Search results

This paper explores international trade of the Chinese manufacturing industries through the lenses of network analysis (NA) to visualise the world trade network of the Chinese economy, describe its topology and better explain the international organisation of Chinese manufacturing industries.

The authors built a dataset of 40,550 Chinese companies and their 107,026 subsidiaries in 118 countries from Orbis-BVD and used a NA to investigate the connection between China and other countries. In particular, the authors studied the connections between Chinese companies and their subsidiaries in order to build a network of Chinese industries.

The authors found that the network of Chinese companies is ramified but not wide and it can be divided into two clusters. Moreover, the relations between China and other peripheral countries are strongly mediated by a few leading locations (e.g. Hong Kong and the USA).

This paper contributes to the literature in several ways. First, the authors provide empirical evidence on the magnitude and ramifications of Chinese enterprises in the world. The existing studies generally focus on applying NA to sectoral insights (Mao and Yang, 2012; Shaikh et al., 2016; Zheng et al., 2016; Wanzenbö ck, 2018; Krichene et al., 2019), whereas in this work the authors take a comprehensive view of the entire Chinese manufacturing system. Second, this paper complements the existing literature identifying the difference between cluster levels in Chinese manufacturing (Wu and Jiang, 2011) by proposing a cluster centralisation method to analyse the international network of Chinese firms rather than just the national network. Finally, the results also shed light on the international trade relationship between China, Hong Kong and the USA.

This study aimed to explore the antecedents of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) internationalization and to compare the different resources required to enter different geographical regions. This study adds to the discussion on internationalization from a resource-based view (RBV) and a focus on dynamic capability, especially the linkage with resources such as digital capability, domestic industrial networks and the business-to-business (B2B) model.

This study used secondary data collected by an SME association in 2020, using a logistic regression model to examine the hypotheses. The respondents were selected according to stratified random sampling.

Digital capability and the B2B model significantly and positively affect the likelihood of internationalization by SMEs, while domestic industrial networks were negatively correlated with this process. In addition, Taiwanese SMEs with high digital capability tend to expand to North America, Europe, Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia, Oceania and the Middle East. Smaller firms tend to develop in Southeast Asia, whereas larger firms opt to establish business in Oceania.

A research limitation is the generalizability of the sample. Findings could be enhanced if future studies include more industries and draw comparisons among different industries or countries. Future studies could explore digital entrepreneurship from a global perspective.

Managers need to emphasize better the development of digital capabilities and skills for SMEs. With limited financial resources and workforce, SMEs can strengthen the competence in international markets by adopting a suitable business model. When SMEs join an association to expand SMEs foreign networks, the study suggests that SMEs carefully evaluate the characteristics of each industrial association first, given that some associations are domestic-oriented. As for public policymakers, a project grant can be used to provide digital capability training for SME employees and owners or promote building a B2B model when internationalizing.

The authors' findings fill the research gaps in RBVs of internationalization, especially in linking resources such as digital capability, domestic industrial networks and the B2B model. The outcomes of this research serve as a reference not only to policymakers for improving the current SME ecosystem, but also to business practitioners positioning themselves in this system.