136Received 24.07.2023. Revised 16.08.2023. Accepted 23.08.2023.
Acknowledgments. The article was prepared within the project “Post-crisis world order: challenges and technologies, competition and cooperation” supported by the grant from Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation program for research projects in priority areas of scientific and technological development (Agreement ¹ 075-15-2020-783).
Abstract. Intensive development of manufacturing capabilities of Taiwan and Republic of Korea (RoK) since 1960s leads to their emergence as key global semiconductor asset. Until 2020/2021 TSMC and Samsung supplied almost 100% of most technologically advanced chips. The U. S. considered this situation as critical dependence – both for political (conflict with China, securitization of digital technologies, etc.) and economic reasons (risks of supply distortions). Along with science and technology (S&T) efforts major accent was put on new relations with Taiwan and RoK as sources of investments and competences needed to regain U.S. capabilities. By forcing and stimulating TSMC and Samsung to localize its facilities in the USA, American elites tried to solve set of different tasks. Among them were supporting strategic technological autonomy from Asia, and limiting Chinese potential for development (by requiring non-cooperation with PRC in exchange for subsidies). However, due to economic, regulatory, and competence drawbacks efficiency of this new strategy is questionable. Crisis in the electronic industry since the fall of 2022 makes the situation even more problematic. In the mid-term the strategy may not change the balance of power in microchip manufacturing and architecture of relationship with both Asian economies. This requires further development of American economic diplomacy toward Taiwan, RoK – as well as Japan (a so-called “Chip 4” group). This coincides with changes in market dynamics of semiconductor industry. On one hand, geopolitics and value chain resilience became organic factors defining investments and operational expenses. On the other, we may envision sharp rise of competition among nations and companies. Thus, for the long-term success may be determined only by S&T and Innovations (also through industry restructuring) where USA are still strong, but their success isn’t guaranteed anymore.
Keywords: USA, Taiwan, Republic of Korea, China, microelectronics, semiconductors, innovation
REFERENCES
1. Danilin I.V. The U. S.-China Technological War. Russia in Global Affairs, 2021, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 78-96. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2021-19-4-78-96
2. Brown C., Linden G. Offshoring in the Semiconductor Industry: A Historical Perspective. Brookings Trade Forum, 2005, vol. 2005, pp. 279-322. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/btf.2006.0009
3. VerWey J. Chinese Semiconductor Industrial Policy: Prospects for Future Success. Journal of International Commerce and Economics, August 2019. 36 p. Available at: https://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/publications/332/journals/chinese_semiconductor_industrial_policy_prospects_for_success_jice_aug_2019_0.pdf (accessed 10.07.2023).
4. Fuller D.B. Globalization for Nation-Building: Taiwan’s Industrial and Technology Policies for High-Technology Sectors. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 2007, vol. 18, iss. 2-3, pp. 203-224. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/02601079X07001800205
5. Chang Pao-Long, Hsu Chiung-Wen. The Development Strategies for Taiwan’s Semiconductor Industry. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 1998, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 349-356.
6. Chiang Min-Hua. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company: A Key Chip in the Global Political Economy. East Asian Policy, 2023, vol.15, no. 1, pp. 36-46. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1142/S179393052300003X
7. Yeung Henry Wai-Chung. Explaining Geographic Shifts of Chip Making Toward East Asia and Market Dynamics in Semiconductor Global Production Networks. Economic Geography, 2022, vol. 98, iss. 3, pp. 272-298. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2021.2019010
8. Son Ji-Hyoung. Samsung Beats TSMC in Advanced Smartphone Chipset Foundry Market. Korea Herald, 17.07.2022. Available at: https://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20220717000147 (accessed 10.07.2023).
9. You H. et al. Semiconductors and the U.S.–China Innovation Race. A Special Report by FP Analytics. Foreign Policy, 16.02.2021. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/16/semiconductors-us-china-taiwan-technology-innovation-competition/ (accessed 10.07.2023).
10. Luo Y., Van Assche A. The Rise of Techno-Geopolitical Uncertainty: Implications of the United States CHIPS and Science Act. Journal of International Business Studies, 2023. 18 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-023-00620-3
11. Ye L., Abe M. The Impacts of Natural Disasters on Global Supply Chains. ARTNeT Working Paper Series, 2012, no. 115. 28 p. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12870/1391 (accessed 10.07.2023).
12. Peters M.A. Semiconductors, Geopolitics and Technological Rivalry: the US CHIPS & Science Act, 2022. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 2022, pp. 1-5. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2022.2124914
13. Farrell H., Newman A.L. Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security, 2019, vol. 44, iss. 1, pp. 42-79. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1162/ISEC_a_00351
14. Li Lauly, Ting-Fang Cheng. Exclusive: Washington Pressures TSMC to Make Chips in US. Nikkei Asia, 15.01.2020. Available at: https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Technology/Exclusive-Washington-pressures-TSMC-to-make-chips-in-US (accessed 10.07.2023).
15. Kang C. How Arizona Is Positioning Itself for $52 Billion to the Chips Industry. The New York Times, 22.02.2023. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/22/technology/arizona-chips-act-semiconductor.html (accessed 10.07.2023).
16. Blanchard B., Kao J. TSMC Talking to US about CHIPS Act ‘Guidance’ amid Subsidy Concerns. Reuters, 10.04.2023. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/technology/tsmc-talking-us-about-chips-act-guidance-amid-subsidy-concerns-2023-04-10/ (accessed 10.07.2023).
17. Liu J., Mozur P. Inside Taiwanese Chip Giant, a U. S. Expansion Stokes Tensions. The New York Times, 22.02.2023. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/22/technology/tsmc-arizona-factory-tensions.html (accessed 10.07.2023).
18. Cattaneo O., Gereffi G., Staritz C. Global Value Chains in a Postcrisis World: a Development Perspective (English). Washington, The World Bank Group, 2010. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/432691468332065846/Global-value-chains-in-a-postcrisis-world-a-development-perspective (accessed 08.08.2023).
19. Grimes S., Du D. China’s Emerging Role in the Global Semiconductor Value Chain. Telecommunications Policy, 2022, vol. 46, iss. 2, 101959. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101959
20. Hille K., Sevastopulo D. TSMC: The Taiwanese Chipmaker Caught up in the Tech Cold War. Financial Times, 24.10.2022. Available at: https://www.ft.com/content/bae9756a-3bce-4595-b6c9-8082fd735aa0 (accessed 10.07.2023).
SOURCES
1. Strengthening the Global Semiconductor Supply Chain in an Uncertain Era. Semiconductor Industry Association, April 2021. Available at: https://www.semiconductors.org/strengthening-the-global-semiconductor-supply-chain-in-an-uncertain-era/ (accessed 22.02.2023).
No comments