International Political Economy of IT Industry

84
DOI: 10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-3-5-19
EDN: IYSLVI
V. Grigoryevsky, v.grigoryevskiy@gmail.com
Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO), 23, Profsoyuznaya Str., Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation.
D. Degterev, degterev-da@rudn.ru
RUDN University, 6, Miklukho-Maklaya Str., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation;
MGIMO-University, MFA of Russia, 76, Vernadskogo Prosp., Moscow, 119454, Russian Federation.
D. Piskunov, piskunov_da@mail.ru
RUDN University, 6, Miklukho-Maklaya Str., Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation.
I. Prokhorenko, irinapr@imemo.ru
Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences (IMEMO), 23, Profsoyuznaya Str., Moscow, 117997, Russian Federation.

Received 25.11.2022. Revised 14.12.2022. Accepted 27.12.2022.

Abstract. The development of the ICT industry in the modern globalized world has an increasing impact on political relationships between states and various non-state actors. The article aims to research the nature of the international system of relations between states in the ICT sphere and to define whether this system is unipolar, bipolar or polycentric. By using the provisions of the international political economy, technology transfer theory and world-systems theory, as well as quantitative methods, the authors developed and substantiated the international rankings methodology of international power research in the global ICT industry based on the data of OECD TiVA FD_EXGR_VA Gross exports by origin of value added and final destination of the ICT three key industries (IT and other information services, Telecommunications, Computers, electronic and optical equipment) for every system actor. Based on this the authors evaluated the distribution of the power between the states and identified key actors, defined state functions and resulting therefrom components of the global ICT industry, competition types for these components, and by typological classification of states defined five of their types (“worker”, “altruist”, “merchant”, “median”, “consumer”), analysed their strengths and weaknesses, provided the network analysis of creating value added, which visualises the key connections between countries. Conclusions are drawn that the international system of relations between states in the ICT sphere has a polycentric nature, a number of practical results have been achieved, which contribute to a better understanding of the mechanisms of the uneven development of the states from the point of view of non-hierarchical models and show state functions in the ICT sphere; estimations are provided for the balance of power in the current system as a result of the process of decoupling economies and technological decoupling between USA and China.

Keywords: international political economy, information and communication technologies, value added, international rankings, quantitative methods, USA, China


REFERENCES

1. Schumpeter J.A. Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process. New York, Toronto, London, McGraw-Hill, 1939. 461 p.

2. Ryabov A.V. From Integrity to the New Split and Rivalry? (World System and World Order in Changing Realities). Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economics, Law, 2019, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 32-48. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2019-12-4-32-48 

3. Varnavskii V.G. International Trade in Value added Terms: Methodological Issues. World Economy and International Relations, 2018, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 5-15. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2018-62-1-5-15 

4. Degterev D.A., Ramich M.S., Piskunov D.A. U.S. & China Approaches to Global Internet Governance: “New Bipolarity” in Terms of “The Network Society”. International Organisations Research Journal, 2021, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 7-33. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2021-03-01 

5. Degterev D.A., Ramich M.S., Tsvyk A.V. U.S.–China: “Power Transition” and the Outlines of “Conflict Bipolarity”. Vestnik RUDN. International Relations, 2021, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 210-231. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-0660-2021-21-2-210-231 

6. Danilin I.V. The Impact of Digital Technologies on Leadership in Global Processes: from Platforms to Markets? MGIMO Review of International Relations, 2020, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 100-116. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2020-1-70-100-116 

7. Satoru M. US Technological Competition with China: The Military, Industrial and Digital Network Dimensions. Asia-Pacific Review, 2019, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 77-120. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/13439006.2019.1622871 

8. Kondrat’ev V.B. World Economy as Global Value Chain’s Network. World Eonomy and International Relations, 2015, no. 3, pp. 5-17. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2015-3-5-17

9. Wallerstein I. The Capitalist World-Economy. Cambridge University Press, 1979. 320 p.

10. Krause K. The Political Economy of the International Arms Transfer System: The Diffusion of Military Technique via Arms Transfers. International Journal, 1990, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 687-722. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/40202695 

11. Mal’tsev .M. Network Dynamics of Technology Diffusion in International Arms Transfers. International Trends, 2020, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 36-61. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2020.18.4.63.5 

12. Akamatsu K.A. Historical Pattern of Economic Growth in Developing Countries. Journal of Developing Economies, 1962, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3-25.

13. Kojima K. The “Flying Geese” Model of Asian Economic Development: Origin, Theoretical Extensions, and Regional Policy Implications. Journal of Asian Economics, 2000, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 375-401.

14. Tung A.C. Beyond Flying Geese: The Expansion of East Asia’s Electronics Trade. German Economic Review, 2003, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 35-51.

15. Keohane R. O., Nye J. S. Power and Interdependence. London, Pearson Education, 2011. 368 p.

16. Lanteigne M. “E-breakout”? Weaponised Interdependence and the Strategic Dimensions of China’s Digital Currency. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 2022, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 140-162.

17. Farrell H., Newman A.L. Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security, 2019, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 42-79.

18. Grachikov E.N. Geopolitics of China: Egocentrism and Space of Networks. Moscow, RuScience, 2017. 234 p. (In Russ.)

19. Shaw T.M. et al., eds. The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary International Political Economy. London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. 743 p.

20. Afontsev S.A. Political Markets and Economic Policies. Moscow, Komkniga, 2010. 380 p. (In Russ.)

21. Hirschman Al. National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade. University of California Press, 1945. 194 p.

22. Tsygankov P.A. International relations theory: textbook. Moscow, Gardariki, 2003. 590 p. (In Russ.)

23. Zhang Y., Ostanin V.A. International Political Economy as a Theoretical Basis for knowing the Processes in Political Markets. Vestnik Altaiskoi akademii ekonomiki i prava, 2021, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 128-134. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.17513/vaael.1697 

24. Kovacic W.E. Transatlantic Turbulence: The Boeing – McDonnell Douglas Merger and International Competition Policy. Antitrust Law Journal, 2001, no. 68, pp. 805-874.

25. Galbraith J.K. American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power. Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1952. 234 p.

26. Oleinov A.G. International Political Economy: Subject Matter and Method. World Economy and International Relations, 2017, vol. 61, no. 2, p. 54-64. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2017-61-2-54-64 

27. Martins Guilhoto J., Webb C., Yamano N. Guide to OECD TiVA Indicators, 2021 edition. OECD Publishing, 2022, no. 2. 55 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1787/58aa22b1-en 

28. Aron R. Paix et guerre entre les nations. Paris, Calmann-Lévy, 1984. 832 p.

29. Gilpin R.G. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2016. 472 p.


For citation:
Grigoryevsky V., Degterev D., Piskunov D., Prokhorenko I. International Political Economy of IT Industry. World Eonomy and International Relations, 2023, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 5-19. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2023-67-3-5-19 EDN: IYSLVI



Comments (0)

No comments

Add comment







Indexed

 

 

 

 

Dear authors! Please note that in the VAK List of peer-reviewed scientific journals, in which the main scientific results of dissertations for the degree of candidate and doctor of sciences should be published for the “MEMO Journal” the following specialties are recorded:
economic sciences:
5.2.5. World Economy.
5.2.1. Economic Theory
5.2.3. Regional and Branch Economics
political sciences:
5.5.4. International Relations
5.5.1. History and Theory of Politics
5.5.2. Political Institutions, Processes, Technologies

 

Current Issue
2024, vol. 68, No. 4
Topical Themes of the Issue:
  • Financial Contagion Propagation in Europe under the Impact of Global Shocks
  • Regional Powers on the African Continent: Trends and Prospects
  • Investment Activity of the PRC in the Kyrgyz Republic
  • “Land Grabbing” Concept: Global and National Aspects
Submit an Article
INVITATION FOR PUBLICATION
The Editorial Board invites authors to write analytical articles on the following topics:
  • changes in the processes of globalization in modern conditions
  • formation of the new world order
  • shifts in civilization at the stage of transition to a digital society

The editors are also interested in publishing synthesis articles / scientific reviews revealing the main trends in the development of certain regions of the world - Latin America, Africa, South Asia, etc.