The exports and imports tables below show the trade data collection between the United States and China from 2019. The United States and China have had a significant relationship regarding merchandise trade for years. China has been a major exporter of goods to the United States, supplying a wide range of products, including electronics, apparel, and machinery. The United States has also exported goods, such as agricultural products, aircraft and machinery, to China. In 2019, the United States’ exports and imports to China were $106.5 billion and $449.1 billion, respectively. The merchandise trade balance designates that the United States trade balance with China has been negative, illustrating that it imports more goods from China than it exports to China. The Merchandise and Service trade: Regarding exports and imports, both countries participate in trade services such as education, tourism and various professional services. Indeed, the United States is known for its strong service sector, for instance, in financial services, entertainment and export services to China. Similarly, the United States classically has a surplus services trade balance with China, demonstrating that the U.S. exports more services to China than it imports. According to the Bureau of Industry and Security (. gov), in 2019, “some of the most significant ten commodities imported from China to the U.S. included electronics, machinery, furniture, toys, agriculture, minerals, chemicals, Wood products, textiles, footwear and metal and China has still to maintain its share in the U.S. in the world, that amounted to $449.1 billion.

Conversely, “the major export commodities from the United States to China included aircraft, machinery, agricultural products, electronic machinery, transportation equipment, mechanical appliances, chemicals, plastics, leather goods and Glass and stone in 2019.” which amounted to $106.5 billion. Comment on these facts: In commenting on these facts, there is a persistent trade imbalance, particularly in the merchandise trade sector, which has been a topic of debate and concern. Indeed, the United States’ deficits with China have been a point of argument leading to the debate about trade policies, tariffs, quotas and the overall trade relationship between the U.S. and China. Undoubtedly, the trade between the U.S. and China is highly interdependent since China is a major production center for many U.S. companies because of low manufacturing opportunity costs. At the same time, the U.S. is also a significant market for Chinese exports. Krugman and Obstfeld (2018) argued that “countries trade because they are different from each other” regarding the efficiencies and specialization in producing goods and services with low opportunity costs. The economic scale in production can encourage countries to trade with each other because both countries can have mutual benefits from engaging in international trade.

Applying the Ricardian model: The Ricardian model of international trade suggests that countries specialize in producing goods and services in which they have a comparative advantage if the opportunity cost of production is lower, which has applied in the case of the U.S. and China trade in 2019, where China has a comparative advantage in labor-intensive industries because of the low opportunity cost of labor. In this concept, China imports more auto parts, electronics, chemicals and intermediate products while exporting more assembled final labor-intensive goods. In the meantime, the U.S. specializes in advanced technology and labor knowledge and skills, giving the U.S. a comparative advantage in capital-intensive industries where it specializes in producing and exporting goods such as aircraft, machinery, high-tech products and many more goods and services to China. In this case, the trade pattern between the United States and China is associated with the Ricardian model, where each country concentrates on producing and exporting goods with a comparative advantage. As stated earlier, the U.S. has strength in capital-intensive industries and complements China’s strength in labor-intensive industries. These tables explain the trade relations between the U.S. and China in 2019 from the exports and imports perspectives.

From understanding these trade patterns, applying the Ricardian model can help economists analyze economic dynamics and the influence of trade relations between the United States and China in 2019. The example of trading between countries has been analyzed by many economists, particularly the difference in high or lower opportunity cost, which allows for a mutually beneficial rearrangement of world production. The tables above explain everything that caused the United States trade balance to be negative in 2019. This negative trade balance could be caused by political change perspectives, exchange rates, and decreased exports and imports between the U.S. and China.

The U.S. Trade and Chinese Exports.

 “Determinants of the Commodity Structure of U.S. Trade” by Robert E. Baldwin, Summary of findings: Baldwin’s work has typically focused on international trade, and in his article, he evaluated the factors that influence the composition of the U.S. trade. His findings include the following factors: Analysis of the type of goods that the U.S. exports and imports, the factors influencing changes in the commodity structure of U.S. trade, such as trade policies, digital advancement, and change in consumer preferences, and lastly, the role of comparative advantage in shaping the U.S. trade portfolio, suggesting that many researchers trying to find the relationship between capital-intensive and labor-intensive have contended that Hercher-Ohlin’s theory has provided a proposition. Baldwin’s research chiefly focuses on international trade, analyzing the “determinants commodity structure of U.S. trade.”

“The Relative Sophistication of Chinese Export” by Peter K. Schott, Summary of findings. Schott’s research always investigates the issues involved in international trade, mainly in China. His article describes the sophistication and complexity of Chinese exports, how they evolved, and the factors influencing China’s export capabilities and competitiveness. China has committed to varying its preferences in international trade with the help of low wages and penetrating the United States market. China produces and exports labor-intensive products to the U.S. market. Schotts also stated that since “China is considered an intensive country, it produces large quantities of intermediate products and exports them into the world market, leading to a sharp reduction in the price of the intermediate products, thus causing the wages of low-skill workers to decrease across countries that produce toys.” Schott’s “relative sophistication of Chinese export” delves into the issues related to international trade, specifically how China emerges as a strong international player.

Empirical Evidence and Hechscher-Ohlin Model: According to Krugman, Obstfeld & Melitz (2018), the Hechscher-Ohlin model advocates that countries export capital-intensive products they make intensive use of their abundant factors of production and import products that are labor-intensive that they make intensive use of their scarce factors of production. Whether these findings provide empirical evidence for or against the Hechscher-Ohlin model, it is essential to consider whether the factors influencing the commodity of the U.S. trade and the sophistication of Chinese exports align with his model’s prediction. In the two articles, the findings provide complex analyses that do not fully support the idea that the U.S. mainly exports products consistent with its abundant factors of production and imports products that align with its scarce factors of production. However, the findings reveal that trade patterns are influenced by technological advancement, consumer preferences, and government policies, which are not entirely driven by factors such as endowments. In this case, the findings partially support the Hechscher-Ohlin model.

Since empirical evidence indicates that the real world is more complex than the simplified assumptions of economics models, some factors involved, such as economies of scale, non-homogeneous goods and transportation costs, can change the trade patterns between the U.S. and China. Krugman, Obstfeld & Melitz (2018) argue that the Hechscher-Ohlin model “remains crucial for understanding the effects of trade.” While the Hechscher-Ohlin model provides a valuable framework for understanding trade, it may not fully describe the complex factors of real-world dynamics. The findings in these articles can improve and expand the understanding of real-world dynamics, but they would not provide a complete picture of the complexity of international trade. The findings in these articles provide nuanced insight into U.S. trade and Chinese exports. Still, they have not fully aligned with the simplification of the Hechscher-Ohlin model because of the various complexities influencing real-world trade. The Hechscher-Ohlin model argues that countries will export products that use their abundant factors of production, such as capital and labor and import goods that use their scarce factors of production. It gives valuable insights into the relationship between resource endowment and trade patterns through the comparative advantage of intensive factors.

The U.S.-China Export and Import Industries

Regarding the iContainers (2016) article, an export industry in the United States that fits the patterns of geographical concentration driven by external economies of scale in the aerospace industry, which is mainly concentrated in Washington and California states, an example of export industries with geographic concentration supported by external economies of scale in the United States. Most businesses, such as Boeing and their suppliers, have gathered in these areas to take advantage of infrastructures, research institutes and highly knowledgeable labor, and, at the same time, have cost-saving and knowledge spillovers that result from the specialization—a large pool of skilled labor, favorable weather and well-established supply chains. A similar attribute can be seen in China’s electronic manufacturing sectors, also found in the Pearl River Delta region where shared infrastructure, trained labor population and effective supply chains are the concentration of electronic companies, and their supplier chains are gathered in this location has mainly produced external economies of scale (I Containers 2016).

Turner, J. (2021) argued that even if the United States and China have political differences over trade, both countries need each other regardless of such minimal issues. The aerospace industries, such as Boeing, significantly impact “the United States economy because Boeing estimated that China needs over 8700 new aerospace worth $1.47 trillion.” The United States generates billions of dollars in export sales and supports millions of jobs. In China, the solar panel export industry fits the pattern of geographical concentration driven by external economies of scale. “This solar panel industry is concentrated in cities where this industry can benefit from well-established supply chains and a large number of skilled workers that promotes speedy growth in the production of solar panel, which accounts for a significant number of percentages of global that some researchers suggested that China exported solar panel worth $18.7 billion in 2020 which is equivalence to almost 70 percent of solar panel of global GDP.” These industries substantially impact commerce between the United States and China, where China exports electrical instruments while the United States exports aerospace-related items.

In such a scenario, Turner (2021) stressed that trade between these nations has expanded due to the dimensional concentration of these industries. Moreover, China imports consumer electronic goods and other related materials or parts from the United States and the U.S. imports aerospace parts, equipment and technology from China. Thus, this is not a one-way street but a multiple-way street. Also, in the meantime, internal economies of scale can influence commerce between the United States and China in many ways in terms of intra-industry trade because of the sizeable domestic markets in both countries. For example, the two countries have robust auto capability manufacturing industries that promote commerce in automobiles and their auto parts. Also, this leads to the advantage of economies of scale within specific industries that are reflected in the intra-industry trade.

 Krugman, Obstfeld and Melitz (2018) argue that “internal economies of scale emphasize that industries’ average cost of production decreases the output they produce and state that perfect competition driving the price of goods down to marginal cost could infer losses.” In such a situation, intra-industry trade can be a phenomenon where countries export and import similar products simultaneously. Suppose that two countries produce the same products, such as cars. The comparative advantage suggests that trade can happen between two countries and will mutually benefit both of them. According to the Bureau of Economics, in 2021, “the United States exported $153.8 billion worth of goods to China and imported $536.8 billion of goods from China.” Turner, J. (2021) argued that most trades between the United States and China concentrated on mechanical appliances, sound recorders and TV sets. Thus, the ongoing trade war between the United States and China could not stop, but it has slightly shown a negative impact on aircraft purchases.

 Yet, Turner (2021) provides that the Chinese aviation market critically depends on Boeing’s bottom line, accounting for a quarter of the United States manufacturing orders of all aircraft. Indeed, the trade war has increased export and import tariffs on unique materials such as aluminum and steel, considered critical inputs for the aerospace industries. Turner (2021) argued that even if there are some intra-industry trades between the United States and China, it has never been a dominant factor in their overall trade relationship. Instead, other factors, such as tariffs, political, and other differences, have shaped their relationship in international trade patterns. Turner (2021) stated the trade between the United States and China has been fueled by the geographic concentration of industries with external economies of scale, such as aerospace in the U.S. and China’s electronics. Turner (2021) described that the intra-industry trade that results from internal economies of scale inside industries has further shaped their economic connection. Internal and external economies of scale have become more significant in this trade dynamic between the United States and China.

Case Study on U.S. Tariff on imported Chinese tires.

Lee (2016) argued that the United States imposed tariffs on imported Chinese tires, alleging that a surge in tire imports from China caused harm to the domestic tire industry. This case study analyzes the reason for imposing tariffs, which includes the impact on the domestic tire market and broader implications. Undoubtedly, the United States tire manufacturing industry claimed that a rapid increase in imported Chinese tires led to the closure of domestic tire plants and the loss of American jobs. They have complained that Chinese tires are sold at low prices, making it harder for domestic manufacturers to compete and demanded domestic jobs protection and the tire industry, which led President Obama to impose tariffs on Chinese tire imports. In September 2009, President Obama imposed roughly 25 to 35 percent in response to the union complaint because tariffs increased the price of Chinese tires in the United States market (Lee 2016).

Under the Trump administration, the specific tariff ranged from 35 to 55 percent, leading to high prices for Chinese tires for consumers. The main goal of imposing tariffs is to protect domestic job opportunities in the U.S. tire manufacturing industries, positively impacting the preservation of job opportunities. Even if tariffs might not have created many new jobs, they managed to maintain employment levels in the domestic industries. The affected individuals are U.S. consumers affected by tariffs that promoted the price increase for tires in the low segments that required consumers to pay more for replacement tires in the United States. Initially, tariff policies can cause trade retaliatory impositions from the Chinese on U.S.-specific exported goods such as agricultural products. Some economists argue that while the tariffs protected domestic jobs in the short term, they might have long-term consequences such as trade retaliation and market distortion.

Krugman (2018) argues that tariffs often increase prices for imported goods, which can also cause the prices of goods in the domestic market to rise. Tariffs can protect domestic manufacturers by making imported goods more expensive, resulting in a competitive advantage for domestic producers increasing sales and production for domestic markets. Regarding domestic employment, tariffs can stimulate domestic production by increasing employment opportunities in sectors related to producing or distributing some particular goods. But sometimes, the overall employment opportunities can be influenced by factors such as the elasticity of demand for particular goods and the efficiency of domestic manufacturers. Lastly, consumers may face increased costs because tariffs increase prices for imported goods and mainly impact domestic consumers. Krugman (2018) suggested that the increased cost can strain the budget of consumers, reducing their purchasing power and possibly limiting their ability to buy more consumption.

Baldwin (1989) discussed that pros assume that tariffs are policies that protect local industries, domestic employment and national security. Tariffs can protect domestic jobs by supporting local manufacturing to benefit the workforce and the economy. Specific domestic industries are protected through tariffs if these industries are crucial for maintaining national security by producing goods vital to the country’s well-being. Although tariffs are believed to protect the domestic economy, Nie, Alice, and Yang (2021) argued that the intensity of tariffs does not affect all domestic consumers based on income; some consumers are more affected than others based on their age, education and earned income status, indicate them to become losers.

Moreover, tariffs increase the tax charged on imported goods into the country, raising more revenue for the government. On the Cons side, tariffs increase taxation, discourage imported goods and eliminate more choices for consumers. Nie (2021) stated that tariffs could change consumer demand to spend more on purchasing power and aggravate import retaliation in international relations, leading to trade conflicts between countries. Using tariffs to protect domestic industries can lead to complacency, hindering innovation and efficiency improvement. As for sustainability, tariffs can be a valuable policy to generate revenues and protect domestic industries. However, they may have short-term damaging setbacks, leading to higher prices for goods that will reduce consumption by individuals and businesses. In general, tariffs discourage trade and question cooperation and relationships in the long run between countries.

In the article, Krugman (2018) implied that tariffs could become a short-term measure for protecting U.S. industries and job opportunities. It is essential for policymakers to cautiously evaluate the impact of tariffs on various participants and consider alternative approaches for the sustainability of tariffs base-job protection, which can significantly vary across industries. They can have more comprehensive economic precision and not be sustainable for long-term outcomes. Specifically, tariffs can be used to balance protecting domestic industries and ensuring global competitiveness, which is vital for a sustainable, thriving economy. In other words, they need more approaches to ensure that bilateral trade should be in place for a very long time and work as an adjustment for domestic goods and services to benefit both domestic consumers and industries. While tariffs offer short-term relief to domestic industries, their prolonged use can lead to adverse problems such as trade conflict, limiting global competition and retraining international relations, making them an unsustainable long-term economic growth and stability strategy.

Comparison of China’s trade policies before 1978.

Krugman (2018) argued that before 1978, China’s trade policies were characterized as a Soviet style that was a largely isolated and inefficient economic system. The Chinese government demanded to change China into a powerful modern socialist country that could improve industrialization by promoting the standard of living, reducing income differences and stabilizing the production of military equipment. However, after 1978, China began significant economic reforms requiring a sharp acceleration of goods flows and improving efficiency in economic transactions, which explained China’s transition from a state-dominated planned socialist economy to a mixed economy that was facilitated by high levels of industrialization and urbanization (Le, Y., Rabinovitch, S, and Macfie, N. 2008). Le (2008) stressed that in 2001, “China became an open economy and engaged in the global market by enrolling as a World Trade Organization (WTO) member.

China had established numerous free trade agreements with other countries by becoming a WTO member. Monaghan (2014) explained in 2013, China became the largest trading nation by surpassing the United States in the world. The main difference between China’s trade policies before and after 1978 was the shift from a centralized planned economy to a more open market-oriented economy.” The concept of interdependence, viewed in the Bible, can be applied here to understand the success of China’s trade policies since 1978. In the Bible, interdependence is only a key theme. 1Corinthains 12:12-14 talks of the body as one unit of many parts, all necessary for the body to function. “Different parts align with China’s trade policies, which evolved from a Soviet-style economic system to a more open economy in the last 40 years” (Garnaut 2018). Before 1978, China had a state-dominated economic plan with less interaction with the global market. However, the post-1978 reforms led to a shift towards a more open and market-oriented economy that allowed China to become a part of the global family by trading with many countries worldwide. As stated by 1 Corinthians 12: 12-14, each body part has a role; each country has unique resources and capabilities in the global economy.

 Since China opened up its economy, it has been able to tap into these different resources and capabilities, importing goods and services and exporting them into the global market. Interdependence with other countries has been critical to China’s economic growth. Similarly, interdependence has been explained in Genesis 1 and 2 that God has connected everything in his power through interdependence, as seen in China’s trade policies by becoming interdependent with other countries. As China’s trade policies became independent from other countries, China became more lucrative, robust, and resilient economically stable. The Biblical view of interdependence provides a valuable reflection to understand the success of China’s trade policies since 1978. China has achieved remarkable economic growth by embracing interdependence with the global economy (Monaghan 2014). Graham (2023) argued that China’s integration into the global supply chain has positively and negatively impacted the United States and China. It was a complex issue that could be seen as win-win and win-lose outcomes. Graham (2023) stated that the win-win indicates economic growth for China’s integration has led to economic growth in the U.S. and China. With China’s economic integration, the United States has been able to access goods at lower prices due to China’s efficient production efficiencies. On the same note, Wolf (2021) states that China has become beneficial from accessing the U.S. market, which also helped fuel China’s economic growth.

Wolf (2021) also stressed that supply chain resilience is the second win-win aspect. China has increased the diversification of the supply chain in a single country, which can make the supply chain problematic and disrupted. The U.S. and China have agreed to develop a balanced trade in advanced medicine for cancer treatment and antibiotics that became a complication for economic interdependence and national security issues. The win-lose factors are job losses, trade war, and national security. Wolf (2021) explained as global trade contributes to economic growth, it can minimize job losses in some industries and geographical locations. In addition, NBER (2022) added that the U.S. and China trade war had disrupted the supply chain and imposed tariffs on $450 billion in trade flows, reducing trade between the U.S. and China, even if it has created trade opportunities for them and other countries.

NBER (2022) explained that national security concerns promoted competition between the United States and China, making trade restriction practices to gain more advantages in high-tech industries. These concerns led to the security of supply chain limitations between the United States and China. Thus, China’s integration into the global family increased its ability to trade with many countries worldwide. The impact of China’s integration into the global supply chain on the United States and China is multifaceted. It depends on enormous factors that include geopolitical considerations, economic policies and specific industries involved, as it becomes a delicate balance that needs more analysis.

In conclusion, the United States and China have had a significant relationship regarding merchandise trade for years. China has been a major exporter of goods to the United States, supplying a wide range of products, including electronics, apparel, and machinery. Baldwin’s work has focused on international trade by evaluating the factors that influence the composition of U.S. trade. His findings include the following factors: Analysis of the type of goods that the U.S. exports and imports, the factors influencing changes in the commodity structure of U.S. trade, such as trade policies, digital advancement, and change in consumer preferences, and lastly, the role of comparative advantage in shaping the U.S. trade. This case study analyzes the reason for imposing tariffs, which includes the impact on the domestic tire market and broader implications.

Indeed, the United States tire manufacturing industry claimed that a rapid increase in imported Chinese tires led to the closure of domestic tire plants and the loss of American jobs. Even if the United States and China have political differences over trade, both countries need each other regardless of such issues. “The aerospace industries, such as Boeing, significantly impact the United States economy because Boeing estimated that China needs over 8700 new aerospace worth $1.47 trillion. Before 1978, China’s trade policies were considered Soviet-style, largely isolated and inefficient economic system 1978.” The Chinese government demanded to change China into a powerful modern socialist country that could improve industrialization by promoting the standard of living, reducing income differences and stabilizing the production of military equipment. All four steps in this course project delve into how trade policies are implemented between the United States and China.

References

Bureau Industry Security (.gov) (2019). The U.S. trades with China. https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/technology-evaluation/ote-data-portal/country-analysis/2575-2019-statistical-analysis-of-u-s-trade-with-china/file.  

The United States Census Bureau (.gov) (2023). Exports and imports merchandise trade statistics. https://usatrade.census.gov/data/Perspective60/View/dispview.aspx?ReportId=172709

Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M. & Melitz, M. (2018). International trade: theory and policy (11^th ed.). Pearson. https://plus.pearson.com/courses/urn:xl-hed:course:7628489/products/JRCHCPFJGO1/pages/a841fbbb6b4dcae92d730bdf1a9d51f3c1e563423-id_toc14?locale=&key=271877128147379269142023

Baldwin, E. R. (1971). Determinants of the commodity structure of the U.S. trade. The American Economic Review. https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.ccu.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=dee32b1a-afe9-44a6-ad70-dd6225822eb5%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.1910546

Schott, K. P. (2008). The relative sophistication of Chinese exports. Economic Policy. https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.ccu.edu/eds/detail/detail?vid=0&sid=88ea239c-bc39-48f6-af89-c22421fcab8f%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#AN=27968426&db=buh 

Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M. & Melitz, M. (2018). International trade: theory and policy (11^th ed.). Pearson. https://plus.pearson.com/courses/urn:xl-hed:course:7628489/products/JRCHCPFJGO1/pages/a841fbbb6b4dcae92d730bdf1a9d51f3c1e563423-id_toc14?locale=&key=271877128147379269142023

iContainers (2021). How to leverage emerging industrial clusters in the U.S. and China. https://www.icontainers.com/us/2016/09/20/learn-to-leverage-emerging-industrial-clusters-in-the-us-and-china/

Turner, J. (2021). How is the U.S.–China trade war impacting the purchase of aircraft? https://www.airport-technology.com/features/how-the-us-china-trade-war-is-impacting-the-purchase-of-aircraft/?cf-view

Bis.doc.gov. (2022). The U.S. Trade with China. Office of Technology Evaluation. https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/country-papers/3268-2022-statistical-analysis-of-u-s-trade-with-china/file

Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M. & Melitz, M. (2018). International trade: theory and policy (11th ed.). Pearson. https://plus.pearson.com/courses/urn:xl-hed:course:7628489/products/JRCHCPFJGO1/pages/a4b2d07a36bc80a9eaa37a8710fffe459a4277358?locale=&key=234327838204371089252023

Lee, D. (2016). The limited success of Chinese tire tariffs shows why Donald Trump’s trade prescription may not work. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-tariffs-trade-analysis-20160724-snap-story.html

Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M. & Melitz, M. (2018). International trade: theory and policy (11th ed.). Pearson. https://plus.pearson.com/courses/urn:xl-hed:course:7628489/products/JRCHCPFJGO1/pages/a4b2d07a36bc80a9eaa37a8710fffe459a4277358?locale=&key=234327838204371089252023

Nie, J., Alice, V. and Yang, S. (2021). How did the 2018-19 U.S. tariff hikes influence household spending? Journal of Economic Review. https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.ccu.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=0f563c67-d0f4-44b1-bda7-36f7772ec17a%40redis

Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M. & Melitz, M. (2018). International trade: theory and policy (11th ed.). Pearson. https://plus.pearson.com/courses/urn:xl-hed:course:7628489/products/JRCHCPFJGO1/pages/a4b2d07a36bc80a9eaa37a8710fffe459a4277358?locale=&key=234327838204371089252023

Le, Y., Rabinovitch, S, and Macfie, N. (2008). Timeline: China milestones since 1978. REUTERS. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-reforms-chronology-sb-idUKTRE4B711V20081208

Monaghan, A. (2014). China surpasses the U.S. as the world’s largest trading nation. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/10/china-surpasses-us-world-largest-trading-nation

Garnaut, R., Song, L. and Fang, C. (2018). China’s 40 years of reforms and development. ANU Press. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/cochristuniv-ebooks/reader.action?docID=5508327

Graham, N. (2023). The U.S. is relying more on China for pharmaceuticals and vice versa. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/econographics/the-us-is-relying-more-on-china-for-pharmaceuticals-and-vice-versa/

Wolf, M. and Kallsh, I. (2021). Supply chain resilience in the face of geopolitical risks. https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/economy/us-china-trade-war-supply-chain.html

National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) (2022). How the U.S.-China trade war affected the rest of the world. https://www.nber.org/digest/202204/how-us-china-trade-war-affected-rest-world