Global rivalries, corporate interests and Germany’s ‘National Industrial Strategy 2030’

IF 3.7 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Julian Germann
{"title":"Global rivalries, corporate interests and Germany’s ‘National Industrial Strategy 2030’","authors":"Julian Germann","doi":"10.1080/09692290.2022.2130958","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article asks how Germany could have pursued a far-reaching ‘National Industrial Strategy 2030’ despite the fierce opposition of German industry. To resolve this puzzle—which realist-inspired and institutionalist analyses struggle with—it deploys a critical state theory attuned to the uneven and combined development of global capitalism. The twin challenge of China catching up and the US forging ahead has not only prompted German officials to develop a ‘defensive-mercantilist’ response; new qualitative and quantitative evidence indicates that it has also deepened conflicts within Germany’s export industry. Small and large firms are divided over how to respond to the growing lead of US capital in the digital economy, and its major sectors have experienced Chinese inroads into high-tech manufacturing differently. I argue that the German state was/is able to advance its industrial strategy insofar as it reconciles these divergent interests. First, it has offered laxer EU cartel rules to big business and enhanced protection from digital oligopolies to the Mittelstand, in exchange for tighter foreign direct investment controls. And second, I suggest that it could win over the chemical and electrical industry, through selective state subsidies, to its plans to re-shore transnational value chains in the name of ‘technological sovereignty’.","PeriodicalId":48121,"journal":{"name":"Review of International Political Economy","volume":"30 1","pages":"1749 - 1775"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of International Political Economy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2022.2130958","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Abstract This article asks how Germany could have pursued a far-reaching ‘National Industrial Strategy 2030’ despite the fierce opposition of German industry. To resolve this puzzle—which realist-inspired and institutionalist analyses struggle with—it deploys a critical state theory attuned to the uneven and combined development of global capitalism. The twin challenge of China catching up and the US forging ahead has not only prompted German officials to develop a ‘defensive-mercantilist’ response; new qualitative and quantitative evidence indicates that it has also deepened conflicts within Germany’s export industry. Small and large firms are divided over how to respond to the growing lead of US capital in the digital economy, and its major sectors have experienced Chinese inroads into high-tech manufacturing differently. I argue that the German state was/is able to advance its industrial strategy insofar as it reconciles these divergent interests. First, it has offered laxer EU cartel rules to big business and enhanced protection from digital oligopolies to the Mittelstand, in exchange for tighter foreign direct investment controls. And second, I suggest that it could win over the chemical and electrical industry, through selective state subsidies, to its plans to re-shore transnational value chains in the name of ‘technological sovereignty’.
全球竞争、企业利益与德国“国家工业战略2030”
本文探讨了德国是如何不顾国内产业界的强烈反对,实施意义深远的“国家工业战略2030”的。为了解决这一现实主义和制度主义分析所纠结的难题,我们运用了一种与全球资本主义的不平衡和联合发展相适应的批判国家理论。中国迎头赶上和美国锐意进取的双重挑战,不仅促使德国官员做出“防御性重商主义”回应;新的定性和定量证据表明,它也加深了德国出口行业内部的冲突。对于如何应对美国资本在数字经济中日益增长的领先地位,大小企业存在分歧,其主要行业也以不同方式经历了中国对高科技制造业的进军。我认为,德国政府过去/现在能够推进其工业战略,因为它调和了这些不同的利益。首先,它向大企业提供了更宽松的欧盟卡特尔规则,并加强了对中小型企业的数字寡头垄断保护,以换取更严格的外国直接投资控制。其次,我建议中国可以通过选择性的国家补贴,争取化工和电气行业支持其以“技术主权”的名义将跨国价值链转移到海外的计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
9.30%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: The Review of Political Economy is a peer-reviewed journal welcoming constructive and critical contributions in all areas of political economy, including the Austrian, Behavioral Economics, Feminist Economics, Institutionalist, Marxian, Post Keynesian, and Sraffian traditions. The Review publishes both theoretical and empirical research, and is also open to submissions in methodology, economic history and the history of economic thought that cast light on issues of contemporary relevance in political economy. Comments on articles published in the Review are encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信