About the Author:
Li Xihui, male, Dean, Professor, Doctoral Supervisor, School of Management, Minzu University of China (Beijing 100081).
Yi Shenghui, male, ph.D. student, School of Management, Minzu University of China (Beijing 100081).
Huang Jixin, male, is a lecturer at the School of Management, Minzu University of China, Ph.D. (Beijing 100081).
I. Introduction
Since the 21st century, emerging economies represented by China have grown rapidly. After the 18th Party Congress in 2012, the Communist Party of China officially contributed to the world a new version of globalization, the "Belt and Road" initiative, after arduous exploration. At this time, China's economic globalization led by the Communist Party of China is opening up the development path of taking the initiative to lead economic globalization in the midst of major changes unprecedented in a century. Different from the economic globalization system dominated by Western countries, the fundamental goal of the "Belt and Road" initiative is to build a community with a shared future for mankind, with the proposition of accommodating all countries, equal participation, common progress, mutual benefit and win-win results, and will effectively overcome the shortcomings of the gap between the rich and the poor brought about by traditional globalization and the development trap. As of January 2021, China has signed 205 belt and road cooperation documents with 171 countries and international organizations.
It is worth studying why the "Belt and Road" initiative has become a key link in the domestic and international double cycle in the new development pattern of domestic and international double circulation? How can the Belt and Road Initiative achieve a higher level of opening up to the outside world, thereby forming new advantages in international cooperation and competition? How to verify that the Belt and Road Initiative has enhanced China's position in the world economy, how to measure that the Belt and Road Initiative has made China more closely connected with the world economy, and how to prove that the Belt and Road Initiative provides countries with broader market opportunities? These will be the core questions studied in this paper.
Second, the theoretical analysis of the "Belt and Road" initiative
The globalization promoted by Western countries adheres to the "center-periphery" theory, believing that the developed countries in the West are in a central position, while other participating countries are on the edge of inequality. In the process of globalization, the economic status and economic strength of Western countries are preconditioned at the expense of the interests of other countries. The "Belt and Road" initiative, China's globalization plan to the world, abandons the "center-periphery" theory and advocates accommodating all countries, equal participation, common progress, mutual benefit and win-win results, with the goal of building a community with a shared future for mankind.
1. Scale and scope benefits: The endogenous logic of the Belt and Road Initiative
Like previous globalizations, the endogenous logic of the Belt and Road Initiative is characterized by free trade and the pursuit of a global division of labor with greater economies of scale. From the perspective of the economic division of labor, free trade can be traced back to the classical economic school, the core of which lies in the growing division of labor, focusing on the growing scale of the surplus and its scale. Adam Smith was the first to put forward the theory of absolute superiority, which held that the basis of trade between countries is the difference in absolute superiority. On the basis of the theory of absolute superiority, David Ricardo proposed the theory of comparative advantage. Bettyl Olin further developed the theory of comparative advantage and proposed the theory of factor endowments. Bettier Olin points out that "in each region, exports contain relatively large quantities of production that are cheaper in the region than in other regions, while imports goods that can be produced cheaper in other regions". International trade theory points the way for countries to participate in international trade, that is, each country produces products with its own comparative advantages.
According to Betir Olin, the consequence of regional trade is the equalization of commodity prices, and the prices of factors of production tend to be equalized. That is to say, as trade progresses, the dominant factors of production between regions may no longer have comparative advantages, which will bring a fatal blow to international trade. With the deepening of economic and social development and reform, the development strategy of large-scale entry and exit has also exposed problems, and the original cheap labor factors no longer have comparative advantages in international trade. Under such circumstances, there is an urgent need to change the way of thinking about development. Thanks to the development of globalization after World War II, China has integrated the role of the world's factory into the global division of labor and economic cycle, and the result is that the emerging economies represented by China have changed the overall appearance of economic globalization, and strongly promoted economic globalization conditioned by the balance of power from the 2.0 era to the 3.0 era characterized by the development of the global balance of power (Jinbei, 2016). The Belt and Road Initiative has created a larger platform for expanding the size of the market and for exchange and division of labor (Li Xihui and Arlev, 2018). The "Belt and Road" initiative is proposed precisely because the increasingly developing productive forces need a market with an increasingly large range and no obstacles to the circulation of commodities and production factors, and the ideal state is a global unified market, so that the increasingly progressive productive forces can run freely, and only then will they support the economies of various countries to achieve great development, will bring the greatest welfare to mankind, and the market economy can achieve its core essence (Li Xihui, 2017b).
2. Geopolitics: The External Drivers of the Belt and Road Initiative
The real version of economic globalization dominated by the traditional Western powers is flawed globalization, because the actual geopolitical pattern undermines the theoretical logical basis of economic globalization, which is also the external driving force for the "Belt and Road" initiative. Economic globalization envisions a barrier-free arena with transparent rules and fair adjudication, while the actual geopolitical state is like thorny and dangerous mountains, obstructed roads, and rampant thieves (Jinbei, 2016). The geopolitical view comes from the history, culture, tradition and development model of the nation, and the nation-states that have grown up in different environments have very different geopolitical views, and it is on this basis that Western countries and China have formed the Western model of Shangwu and the Chinese model of economic first and cultural integration (Li Xihui, 2017a). In ShangWu's Western view of geopolitics, the typical views are the theory of land power and sea power, which aims to create an empire that unifies large-scale markets by occupying, dominating and controlling land and sea. From historical experience, it can be seen that the globalization promoted by the traditional Western powers undoubtedly has obvious violent characteristics, which is the process of colonial conquest and the forced submission of underdeveloped nations. Therefore, the era of economic globalization 1.0 characterized by the balance of power among the great powers and the era of economic globalization 2.0, which is characterized by the balance of power, have their own significant defects and injustices, and economic globalization has not reached its ideal state (Jinbei, 2016).
In China's geopolitical view of economic first and cultural integration, the biggest difference between China's nation-state model and the West is that the Chinese nation is a cultural nation rather than a blood nation, and it has a strong inclusiveness rather than exclusivity, a process that promotes integration and abandons war (Li Xihui, 2017a). The "Belt and Road" initiative originated from the ancient overland Silk Road and maritime Silk Road more than 2,000 years ago, has a deep historical and cultural foundation of China's excellent history and culture, is the road of openness and prosperity of the Chinese nation, promotes the convergence and integration between multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural, and forms a Silk Road culture of shared peace and common development (Ouyang Kang, 2018). In the 2nd century BC, the Chinese nation opened the western region, explored the road of globalization, maximized the scale and scope of the allocation of production factors under the level of productivity at that time, and achieved the market space to the extreme, which may be an important reason why ancient China has been leading in traditional science and technology and economic and social development. While benefiting from the benefits brought about by the development of globalization, the Chinese nation has also made outstanding contributions to the world. In fact, in our 1600 years of technological leadership, we have contributed countless innovations to the world. Nowadays, the defects of non-global free flow of production factors manifested in the real version of economic globalization are not only due to economic factors, but also various non-economic factors, which make it difficult for production factors to flow freely around the world, especially to make the global free flow of labor more difficult, of which ethnic and religious factors are particularly important (Li Xihui, 2017a). Therefore, benefiting from China's geopolitical view of economy first and cultural integration, the proposal of the "Belt and Road" initiative will help overcome the shortcomings of the economic globalization model in reality.
In the face of the influence of geopolitics in economic globalization, Jin Bei put forward the theory of domain economics, he believes: "The consciousness of economic rationality does not occur in an 'empty box' space, but in a social environment that has experienced a long history. "Human nature cannot exist as a naked 'rational man' (economic man) without the value and cultural environment of society. Therefore, economic modernization, although it is a process of economic rationalization, is also a process of civilization. The so-called civilization is a complex social and psychological process in which economic rationality, value culture and institutional forms blend together" (Jin Bei, 2019a). In the study of the origin of the phenomenon of domain view, Jin Bei believes that in different business domains, people's values and behavior patterns have different cultural characteristics, due to the different characteristics of institutional forms, determine or influence people's values and economic behaviors, and the institutional form and its characteristics are profoundly affected by traditional culture, it can be said that "culture is the mother of the system", and culture affects people's economic behavior in two dimensions (JinBei, 2019b). This view is also supported by the exposition of the American political scientist Samuel Huntington, who argues that "nations increasingly determine their own interests according to civilization." They usually cooperate or ally with countries that share a similar or common culture to themselves and often come into conflict with countries with different cultures" (Samuel Huntington, 1999). The formation of this increasingly nationalized and civilized world political and economic pattern is inseparable from the trend of the United States becoming weaker and weaker and the world becoming more and more diversified. In this process, as China's position in the world becomes more and more important, the "Belt and Road" initiative is the embodiment of China's version of globalization, by promoting the unique paradigm of China's development to other countries, contributing Chinese wisdom to human development.
3. Community of Shared Future for Mankind: The essential features of the Belt and Road Initiative
The theory of building a community with a shared future for mankind was put forward by President Xi Jinping in an important speech delivered by the United Nations Headquarters in 2015, advocating that "to promote the democratization of international relations, we cannot engage in 'one country hegemony' or 'several parties co-governing', the fate of the world should be jointly controlled by all countries, international rules should be jointly written by all countries, global affairs should be jointly governed by all countries, and the fruits of development should be shared by all countries." This reflects the reasons put forward by the theory of a community with a shared future for mankind, for a long time, under the framework of economic globalization dominated by the traditional western powers, based on the development concepts of "profit maximization", "efficiency priority" and "center-periphery", it is difficult to promote the development of global inclusive balance, and it is impossible to make up for the widening gap between countries and regions between rich and poor (Pei Changhong and Liu Bin, 2020). This is because "the great geographical discoveries that originated in the 15th century opened the prelude to the expansion of the Western countries abroad, and the two industrial revolutions that broke out in the 18th and 19th centuries laid the foundation for the capitalist world system and formed an international structure dominated by the West... The current global order still reflects the expansion of the capitalist system around the world, which is mainly characterized by the traditional advantages of Western countries in the political and economic fields, and is manifested in the fact that Western countries represented by Europe and the United States are at a higher level in the international division of labor, and they have the main right to speak in important global governance mechanisms" (Yang Na and Wang Huiting, 2020). Western-led globalization is based on a "center-periphery" worldview, which holds that Western countries are the center and other countries are on the edge of inequality. The development model of "center-periphery" is inherently unequal, and the gap between the center and the periphery will become wider and wider. The globalized Chinese version is not a "center-periphery" system, but upholds the principle of mutual benefit and win-win results, and countries are mutually centered and peripheral to promote the common development of all countries.
The existing macroeconomic theory contains two ways of allocating resources, which are a compromise between efficiency and fairness, a compromise between planning and the market, and it even tolerates a small number of governments to issue small and limited challenges to the rules of the market economy, such as the use of tariff measures by the government to protect the country's infant industries. It is because of these compromises and compromises that humanity has been able to achieve as much as half a century of peace and tranquility. With the advancement of science and technology, large enterprises now have the ability to push production and operation abroad, which will get rid of government coercion and thus easily improve efficiency. At a time when the tide of economic globalization is surging, transnational governments cannot be established, and even with the EU as an example, we cannot expect to establish transnational governments in the short term. At a time when economic and political matching breaks the original pattern, human politics, society, and culture are still based on the state, and under the strong pressure of citizens, governments will find new ways to stabilize, both beneficial to all countries and harmful to other countries (Li Xihui, 2003). Both theory and practice have proved that there are flaws in using existing Western economic theories to guide international trade practice, and we can only use Chinese economic theory to guide our own practice. The theory of a community with a shared future for mankind can adapt to the highly developed state of communication and connection in the world today, realize the criticism and innovation of Western universal values, and help build a new governance order of "consultation, co-construction and sharing" (Liu Wei and Wang Wen, 2019). The theory of a community with a shared future for mankind provides a fundamental and basic ideological premise and value orientation for global governance. The Belt and Road Initiative closely links China's development with the development of other countries and regions in the world, blends with the vastst regions and countries with inclusive cultural values, adheres to the values of sustainable development that are in line with the well-being of the whole of mankind, and deepens the rationality of values into the context of common development, which will ultimately promote the continuous progress of the entire human society (Li Xihui and Chen Jingzhao, 2019). Therefore, the community of human destiny is the node that triggers the "Belt and Road" initiative to interconnect and communicate the domestic economic cycle and the international economic cycle, and it is also the core connotation and ultimate goal of the new development pattern of the domestic and international dual cycle, which is manifested as closer economic ties and broader market opportunities in the "Belt and Road" initiative.
Third, the current status of the "Belt and Road" initiative research
At present, the relevant research on the "Belt and Road" initiative and domestic and international double circulation at home and abroad mainly focuses on the following three aspects.
1. A study on the impact of the Belt and Road Initiative on the domestic economic cycle
First, the study of the domestic economic cycle driven by import and export trade under the "Belt and Road" initiative, Wang Ruifeng and Li Shuang (2018) used the method of breakpoint regression, combined with panel data from countries along the "Belt and Road", to test the role of the "Belt and Road" initiative in promoting China's economic development. Xu Chenghong et al. (2017) pointed out that import trade has a significant positive impact on the optimization and upgrading of industrial structure, and this impact is achieved through the intermediary effect of physical capital, human capital and technological progress. Zhang Shixiang et al. (2019) took the economic and demographic panel data of 62 countries along the "Belt and Road" from 2001 to 2016 as a sample, and through grouping and combining the EKC test method, it was found that there is a long-term balanced dynamic relationship between bilateral trade and economic growth between China and countries along the Belt and Road. The second is the study on the impact of the domestic economic cycle driven by foreign investment under the "Belt and Road" initiative. Wu Zhe et al. (2015) calculated that the reverse technology spillover of China's direct investment in developing countries had a significant positive impact on total factor productivity based on China's outward FDI data from 2003 to 2013. Yao Zhanqi (2017) pointed out that the international R&D capital stock obtained by the import trade of countries along the Belt and Road has a significant positive role in promoting the rationalization of industrial structure. Research by Yanxin Hu et al. (2019) shows that direct investment in countries along the Belt and Road has significantly promoted China's green economic growth. Zheng Linan et al. (2020) believe that China's outward direct investment in countries along the "Belt and Road" can significantly improve the manufacturing value chain.
2. A study on the impact of the Belt and Road Initiative on the international economic cycle
The first is the impact of the "Belt and Road" initiative on countries along the route. The interaction between OFDI and the economic growth of countries along the Belt and Road (Huang Liangxiong and Qian Xinbei, 2016), the impact on the upgrading of industrial structure and economic growth of countries along the Route (Jianisa and Lei Hongzhen, 2019), the impact on the status of countries along the Belt and Road on the global value chain (Cao Jianping and Zhang Miao, 2020), the impact on the level of economic globalization of countries along the Route (Liu Yazhen and Yang Zhong, 2019), and the impact on the balance of payments of countries along the Route (Shi Huihong et al., 2019), The impact on the poverty reduction effect and employment growth of countries along the Belt and Road (Zhang Yuan, 2018), the impact on the environment of countries along the Belt and Road (Liu Naiquan and Dai Jin, 2017), the impact on the infrastructure of countries along the Belt and Road (Hu Zaiyong et al., 2019), etc. The second is the impact of the "Belt and Road" initiative on the mainland's foreign trade, economic interaction and value chain. Ren Zhicheng and Zhu Wenbo (2018) pointed out that OFDI can promote China's import and export trade with countries along the "Belt and Road". Wisdom (2020) On the basis of constructing a trade facilitation index system, empirical research shows that the level of trade facilitation has a significant positive role in promoting mainland exports. Yu Cuiping and Wang Meichang (2015) argue that China's trade partnership with countries along the Belt and Road is getting closer and closer, while there is a significant positive spillover effect on China's economic growth.
3. A Study on the Belt and Road Initiative and China's International Division of Labor
At present, the research on the "Belt and Road" initiative and China's international division of labor status mainly includes: Sun Tianhao and Wang Yan (2016) based on the 2014 input-output table and import and export trade data, compiled the input-output model of economic interaction between multinational trade, and made a preliminary attempt at the research on economic interaction under the "Belt and Road" initiative. Zheng Zhi et al. (2019) analyze the evolution of China's ability to obtain added value from the "Belt and Road" region using input-output analysis, value-added decomposition and network analysis from the perspective of global production networks. Li Junjiu and Cai Wanlin (2018) mainly focused on global value chains, studied THE POSITION OFDI and China in the global value chain, and the results showed that OFDI can significantly enhance China's position in the global value chain. Huang Xianhai and Yu Xiao (2018) pointed out that the "Belt and Road" has significantly enhanced China's position in the global value chain, and the status of the global value chain of countries along the route has also been improved to a certain extent. Ma Xiaodong and He Lunzhi (2018) found that not all countries integrated into global value chains can achieve industrial structure upgrading. After dividing the countries along the "Belt and Road" into four different regions, the empirical results show that only the integration of China's East Asia and Southeast Asia region into the global value chain can promote industrial structure upgrading. Cao Jianping and Zhang Miao (2020) used the social network analysis method to construct the direct investment network of countries along the "Belt and Road", exploring the impact of the characteristics of countries in the investment network on their position in the global value chain.
The above literature on the "Belt and Road" initiative and the domestic and international double cycle provides a solid foundation for the research of this paper, but there are also some shortcomings, one is that the current literature lacks the implementation effect of the "Belt and Road" initiative from the macro perspective of economic globalization. Second, the current literature on the "Belt and Road" initiative international division of labor status research data has a great limitation, basically rely on WIOD international input and output data, because the WIOD international input and output table is currently only updated to 2014, and the "Belt and Road" initiative has just begun to implement, so the current research results are not enough to explain the implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative and effect. Third, the current literature rarely distinguishes between the analysis of the effects of economic globalization led by the "Belt and Road" initiative and the economic globalization led by traditional Western powers, mainly focusing on the study of the status of the global value chain, and there is no in-depth analysis of the effects of the "Belt and Road" initiative on diversification, balance of power development, decentralization and multipolarization. Fourth, the current literature lacks empirical analysis of the effect of the "Belt and Road" initiative in building a community with a shared future for mankind. Therefore, based on the above theoretical analysis, the following research hypotheses are proposed for testing:
H1: The Belt and Road Initiative can achieve a higher level of opening up and form a new advantage in international cooperation and competition.
H2: The Belt and Road Initiative has brought China closer to the world economy.
H3: The Belt and Road Initiative has elevated China's position in the world economy.
H4: The Belt and Road Initiative provides broader market opportunities for countries.
4. Empirical analysis and testing of the "Belt and Road" initiative
The time nodes selected for the empirical test are: the five years before the "Belt and Road" initiative was proposed in 2008, which was used to compare the situation before the implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative; in 2013, the "Belt and Road" initiative was officially proposed and 5 years after the implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative in 2018, which was used to reflect the development of economic ties and market opportunities between countries in the "Belt and Road" initiative.
In 2020, due to the impact of the new crown pneumonia epidemic, the global economic development has seriously declined. Therefore, when selecting the sample, the top countries were selected as the research sample of this paper with reference to the 2019 GDP of countries released by the World Bank. At the same time, considering the representativeness of data selection, try to avoid the situation where there are multiple samples in the same area. The countries selected were: the United States (USA), China (CHN), Japan (JPN), Germany (DEU), Italy (ITA), Russia (RUS), South Korea (KOR), Australia (AUS), Indonesia (IDN), Turkey (TUR) and Poland (POL). These 11 countries can be further divided according to whether they are participating countries in the Belt and Road Initiative.
In the process of data selection, since the latest version of the international input-output data WIOD has only been updated to 2014, it is difficult to accurately reflect the impact of the implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative on countries. To this end, this paper integrates the WIOD database with the United Nations Trade Database (UN Comtrade), constructs the WIOD-UN Comtrade database, unifies the unit of measurement, and forms a new input-output data table that meets the calculation requirements, which is used as the source of the empirical research data in this paper. Among them, for the intermediates and final products used by countries for their own use, the input-output in 2008 and 2013 can be directly derived from THE WIOD data, and the extrapolated forecasts in 2018 are based on the historical data of 2000-2014 (the goodness of fit of all the forecasts is greater than 0.9); for the trade in intermediate and final goods between the two countries, the input-output of 2008 and 2014 can be combined with the PROPORTION of intermediates and final products in the current year calculated from THE WIOD, combined with UN Comtrade's trade volume in the current year is calculated, and the value of 2018 is approximately replaced by the average of 2000-2014, and can be calculated by combining the trade volume between UN Comtrade and the two countries in 2018.
1. Economic interaction coefficient matrix
According to the input-output tables of 11 countries in 2008, 2013 and 2018, combined with the input-output model, the direct consumption coefficient matrix of each year is calculated to reflect the value of each unit of output of each country, and the corresponding amount of value of how many units of value need to be consumed by exporting countries, which can be interpreted to some extent as the economic interaction between countries (Sun Tianhao and Wang Yan, 2016). Based on this, in subsequent analyses, the direct consumption coefficient is collectively referred to as the economic interaction coefficient. It should be noted that there are two coefficients of economic interaction between the two countries, which is similar to the volume of trade between the two countries can be further divided into imports and exports.
First, analyze the changes in the economic interaction coefficient from a qualitative point of view. From the change of economic interaction coefficient from 2013 to 2018, it can be seen that the number of economic interaction coefficients of non-Belt and Road Initiative participating countries for "Belt and Road" participating countries has risen (18) more than the number of declines (10), that is, non-Belt and Road Initiative participants are increasingly dependent on "Belt and Road" participating countries; "Belt and Road" initiative participating countries are more and more dependent on non-Belt and Road Initiative participants The number of declines in the economic interaction coefficients of the participating countries (15) is higher than the number of increases (13), indicating that overall, the number of BELT and Road participating countries is becoming less and less dependent on non-BELT and Road participating countries. Therefore, from the perspective of qualitative analysis, it can be seen that under the influence of anti-globalization, the degree of economic interaction between various countries and western traditional industrial powers is gradually decreasing, and the implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative has gradually reduced the dependence of countries along the route on western traditional industrial powers, but the degree of economic interaction between countries along the route has been continuously enhanced, the practical effect of the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind has initially emerged, and the development links between countries have become closer and closer. At the same time, the dependence of Western traditional industrial powers on the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" initiative is rising, indicating that countries along the "Belt and Road" have also integrated into the international trade environment and have had a significant impact on the trade of western traditional industrial powers.
Second, analyze the changes in the economic interaction coefficient from a quantitative point of view. For the economic interaction coefficient matrix, it can be analyzed from the horizontal and vertical levels, and the changes in each year can be compared and analyzed. In 2008, when other countries need to produce a unit of value, the largest amount of value imported from China is South Korea, followed by Indonesia, Japan, etc.; when China needs to produce a unit of value, it needs to consume Japan, followed by South Korea, the United States, etc. In 2013, when other countries need to produce a unit of value, the largest amount of value imported from China is South Korea, followed by Indonesia, the United States, etc.; when China needs to output a unit of value, it needs to consume the largest amount of value imported from other countries for South Korea, followed by Japan, Australia, etc. In 2018, when other countries need to produce a unit of value, the largest amount of value imported from China needs to be consumed is South Korea, followed by Indonesia, Poland, etc.; when China needs to output a unit of value, it needs to consume the largest amount of import value from other countries for South Korea, followed by Japan, Australia, etc. By comparing the changes in the economic interaction coefficient between years, it can be found that with the exception of South Korea, over time, the remaining "Belt and Road" participating countries need to consume more and more value imported from China for each unit of value produced, thus indicating that China's position in the "Belt and Road" network has been continuously consolidated. Although South Korea's input-output coefficient for China has been declining, South Korea is still the country with the largest amount of value imported from China per unit of output value, which further verifies the consolidation of China's economic position.
The average economic interaction coefficient between the participants in the Belt and Road Initiative and the traditional industrial countries in the West for China is increasing year by year, thus indicating that China's position in the world economy is becoming more and more important. At the same time, the average economic interaction coefficient of all countries for most of the countries participating in the "Belt and Road" initiative has increased, which shows that the economic ties between the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" initiative and other countries are also getting closer and closer. The results of the comprehensive qualitative and quantitative analysis show that the smooth implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative has continuously improved China's position in the world economy and verified the hypothesis H3 proposed in this paper. The change in the economic interaction coefficient of the countries participating in the "Belt and Road" initiative is basically on the rise over time, thus indicating that the economic interaction between countries is getting closer and closer, and the economic ties between the countries participating in the "Belt and Road" initiative are becoming closer and closer, which verifies the hypothesis H2 proposed in this paper.
2. Network density analysis
Network density can be used to reflect the closeness of economic exchanges between countries in the network. Based on the calculated matrix of economic interaction coefficients, this paper can construct the trade networks of selected Belt and Road Initiative participants. According to the calculation results, from the implementation of the "Belt and Road" Initiative in 2008 to the implementation of the "Belt and Road" Initiative in 2018 for 5 years, the network density of the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" Initiative has increased year by year, indicating that the trade relations between the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" Initiative have become closer, and the "Belt and Road" Initiative has provided a broader and freer global production network and a broader market opportunity. Thus, the hypothesis H2 proposed in this paper is further verified, and the hypothesis H4 is also verified.
3. Network centralization analysis
In a centralized research network, if a country is central in the network, the more influential it is in the entire network. From the results of the relative degree center, it can be seen that China's relative degree center has always been 1, in the leading position, and has been far ahead of the second place South Korea and the third place Russia for many years. There is no need to shy away from this, and the more responsibilities that come with higher status are also what China needs to bear and face (Pei Changhong and Liu Hongjian, 2020). At the same time, the relative degree center of Poland and Turkey is increasing year by year. It is worth noting that the position of all countries in the network is showing a trend of increasing year by year, which can be reflected in the change in the value of the economic interaction coefficient. For Poland and Turkey, there has been a qualitative change in their position in the network, that is, the coefficient values with more countries in the network exceed the set median standard, resulting in changes in their values; Indonesia, Italy, South Korea and Russia have increased their coefficient values with countries in the network, resulting in quantitative changes, but failing to cause a qualitative leap, so that no change can be seen from the relative degree of centrality.
The relative degree center potential index reflects the changes in the relationship between countries in the network. If the relative degree central potential index increases, it means that the countries in the network have a tendency to develop unipolar, that is, the situation that the stronger the stronger and the weaker the weaker. From the analysis results, it can be seen that in the trade network formed by the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" initiative, the relative degree central potential index has been in a state of decline, thus indicating that the "Belt and Road" initiative has successfully fulfilled the commitment of "strengthening economic cooperation and promoting common development" and avoiding the danger of the world moving towards unipolarization. The essence of the multipolar pattern is structural change, and the core of this structural change is the "Belt and Road" initiative, or "de-American centralization", which shows a richer level and looser structure on a global scale (Cui Liru, 2016). The Belt and Road Initiative has also achieved remarkable results in the process of global "decentralization".
According to the results of the analysis of network centrality, China has always been at the center of the "Belt and Road" network, while the gap between countries and countries is gradually narrowing between years. The operation of the contemporary world economy has gradually surpassed the traditional "center-periphery" model, and is gradually transforming into a "double circulation" system mediated by China and connecting developed and developing countries, of which China is in the core and intermediate position, and also plays a "node" role (Liu Wei and Wang Wen, 2019). It is precisely because of the "Belt and Road" initiative as the intersection of domestic and international double circulation, China's status in the world economy has been gradually improved, at the same time, China has also played the role of "node", the gap between other "Belt and Road" countries and China is gradually narrowing, China provides a broad platform, so that other countries are also involved in it, China's own development has also led to the development of other countries. Therefore, the hypothesis H3 and H4 proposed herein are verified.
4. Value added analysis
For the analysis of the value-added process, the following two analytical ideas are adopted:
(1) Geographical decomposition of value appreciation. The article mainly explores the value appreciation of the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" Initiative, so with reference to the practice of Timmer et al. (2015), the value added is decomposed into: domestic value appreciation, "Belt and Road" initiative value appreciation (except for the rest of the "Belt and Road" countries), and Western industrial countries traditional globalization value appreciation (Australia, Germany, Japan and the United States).
Comparing the proportion of countries in the value-added VA_OBOR of the "Belt and Road" initiative in each year, it can be seen that the proportion of VA_OBOR value appreciation obtained by China from the "Belt and Road" initiative in each year has always been in the lowest position of the 7 countries, and has been smaller than the proportion of value appreciation obtained by other countries, and with the proposal and implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative, the VA_OBOR value added by China from the "Belt and Road" initiative has decreased year by year, while other countries have received from the "Belt and Road" "The value added of the VA_OBOR received by the initiative has increased significantly. On the other hand, china's average share of regional value added from the Belt and Road Initiative is also significantly smaller than that of the other six countries. Among them, South Korea received the highest average proportion of regional value appreciation from the "Belt and Road", at 0.2459, more than 6 times that of China; the smallest Turkey also reached 0.0647, close to 2 times that of China. Therefore, from the perspective of the two-way flow of added value, China's contribution to the regional value appreciation of the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" is greater than That of China from the participating countries of the "Belt and Road", that is, China's ability to contribute to the increase in the added value of the countries participating in the "Belt and Road" is higher than China's ability to obtain added value from them (Zheng Zhi et al., 2019). The "Belt and Road" initiative is different from the traditional globalization led by Western industrial countries, overcomes the shortcomings such as the gap between the rich and the poor and the development trap brought about by the traditional globalization, reflects the new characteristics of the "balanced development of globalization", and is also a strong response to and factual refutation of the distorted and smeared "Belt and Road" initiative speeches such as "neocolonialism" and "debt trap theory" in Western countries. From the analysis results, it can be seen that China provides a higher level of opening up through the "Belt and Road" production network, providing broad market opportunities for countries along the "Belt and Road", the benefits of countries along the "Belt and Road" are rising year by year, and China continues to make greater contributions to the economic growth of countries along the "Belt and Road", so the hypothesis H1 and hypothesis H4 proposed in this paper can be verified by facts.
(2) Reflect the specific sources of value appreciation through the value decomposition of total exports. Referring to the decomposition process of value appreciation by Koopman et al. (2014), the total value appreciation can be decomposed into 9 parts, of which: the first item is the value appreciation brought about by the direct export of the final product; the second item is the export intermediate, the importing country uses the intermediate product to produce the final product, and the value appreciation brought by the part that is finally consumed in the importing country; the third item is the export intermediate, the importing country uses the intermediate product to produce the final product, And in a third country other than these two countries, the value added brought about by the final consumption part; the fourth item is the export of intermediate goods, which are produced and processed in other countries to become the value added of the final goods returned to the country and consumed domestically; item 5 is the value added brought about by the export of intermediate goods, which are finally returned to the domestic part in the form of intermediate goods; item 6 is the double counting part brought about by the export of domestically produced intermediate goods; and item 7 is the foreign added value of the final goods exported Item 8 is the foreign value added of intermediate goods exports, and item 9 is the double counting part of the export of intermediate goods produced by other countries. Differences in the size of decomposition projects across countries provide a way to measure the differences in the roles played by countries in global production networks.
The comparison shows that a large part of the total exports of the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" initiative are foreign added value, while most of the exports of western traditional industrial countries reflect their domestic added value. We break down the duplicate accounting share (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) into two parts: the domestic value added returns to the domestic (4, 5, 6) through imports and the foreign value added (7, 8, 9) and recalculates the ratio of these two parts to the duplicate accounting share. Changes in these two parts of the value can reflect the position of countries in the global production chain (Koopman et al., 2014). The higher the proportion of domestic added value, the lower the corresponding proportion of foreign added value, which indicates that the country is at the head of the global production chain; conversely, it indicates that it is at the tail end of the global production chain. Through the analysis, it is found that the average share of domestic added value returned to China through imports in western traditional industrial countries is only 13.7916% (2008), 12.0608% (2013) and 11.5498% (2018), while the proportion of foreign value added is 86.2084% (2008), 87.9392% (2013) and 88.4502% (2018). The average share of domestic value added returned to China through imports of Belt and Road Initiative participants was only 11.7845% (2008), 12.4459% (2013) and 12.5102% (2018), while the proportion of foreign value added was 88.2155% (2008), 87.5541% (2013) and 87.4898% (2018).
From the analysis results, it can be seen that the position of the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" initiative in the global production chain is constantly improving, and in 2013, it surpassed the traditional industrial countries in the West and was in a leading position. The lagging level of economic development and the inability to participate in international economic cooperation are mutually causal, and the openness of the "Belt and Road" initiative has helped to break this vicious circle, allowing countries to climb to the high end of the global value chain, reducing the import of high-value-added intermediates, and objectively shortening the length of the global value chain (Li Xiangyang, 2018). Therefore, the smooth implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative has given all countries the opportunity to participate in global trade, and the position of countries in the global production chain is also increasing. The Belt and Road Initiative has achieved a higher level of opening up, forming a new advantage in international cooperation and competition, and the hypothesis H1 proposed in this paper has been further verified.
At the same time, it must be pointed out that the current "Belt and Road" initiative countries participate in the global trade network more and more closely, and their position in the global production chain is also rising. However, it must be noted that the countries in the "Belt and Road" initiative are still in a relatively inferior position in the global production chain, and the reason why this paper calculates such a result is that the "Belt and Road" 7 countries and non-"Belt and Road" countries selected in this article are selected according to the highest standards of GDP, but from a global perspective, the gap between non-"Belt and Road" countries is small, and the "Belt and Road" countries have a higher level of development (the 7 countries selected in this article). There are also countries with low economic performance, which are very different from the 7 countries selected. Therefore, although the "Belt and Road" initiative has made great achievements, it is still necessary to continuously expand the scale of the market, promote the free flow of production factors, create a greater platform for exchange and division of labor, and promote the further development of the participating countries of the "Belt and Road" initiative under the fundamental guidance of the community with a shared future for mankind.
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
This paper uses input-output analysis, social network analysis and value-added decomposition to discuss the implementation effect of the "Belt and Road" initiative on building a community with a shared future for mankind from the macro perspective of economic globalization, and finds that: First, the "Belt and Road" initiative has achieved a higher level of opening up to the outside world and formed a new advantage in international cooperation and competition. With the smooth implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative, all countries can participate in the global trade network, and the position of participating countries in the global production chain is also increasing. Second, the Belt and Road Initiative has brought China closer to the world economy. The analysis results of the economic interaction coefficient profoundly verified this point, and the economic interaction coefficient of various countries for China showed an upward trend year by year. This is also evidenced by the fact that economic ties are more closely linked in the calculation of network density. Third, the Belt and Road Initiative has elevated China's position in the world economy. The economic interaction coefficient of various countries with China is increasing year by year, and the results of the calculation of network centrality show that China has always been in the central position of the network, far ahead of other countries in the "Belt and Road" network. Fourth, the Belt and Road Initiative provides countries with broader market opportunities. The results of value appreciation decomposition show that the regional value appreciation obtained by China from the "Belt and Road" production network is decreasing, while the regional value appreciation obtained by other countries from the "Belt and Road" is increasing year by year and is always greater than that of China, and China's contribution in the "Belt and Road" production network is greater than the income.
Today's world is in a century of unprecedented changes, opportunities and challenges coexist, China proposed and implemented the "Belt and Road" initiative to make the countries along the route more closely linked, market opportunities are broader, this is the first time in the history of human economic globalization by the Chinese put forward and carried out by the global practice, but also the concept of a community of human destiny landmark results and practical judgment, its implementation results determine the future world pattern and the development mode of economic globalization. Based on the research results, this paper puts forward the following suggestions: First, take the "Belt and Road" initiative as a breakthrough in the mutual promotion of domestic and international dual cycles, rely on the "Belt and Road" initiative, continuously improve the new development pattern of double circulation, and achieve a higher level of opening up. Second, take the "Belt and Road" initiative as an economic practice and model project of the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind, reshape the concept and governance mechanism of global governance, promote the in-depth cooperation between the political, economic and cultural levels of countries along the route, and overcome the shortcomings of the gap between the rich and the poor and the development trap brought about by traditional globalization. Through the implementation of the "Belt and Road" initiative, we will create economic, political, cultural and social networks for close exchanges for all countries, promote the mutual integration and development of cultures in different countries and regions around the world, promote mutual exchanges and cognition, mutual openness and tolerance among the people of all countries, and deepen the value rationality of the community of destiny and sustainable development into the context of globalization, and further promote mankind to a better future.
Source: Regional Economic Review, Issue 1, 2022
Editor: Ziyi Li
Proofreading: Qin Sufeng
Audit: Lei lu
Editor-in-Chief: Deng Zhuo
For more highlights, see "Belt and Road Report (Chinese and English)"↓↓↓
Welcome to subscribe and invite cooperation
National unified serial number: CN 51-1788/F
ISSN 2096-2886
Postal code: 62-625
Contact number: (028) 86523772
News Thread: (028) 85471528
Submission Email: [email protected]
Contact: Xiao Lu
Disclaimer: 1. Where the source is "Belt and Road Report", the copyright belongs to the "Belt and Road Report" magazine, any third-party reprint should indicate "Source: Belt and Road Report"; 2. The purpose of reprinting other media works is to convey more information, and does not mean that this journal endorses its views or is responsible for its authenticity. Any third party must retain the "source" when reprinting; 3. If copyright issues are involved, please contact our journal with the corresponding copyright certificate, and after verification, you will pay the remuneration in accordance with relevant regulations; 4. If you need to contact our journal due to the content of the work, copyright and other issues, please do so within 30 days from the date of occurrence of the cause.