глобальных стоимостных цепочек (ГСЦ). Под ГСЦ понимается феномен, когда промежуточная продукция одних стран мира приобретается другими для последующей обработки (добавления стоимости) и реэкспорта в третьи страны. Рассматривается конструкция ГСЦ в качестве распределенных бизнес-сетей, которые выстраиваются и координируются глобальными компаниями как коллективный проект независимых фирм-поставщиков, имеющий свои временные рамки и последовательность действий. Глобальные фирмы размещают звенья цепочек в конфигурации, позволяющей снижать общий уровень затрат и создавать новые продукты с наибольшей добавленной стоимостью. При этом они стремятся рекомбинировать территориальное распределение звеньев, подбирая под каждую бизнес-задачу специализированных подрядчиков из того локального кластера, где она может выполняться наиболее эффективно. В статье исследуется динамика распространения ГСЦ по регионам мира, анализируются степень и качество участия в них национальных экономик, включая Россию. Рассмотрены бизнес-стратегии (офшоринг, решоринг, смартсорсинг), усложняющие географию и конфигурацию ГСЦ, а также феномен образования в мировой экономике глобальных производственных и инновационных сетей, макрорегиональных сетевых «фабрик» как результат этого усложнения. Проведенный анализ позволил выделить ряд «умных» принципов, которые должны составлять основу национальных экономических и внешнеэкономических стратегий в условиях распределенного производства и растущей взаимозависимости территорий. Подчеркивается важность наращивания внешней открытости экономики, политики увеличения экспортных доходов за счет широкой либерализации импорта, использования конкурентных преимуществ стран-партнеров для усиления собственной конкурентоспособности. Описаны преимущества нелинейной модели диверсификации производства и экспорта по сравнению с классической, кластерный подход в политике роста (образование инновационных кластеров с «умной» специализацией как локальных узлов ГСЦ), а также принцип приоритетности улучшения экономической среды для непрерывного обновления технологий над курсом на улучшение самих технологий. Ключевые слова: глобальные стоимостные цепочки, инновационные кластеры, офшоринг, распределенное производство, сетевые взаимодействия, умная специализация, национальная экономическая политика. JEL: F23, F60, L16, L23. Международная экономикаНаталия Вадимовна Смородинская -кандидат экономических наук, ведущий научный сотрудник Института экономики РАН.

In this paper, we seek to explain the fundamental vulnerability of global value chains (GVCs) to sudden shocks, as revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, and outline ways for enhancing their adaptability to the increased uncertainty at both conceptual and policy levels. We consider the concept and a typical multi-structural model of GVCs, highlighting the network complexity of the system of distributed production and trade in value added. Not only does this system bring competitive advantages to GVC partner countries, but also it entails risks of cascading production disruptions. We examine these risks by analysing the ripple effect of supply disruptions in GVCs when a sudden local shock can propagate globally through inter-firm supplier links, generating growing output losses across industries and economies. From this perspective, we describe the pandemic-induced breakdown in the global just-in-time supply system in spring 2020 and its role in the escalating global recession. In analysing the mechanisms of post-pandemic GVC adaptation to uncertainty, we look at the concept of economic resilience and properties of resilient systems (robustness, flexibility, redundancy, and dynamic sustainability). We scrutinise the supply chain resilience model used by leading MNEs (GVC organisers) in their disruption risk management at pre-disruption and post-disruption stages. We classify resilience strategies devised by MNEs after 2020 into three interrelated categories: namely, multi-structural GVC optimisation (diversification and relocation of suppliers), operational optimisation (building redundancy and production flexibility), and GVC digitalisation. We conclude by outlining windows of opportunity to improve international specialisation and growth patterns, which may open in the 2020s for developing economies, including Russia, due to the ongoing restructuring of GVCs and their global supplier networks.

The paper draws attention to a new wave of public and academic debate on the future of globalization and on rationality of countries’ further participation in distributed production, i.e., their involvement in global value chains (GVCs) and value-added trade. Raised during the COVID-19 pandemic shock, this debate is the reaction of countries to the global diffusion of downfalls through transborder supplies. We analyze vulnerabilities of GVCs to sudden shocks, demonstrate the role of these risks in escalating the 2020 global recession and in shaping its unique features, as well as scrutinize the emerging post-pandemic strategies of leading MNEs for enhancing the GVC resilience. We argue that despite the collapse of the just-in-time supply system and the crucial dependency of many domestic industries on imports from China, the pandemic shock could neither undermine foundations of distributed production nor lead to mass reshoring. On the contrary, both analyzed practice and surveyed econometric literature confirm that benefits of countries’ participation in GVCs outweigh risks of their falling under potential rippling disruptions. Moreover, MNEs’ resilience strategies, which we classified into three interrelated lines of action (restructuring of GVCs’ supplier networks, production optimization, and GVCs’ digital transformation), give globalization a new impetus. We conclude with describing the changing features of distributed production under the ongoing GVCs’ restructuring and outline a number of promising export opportunities that objectively open up in the 2020s for developing economies, including Russia. In the course of our study, we examine key properties of resilient systems (robustness, flexibility, redundancy), some new notions (disruption risks, ripple effect, etc.), and new management approaches relevant for all types of economies and businesses under increased uncertainty.

In this paper, we examine the modern cluster theory and the specific features of regional innovation clusters as complex adaptive systems. Clusters have become a typical pattern of industrial organization in national economies under their transition to innovation-driven model of growth. We provide an overview of the contribution of various theoretical frameworks (evolutionary theory, spatial development theory, theory of technological change and system innovation, and Porter’s competitiveness theory) to the cluster concept and consider the latter from the perspective of complexity economics. On this basis, we differentiate true clusters from their nominal counterparts and propose three analytical dimensions to explore clusters, namely, as a special class of industrial agglomerations, as a special class of innovation ecosystems, and as a special class of economic projects (cluster initiatives). We examine the properties of clusters corresponding to each class and demonstrate their role in the geographical and functional fragmentation of production, in the integration of local exporters into global value chains, and in bridging communication gaps and developing collaboration among economic agents. We show that clusters occupy a central place among various types of business networks and have a comparative edge making them key building blocks of the modern industrial landscape. Further, we explain how the innovation capacity of clusters is affected by network synergy effects arising from the triple-helix pattern of collaboration among their participants. Finally, we draw conclusions regarding national cluster supporting policies, including those applied in modern Russia.

The paper examines the place of Schumpeterian idea of creative destruction in endogenous growth models, as well as its relevance for national competitive strategies under the ‘new normal’ situation. The difference between Schumpeterian growth models and the model elaborated by P. Romer is revealed. The paper analyzes modern interpretation of creative destruction as a process displacing low-performing firms by high-performing ones, as well as old products and technologies by more innovative ones through a market competition. It is shown that this process accelerates the dynamics of firms and the turnover of resources in an economy, thus leading to reallocation of investments and knowledge to the most productive agents. The paper highlights the importance of sustaining a dynamic balance between measures stimulating a firm-level innovation activity and measures supporting a barrier-free environment for an effective resource allocation in the economy. We consider cases of several developed and developing countries, which demonstrate negative implications of underutilized advantages of creative destruction and the risks of selective supporting policies towards exclusively high-growing firms. We conclude that without restarting the process of creative destruction in the Russian economy the national efforts to enhance competitiveness and growth may turn unproductive.

No abstract

No abstract