Print Print Email Email Share Share Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close

loading...

China: exporter of imported components or exporter?

by Brad Setser
April 24, 2007

The Economist (New York byline): 

However, it’s not clear how much impact this [A more freely floating currency] would really have on exports. For many of the products it exports, China is merely an assembler of parts made elsewhere, which is why its trade surplus with the rest of the world is less impressive than its bilateral one with America. Should the yuan rise, it will make those inputs cheaper for Chinese firms, so export prices will rise less than the yuan-bashers might hope.

Murtaza Syed of the IMF (box 1.2 of the Asian regional outlook). 

“China has often been described as the assembly line of the world, combining expensive high-tech imported inputs with cheap domestic labor to assemble final goods that are exported predominantly to developed markets in Europe and North America …    According to this view, as long as China retains its competitive advantage in cheap labor, movements in external demand and the exchange rate would have limited impact on China’s trade balance.

However, there situation may already be evolving, as a result of increased production capacity and capability with China …  According to this alternative view, the domestic content of Chinese exports is rising fast … as a result the trade balance is likely to be more responsive to movements in the exchange rate and fluctuations in external demand. 

The dramatic shift in China’s trade and production structure observed in recent years tends to support the later view.  Over the last two years, China’s current account surplus has risen by nearly 5.5% of GDP, as import growth has begun to lag export growth by a significant margin.”

I tend to agree with Syed and the IMF on this one.   Take a look at the chart on p. 24 of the IMF’s regional outlook showing the evolution of China’s trade balance with various regions of the world economy.  Since 2004, China surplus with the US and Europe has continued to rise while China’s deficit with the rest of Asia has fallen.   And if you look at the chart showing Chinese domestic production of semiconductors (which had to be put on a separate scale …) it is pretty clear that some previously imported electronics components are now made in China.

Electronics isn’t the only sector where China’s role is changing.  Things are changing in autos too.  Foreign producers in China used to import lot of parts for final assembly in China for the Chinese domestic market.  But China is gradually becoming a source of parts – if not assembled cars – for the world market.

I think two things are relatively clear from looking at the recent data.  One is that China’s surplus with Europe has increased dramatically over the past few years.  China now runs nearly as large as surplus with Europe as with the US.    The IMF presents the Chinese data.   The European data tells the same story.   The EU—25 imported euro 191b ($243b) from China in 2006, and ran a euro 128b ($163b) trade deficit.     The US only imported a bit more – $288b v $243, but it also exported a bit less, so its bilateral deficit with China was $232b.  

The other is that China’s pace of export growth accelerated significantly in late 2002 and early 2003, and subsequently stayed at a high level.   That shows up clearly in the following chart. 

china_trade_07_small 

There are three plausible explanations for the upward shift in China’s export growth:

  • WTO accession;
  • State enterprise reform, which made many Chinese firms more efficient;
  • The RMB’s real depreciation from 2002 onl. 

All three played a role.   I would put the most emphasis on the later.   Chinese export growth seems to have picked up about the same time US export growth picked up, suggesting that a common factor played a role — though there is little doubt Chinese exports responded more strongly to the depreciation of the dollar/ RMB than US exports.  

china_and_us_x_growth 

The RMB’s real depreciation is certainly the easiest of the three to reverse.  After all one would normally expect reforms that increased the pace of productivity growth to push the real exchange rate up – not drive it down.

15 Comments

  • Posted by Emmanuel

    If it were 2004 and not 2007, I’d probably agree with the Economist, but China has moved up in sophistication and is less reliant now on the processing trade. Hence, it needs less inputs from elsewhere for its production, possibly resulting in a growing trade surplus:

    Asia’s export-dependent economies are facing the “worrying” prospect of weaker growth in sales to China, which is also squeezing its neighbors out of key overseas markets, according to the World Bank…

    China’s imports rose 13.1 percent in February from a year earlier, the smallest gain in 19 months. That slowdown has been tough for other developing economies in Asia, which had benefited by selling parts, components and capital equipment to China, the World Bank said.

  • Posted by Guest

    China should broaden the investment channels for its huge foreign exchange reserves by increasing its gold reserves and buying strategic resources such as oil and metals, People’s Bank of China Vice Governor Xiang Junbo says.

    Introducing more liquid capital markets will increase flexibility, make prices more responsive to structural changes and facilitate a rational distribution of resources, writes Thomas Schiller, executive managing ­director and head of Asia-Pacific, ­Standard & Poor’s.

  • Posted by bsetser

    I quite liked Schiller’s comment — especially the way he lays out the issues around sterilization (though that is more the topic of my monday post than today’s post)

  • Posted by Alex

    “Hence, it needs less inputs from elsewhere for its production”

    I agree with Emmanuel in form but would disagree in substance. At least with my industry supplying the actual parts themselves is viewed as a much better and far more profitable endeavor than building the finished product. For our factories at least its neccessary to visit the suppliers rather than the other way around, the suppliers don’t visit you they have too much business.

    This is very different from the situation in Taiwan during the 80′s.

    So yes China does need fewer inputs but nonetheless I think the supply of primary components in China domestically versus the actual number of factories assembling final goods themselves.

    However the Chinese are catching up, this is especially noticable in Dong Guan. A haven for many Taiwanese investors who brought their money and know how to southern China.

    Lets also be honest with ourselves. The euro has really borne the brunt of the dollar’s decline. With China nad the rest of Asia still “softpegged” to the dollar is really any wonder that China’s trade with Europe is increasing?

    I think we shouldn’t forget that the Chinese domestic market is strong. BMW’s #3 market is China and I’m sure the same thing goes for a number of European auto makers. Doesn’t it just make sense to take advantage of the labor differential for China, especially if you are producing the same product there that’s being sold in Europe!

    China’s surging trade surpluses (at least versus Europe) should come as no surprise to anyone given the Euros strength against the dollar and Remimni and the fact Chinese domestic production in some industry can be very quickly adapted to “home” markets for European multinationals.

  • Posted by Gheorghius

    Yes, it is true, the strong Euro right now is a real bonanza for Europeans: cheap goods + low oil prices (in Euro)… cheap holidays abroad… provided that the Euro does not go too far!

  • Posted by Dave Chiang

    Brad,

    While China’s main area of comparative advantage continues to be low-cost manufacturing, the Chinese economy remains dependent on high technology components from elsewhere. The ultra high-tech components from charged coupled devices (CCD’s) to advanced microprocessors must still be imported. For instance, Intel presently only final packages microprocessors in China with the advanced wafers manufactured in the United States, Ireland, and Israel. And while IBM has transferred its global procurement headquarters to Shenzhen, advanced microprocessors are still manufactured in-house at its upstate New York fab. Moreover, Domestic Chinese chip production can only currently meet 30% of China’s internal demand. However, with over a dozen new semiconductor fabs under construction across the nation, the Chinese economy will over time, meet an increasing portion of China’s domestic demand. Often overlooked by Western analysts, Chinese Industrial clustering has been instrumental in supporting the rapid expansion of various manufacturing sectors. With the exception of the core microprocessors, IBM’s global procurement center in Shenzhen is able to acquire almost every other computer component from power supplies, cables, circuit boards, displays from suppliers across the Pearl River Delta. With other Chinese government targeted industrial clusters in Beijing and Shanghai, China will soon move into higher-value-added sectors, such as automobiles, commercial aerospace and pharmaceuticals.

  • Posted by Guest

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070326-sizing-up-intels-historic-decision-to-open-a-fab-in-china.html – intel’s china fab will only go to 90nm when they’re already ramping 45nm and readying a 32nm process…

    in addition to buying (access to) gold, minerals and other resources from the emerging world, they’re also rapidly “transferring” technology from the developed world…

    if they’re smart they could just buy israel… what’s their market cap; like around $123bn?

  • Posted by Dave Chiang

    Notable comment:

    On March 20, 2007, the governor of China’s central bank stated for the first time that they “will not stockpile foreign exchange reserves any more”. This an extraordinarily important comment that few Western pundits took note. The PBoC realizes that ultimately keeping the policy in place will only result in the destruction of the Chinese economy. Too much foreign capital is exploding the domestic Chinese money supply. The US Federal Reserve is equally at fault for printing too many fiat dollars for the past decade.

  • Posted by Macro Man

    Plenty of us observed that comment, Dave, just as we observed Chinese officials resolving to rebalance growth a couple of years ago, with little noticeable effect.

    To quote the professional wrestling “legend” Ric Flair: You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk? We’ll see when the next batch of reserve data comes out.

    Of course, PBOC could simply have referred to the fact that it won’t be them stockpiling reserves anymore- it will be the PIC.

  • Posted by jkh

    This is peripheral to the immediate post topic, but it does relate to the IMF Asia Pacific REO that you’ve referenced several times:

    Box 2.2 on page 33 gives some insight and examples on banking and derivative flows, which apparently constitute the two types of flows included in the ‘other’ flows category of the capital account as defined in the paper.

    The derivative examples used seem to translate to underlying bank flows as the immediate cross border effect – e.g. banks shorting the dollar (borrowing interbank from offshore) as a hedge against the forward purchase of dollars from an exporter, banks increasing their net dollar assets against the forward sale of dollars to their central banks, or banks allowing forward currency contracts to mature (which would change their external classification of assets or liabilities).

    The classification framework suggests some derivative flows are not classified as bank flows. But I don’t see examples where the effect of derivatives isn’t reflected entirely in bank flows. What sorts of derivative transactions are reflected in the other category separate from bank flows, and how substantial are they? (I would have guessed the classification distinction is not mutually exclusive, except that the Korean capital inflow chart on page 33 specifically classifies ‘other investment inflows: bank’, and ‘other investment inflows: other’, as separate and distinct.)

    Do you know of other articles that provide a good framework for understanding derivatives content in capital account flows?

  • Posted by Macro Man

    Lest anyone accuse me of Sinophobia, the same jaundiced attitude is utterly appropriate when judging the pronouncements of public officials around the globe, from the US to the UK to Hungary and beyond…

  • Posted by bsetser

    jkh — good question.

    most derivatives transactions are “off-balance sheet” and don’t show up in the capital flows data.

    Other investment is basically bank loans

    other investment banks = banks lending to other banks

    other investment other = banks lending to firms

    what i took from the regional outlook is that derivatives activity often gives rise to real flows that show up in other investment. but i don’t think the actual derivative itself does.

    the premiums that the banks receive from selling derivatives should show up in the current account (current income), i think.

    to be honest, tho, i would need to spend some time looking at this/ thinking about it. my general sense is that derivative positions rarely show up directly in the data, but sometimes show up indirectly.

  • Posted by koteli

    Peripheral news from chinadaily:

    Chinese mainland becomes Japan’s top trade partner
    (Agencies)
    Updated: 2007-04-25 16:24

    “The Chinese mainland has surpassed the United States as Japan’s top trading partner despite strained ties between the Asian giants.

    Japan’s total trade with the Chinese mainland came to 25.43 trillion yen (US$214.8 billion) in the year ended March, against 25.16 trillion yen with the United States, the Japanese finance ministry said in a statement.

    “This reflects the gradual shift of production by Japanese firms to China. I think the trend of growing trade with China will continue,” said finance ministry official Koichi Nose.

    The United States is still Japan’s largest export destination but Japanese exports to the Chinese mainland have been growing in recent years, while imports are strong.

    Japanese manufacturers have been shifting more of their production operations to the Chinese mainland, seeking cheap labour costs and a foothold in the fast-growing economy.

    “For Japan, a very large market has emerged next door,” said Senshu University economics professor Hideo Ohashi.

    The two economies have strong links through direct investment while the flow of goods has increased sharply, ensuring that trade relations between the two Asian giants are likely to remain strong, he added.

    Japan was also Chinese mainland’s largest trading partner for 11 consecutive years until 2003 but was then overtaken by the United States and European Union.”

    Diplomatic relations between the two Asian giants became severely strained in recent years over war-time memories and territorial spats.

  • Posted by Dave Chiang

    Macroman,

    The PBoC governor probably is considering investing excess US Dollars into the natural resource sector and international equities. The biggest joke of the century is that the entire world is knee deep with increasingly worthless US dollars.

  • Posted by Alex

    “The PBoC governor probably is considering investing excess US Dollars into the natural resource sector and international equities. The biggest joke of the century is that the entire world is knee deep with increasingly worthless US dollars. ”

    All the more reason for the Chinese to invest their “money” while its worth something!