Search results

The objective of this chapter is to provide a first assessment on the evolution of spatial distribution of foreign firms in China.

We examine the overall changes in the location of foreign firms in China over the period 1999–2009. Then, we distinguish two time periods, 1998–2001 and 2002–2009 so as to analyze whether foreign firms’ agglomeration across regions has changed significantly after the China’s entry into the WTO (2001) and the first launch of the Chinese government policies to develop western internal areas.

Our analysis suggests that foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs) with higher foreign capital shares are more geographically clustered in coastal regions than other enterprises with lower foreign capital shares. This group with the highest intensity of foreign involvement in firm capital also experienced the most relevant changes over the decade of our analysis becoming more localized between the core-periphery divide (coastal provinces and the rest of mainland China).

The main limitation refers to poor data availability, data matching problems, and measurement errors in the database used, as highlighted by Nie, Jiang, and Yang (2012).

A general analysis of location patterns and the role of public policies may inform foreign companies in their entry strategy in the Chinese market.

Very few studies have explored location patterns with detailed geographical data and, at the same time, with data disaggregated by foreign ownership shares.

Defined as local manufacturing systems, industrial districts have been recognized as particularly important for the location of firms’ manufacturing activities intertwined with innovation processes. The debate on the internationalization of production has stressed the low value related to manufacturing within value chain activities (smile framework), emphasizing the need to focus on high value-added activities (R&D or marketing). Following multinational enterprises’ internationalization strategies, also district firms have progressively offshored their production phases in the past years. However, recent studies focused on backshoring have revamped the attention on the domestic control of production for firms’ competitiveness. This chapter explores district firms’ location choices for manufacturing activities between local and global. Based on an empirical analysis of about 260 Italian district firms specialized in mechanics, furniture, and fashion and supported by a case study investigation, our results show that despite district internationalization processes, a non-negligible amount of firms still carry out – in-house or through outsourcing – production activities at district level. Larger firms couple district production and long-term upstream outsourced internationalization activities. The district system confirms its role of pooling specialized competences and product know-how, being decisive for firms’ innovation and responsiveness to national and international markets. Backshoring, instead, is a very limited phenomenon and linked to upgrading strategies.