Especially
as the trend of regionalization in supply chains grows, companies need to
increasingly look at their long-term supply chain strategy.[1] A long-term supply chain
strategy may well find itself as more regional. Companies whose prime consumers
are in the United States, therefore, should take a very hard look at the
benefits of Mexico.
One
of the biggest benefits of Mexico is inherent in its proximity to the United
States- reducing transport and emissions costs- as well as its NAFTA
membership. Free Trade Zones in general allow for reduced tariff costs as well
as reduced barriers to entry.
Source:
The Economist.[2]
As seen above, however, there is still room for Canada and Mexico to increase its share in U.S. trade. In addition, Mexico has trade agreements with 44 other countries, many regional, enabling the easier building of a regional supply chain with emerging economies that are demanding more and more consumer goods. In the long-term, Mexico’s labor force is projected to grow by 58% where China’s is expected to shrink by 3%.[3] Finally, Mexico’s wages are not increasing at the rate of that of many Asian economies. China’s wages have increased to almost the level of Mexico’s-[4] and for industries conscious of IP infringements, Mexico’s free trade agreements allow for enhanced protection- something China does not provide.
Finally,
companies should pay attention to political and institutional instability. Most
developing countries have some instability, corruption or unrest, all of which
effects investment. However, supply chain movements incur huge fixed costs. And
choosing the correct political environment for a company is a very necessary
part of optimizing supply chain logistics.
Let’s continue the China/Mexico comparison. Corruption is something to look at in both economies:
Source:
Transparency International[5]
Corruption
is higher then, in Mexico. But not so much higher—and the government of Mexico
is not disrupting current world power structures. (This is not a judgement of
that power transition; merely an observation that China is increasingly seeking
to take a higher position within the world, and that can be disruptive
politically.)
For
example, China’s recent claims on the South China Sea have been seen by many as
destabilizing.[6]
Combine this with a massive increase in military spending, particularly on
China’s navy,[7]
and a supply chain analyst may well need to spend significant time analyzing
the risk and associated costs of a bellicose China with control over certain sea
lanes.
While
I certainly don’t think China is currently seeking to secure and close sea
lanes, the geopolitical conflicts arising in and near China have a higher
risk/price tag than those in Mexico (including the many issues with the drug
trade). Anyone seeking a long-term vs. short-term supply chain strategy should take
these risks into account. And there are certainly benefits to many industries –
especially those looking to protect intellectual property- to moving major
operations to Mexico.
Perhaps
this analysis is too bleak; China has certainly shown its ability to be
surprisingly agile and inventive, and its need to maintain a strong economy has
driven change many thought impossible. So what do you think: is Mexico the new
China for long-term supply chain investment? Or will China go on to press its
advantage in economic and labor markets?
[1] Transportation
& Logistics 2030. (n.d.).Volume 1: How will supply chains evolve in an
energy-constrained, low-carbon world?. Retrieved February 9, 2014, from
http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/transportation-logistics/pdf/tl2030_vol1.pdf
[2] NAFTA
at 20: Ready to take off again?. (n.d.). The Economist. Retrieved
February 9, 2014, from http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21592631-two-decades-ago-north-american-free-trade-agreement-got-flying-start-then-it
[3]
Ibid, The Economist.
[4] Time
to rethink offshoring?. (n.d.). The McKinsey Quarterly.
Retrieved February 10, 2014, from http://relooney.fatcow.com/0_New_3551.pdf
[5] Corruption
Perceptions Index 2013 View Results Table View Brochure. (n.d.).Corruption
Perceptions Index 2013. Retrieved February 10, 2014, from
http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/
[6] US
blames China for rising tensions in South China Sea. (n.d.). Financial
Times. Retrieved February 10, 2014, from
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cdc09e14-91a7-11e3-8fb3-00144feab7de.html#axzz2szOPxemb
[7] Military
and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2013 .
(n.d.). Defense.gov.
Retrieved February 10, 2014, from http://www.defense.gov/pubs/2013_china_report_final.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.