On June 24, the student cohort gathered in Shanghai for the program’s kickoff. While in Shanghai, students toured the store and warehouse of the innovative grocery chain model, Freshippo. Next, students learned about cutting-edge environmental initiatives and spoke directly with young professionals at Ant Finance. The Shanghai leg of the trip also featured a tour of the Luckin Coffee factory, which is the largest roastary in Asia, and a networking dinner with local Stanford alumni.

“It was incredible talking to people in very high positions of power in these digital companies that we took tours of, for example, the Ant group or even some of the manufacturing companies we went to...that the core thesis of their drive for profit, it's underpinned by, ‘we need to be environmentally friendly.’” Arshia Mehta, a management science and engineering major going into consulting, reflected on these visits. 

From Shanghai, students traveled to Deqing, a prosperous rural county in the Yangtze river delta region, where they explored a local health clinic and a pearl farm responsible for a sizable portion of global pearl production. From Deqing, students traveled to the nearby township of Tongxiang, where they dove into China’s dynamic manufacturing sector through informative conversations with factory personnel and tours of a conveyor belt factory and fiber glass company. 

The program cohort then traveled to Xi’an, where they had the opportunity to marvel at the Terracotta Warriors and explore the city’s Muslim Quarter. From urban Xi’an, students rode a bus through tunnels and over mountains towards the rural county of Ningshan, where they visited a local parenting center, rural agricultural communities, and local hospitals. Students also visited local households where they conversed with villagers and families to learn more about rural life in Ningshan.

“Everybody wanted their children to go to college, everybody wanted to see a better future and how to help for that future,” said first year political science major Garrett Molloy, “that reminds me – no matter how distant we seem politically, people are actually very similar.”

Finally, after traveling overnight on a sleeper train, students arrived in Beijing. While in China’s capital, the cohort toured the newly operational Xiaomi EV factory, engaged with students from Tsinghua University High School and Peking University, and spoke directly with the country’s stock market regulators. Students also joined the 4th of July celebration hosted by the U.S. Embassy, where they were greeted by the U.S. Ambassador to China, Nicholas Burns.

Reflecting on her conversation with the Ambassador, Amaya Marion, a junior studying international relations, said, “This trip makes me more certain that I do want to do something in the future with U.S.-China relations.”

The student cohort also had ample opportunity to explore China’s culture and history throughout the program. They visited a paleolithic archaeological site, learned to make traditional Chinese rice cakes, practiced the art of Chinese calligraphy, and visited the Zhujiajiao Water Town. The cohort also explored traditional indigo tye-dyeing practices and cloisonné, an ancient technique for decorating metalwork with colored enamel material.

Students not only gained new insights from the cultural and business visits, they also learned from one another. Stella Meier, Stanford junior studying international relations, remarked, “this is a really remarkable opportunity to see parts of China that otherwise wouldn't be accessible to me.”

Having experienced urban and rural China firsthand over the course of two weeks, students walked away with a deeper and more nuanced understanding of China’s economy and people that, according to one student, “fundamentally reshaped my global perspective.” To continue facilitating transformative student exchanges with China, planning for SCCEI’s second annual Summer Program is already well underway.
 

Watch the Program Highlights 

Visit the program page for more program details and future program announcements.

Economic Growth is No Longer China’s Top Priority

A panel of economists from the U.S. and China agreed that China's economy is at a structural turning point where economic growth is no longer the primary objective of the government. Instead, the new focus appears to be on building a modern industrial system that prioritizes state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and state entities over the private sector whose dynamism has fueled past decades of growth.

Panelists agreed that in this new context, policymaking will be more important than ever. But the evidence suggests China’s government is abandoning its former tolerance for policy experimentation at the local level and embracing centrally formulated “moonshot” objectives driven by the state. Meanwhile, policies seeking to drive domestic consumption appear to be taking a back seat, as cautious households protect their savings and wrestle with losses in the troubled property sector.

Further complicating the picture are cash-strapped local governments. Provinces and municipalities that once financed themselves with land sales face severe fiscal strain in the wake of China’s property bust, with debts near 100% of GDP. One panelist shared analysis showing some cities face debts exceeding 800% of their annual budgets, underfunded pension systems, and reductions in civil servant benefits of up to 30%.

Genuine GDP growth on the order of 5% per year could help China grow out of its problems but no panelist was able to say with confidence what sectors could replace the property sector in driving that level of growth. While the panelists agreed we may not be at “peak China,” the country’s leadership is taking a major gamble by empowering the state sector and doubling down on manufacturing, while doing little to reassure private business and households. 

The Evolving View from Europe

China’s apparent aim to export its way out of trouble has caused a fundamental shift in Europe’s approach to the country, according to panelists from Germany and France. In response to a flood of commodity and green tech imports, the panelists point out that Europe has steadily developed and deployed policy tools like tariffs to combat the challenges posed by China’s industrial policy.

At the same time, they were careful to emphasize that Europe must also learn from China in sectors where it has surged ahead of European counterparts. One panelist deemed China “a fitness center” for foreign firms that not only draws on high levels of state support but also on a world-class pool of high-end engineers and businesses honed by the demanding Chinese consumer. Foreign firms can learn from Chinese competitors to be faster in production and take more risks. German car companies, for example, are in China not for the market, but instead to unlearn how to build traditional cars and learn how to build “mobile phones on wheels” – the electric vehicles that China’s firms lead the world in producing. 

Tech Competition with the U.S. Heats Up, Fueling Unintended Consequences

Panelists from Silicon Valley and U.S. business groups highlighted the U.S. government’s multiplying efforts to hem in China’s tech ambitions through use of export controls on advanced semiconductors, onshoring with the CHIPS act, and impending controls on outbound investments, artificial intelligence, cloud services, data flows, and biotech.

They asserted that though these measures have hurt China’s tech ecosystem and exacerbated a flow of entrepreneurial talent out of China, they have also spurred a series of unintended consequences. For example, many Chinese venture capitalists have decamped to Japan and Singapore, where they comprise a new generation adept at reading China’s policies and identifying niches to found startups where American funds are barred from playing. U.S. tech controls have also induced consolidation around China’s “national champion” firms like Huawei, which has seen profits jump, while market share for American tech firms active in China like Apple have only declined.

As for generative AI, panelists asserted that China will remain persistently behind the U.S. by two to four years, partly due to lack of access to best-in-class chips and other hardware, but also because the unpredictable nature of generative AI is unpalatable to China’s leaders seeking control over politics, society, and culture. Nevertheless, China may still jump ahead in other applications of AI, like self-driving tech, advanced manufacturing, and robotics. A case in point: China’s tremendous manufacturing capacity offers abundant use cases to train AI in advanced manufacturing.

No Easy Solutions for Demographic, Labor Market Trends

A panel of economists and sociologists highlighted troubling, longer-term trends in China’s labor force. A panelist from China presented new research showing that the rapid advancement of AI is threatening China’s white-collar jobs and causing dramatic changes in the manufacturing sector, including declining skill requirements for blue-collar workers and a steady rise in unstable, short-term employment for unskilled workers. She pointed out that the proportion of China’s college graduates taking jobs in the formal sector (i.e., salaried positions with benefits) has been declining since 2013, with more women entering these roles and consequently delaying childbearing. This trend contributes to China’s precipitously declining birth rate (from 18 million children born in 2017 to just 11 million in 2021), saddling the country with an aging society for the foreseeable future. Other panelists emphasized the hundreds of millions of underemployed rural Chinese and uneven progress in China’s universal education as posing significant obstacles to sustainable growth with few easy solutions.

Grim Outlook for U.S.-China Relations

Two panels of political scientists and historians pointed out that China’s apparent shift away from the market is a feature, not a bug, of current leader Xi Jinping’s administration. They asserted that China’s economic liberalization of the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s was never a goal in itself, but rather a means to generate the material basis required to keep the ruling regime in power. Now, decades of growth have made it possible for China’s leaders to reembrace central planning to harness “new productive forces” in the industries of the future, harden supply chains, and extend social controls. In doing so, the leadership is purposefully choosing not to empower China’s consumers and households, and instead preparing for prolonged confrontation with the U.S., no matter the long-term cost to the economy. In this era of competition, cooperation, even when desirable by either the U.S. or China, remains difficult because both sides fear openness to cooperation will be exploited as a vulnerability by the other.

Letting Data Take the Lead

The throughline of the conference was that empirical research is essential for understanding the complex dynamics of China’s economy and politics. Data-driven research helps decode the nuanced impacts of policy changes, technological advancements, demographic trends, and more. By providing a platform for interdisciplinary exchange, SCCEI aims to put empirical research at center stage to enhance understanding of China’s current trajectory and inform more robust and adaptive policy to navigate future challenges.

 
Stanford Affiliated Panelists

Paul Gregory is a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the Cullen Professor Emeritus in the Department of Economics at the University of Houston, a Research Fellow at the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin, and Emeritus Chair of the International Advisory Board of the Kiev School of Economics.

Zhiguo He is the James Irvin Miller Professor of Finance at the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University.

Hongbin Li is the Co-director of Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions, and a Senior Fellow of Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford Unviersity.

Jennifer Pan is the Sir Robert Ho Tung Professor of Chinese Studies, Professor of Communication and (by courtesy) Political Science, and a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute at Stanford University.

Scott Rozelle is the Co-director of Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions and the Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research at Stanford University.

Joseph Torigian is a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is an Assistant Professor at American University in Washington, a Global Fellow at the Wilson Center, and a Center Associate of the Lieberthal-Rogel Center for Chinese Studies at the University of Michigan.

Guoguang Wu is a Senior Research Scholar at the Stanford Center on China’s Economy and Institutions at Stanford University.

Chenggang Xu is a Senior Research Scholar at the Stanford Center on China's Economic and Institutions and a Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He is also a Visiting Professor in the Department of Finance at Imperial College London.

Yiqing Xu is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Stanford University.

Xueguang Zhou is the Kwoh-Ting Li Professor in Economic Development, a Professor of Sociology, and a Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.

Discover more from the inaugural SCCEI China Conference which brought together over 20 expert panelists from around the world and from across Stanford’s schools and disciplines, as well as experts and business leaders from Silicon Valley and the Bay Area to share insights on China's economic prospects. 
 

Allen began with an anecdote about a conversation with the governor of one of China's poorest agricultural provinces. When asked about his economic priorities, the governor cited advanced technologies such as semiconductors and biotechnology, mirroring the sectors highlighted in the Made in China 2025 plan. This response underscored China's government's relentless focus on technological advancement across all levels of government, which Allen described as a "techno-utopian quest."

Allen traced the roots of China's techno-utopianism back over a century ago to the May 4th Movement, which called for a new culture based on science and democracy. He argued that this vision aligns perfectly with Marxist ideology and the Communist Party's current policies. "China’s leaders have long believed in the transformative power of technology," Allen noted, "a belief that is deeply embedded in their political and ideological fabric."

Allen emphasized that China is not just an "innovation sponge" but has also become a leader in its own right. "China’s definition of innovation is tailored to its needs," he said, "differing significantly from the Silicon Valley model." He outlined five key points about the new productive forces that may distinguish Shenzhen from Silicon Valley:

1. China recognizes that it is facing an acute labor shortage and is thus focusing on factory automation and efficient production in mature industries.
2. China wants to spur innovation and create new industries at almost any cost.
3. There is an overwhelming mandate for self-reliance and import substitution. 
4. There is plenty of government money.  
5. China plans to turn “data” into the “fifth factor of production”, behind – land, capital, labor, and entrepreneurship. 
    

China’s innovation is evident in its ambitious industrial policies, which are supported by substantial government funding and a strategic focus on self-reliance and import substitution.

Allen continued to discuss the implications of the U.S. export controls aimed at decoupling from China, highlighting the unintended consequences for American companies. He pointed out that unilateral export controls often harm U.S. firms more than their intended targets by reducing their customer base and long-term competitiveness. "We must recognize that these controls can backfire, hurting our own industries while China accelerates its push for technological independence," Allen warned.

Another critical issue raised by Allen was the regulation of data flows. China's Cyber Administration has introduced stringent controls over cross-border data transfers. "The regulatory environment is becoming increasingly complex," Allen explained, "making it challenging for companies to maintain operational connectivity and compliance across borders."

From a corporate perspective, Allen urged companies to recognize the political realities and prepare for potential conflicts that could disrupt international trade. Many American firms are already scenario planning for severe sanctions, similar to those imposed on Russia, to ensure business continuity. "Strategic foresight is essential," he advised, "as geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and China show no signs of abating."

Craig Allen's remarks were a reminder of the far-reaching implications of the competition for technology leadership between the U.S. and China. His insights underscored the need for a nuanced understanding of China's ambitions and the strategic adjustments required for American businesses to navigate this complex landscape. As the world witnesses unprecedented techno-economic competition, the stakes for both nations and the global economy could not be higher.

All views Craig Allen shared are his own and do not reflect the positions of the US-China Business Council.
 

Watch the Recorded Event   

Discover more from the inaugural SCCEI China Conference which brought together over 20 expert panelists from around the world and from across Stanford’s schools and disciplines, as well as experts and business leaders from Silicon Valley and the Bay Area to share insights on China's economic prospects. 
 

In July 2023, Professor Rozelle joined a group of ten academics from the US, including both professors and think tank professionals, and traveled to China where they met with 12 scholars from China. The group spent three days at Peking University in discussion and went on several site visits around Beijing (to the Foreign Ministry; Xinhua New Agency; American Chamber of Commerce in Beijing; the US Embassy) where they furthered dialogue on the current state of scholarly exchange and how to improve it.

There were several key takeaways from the meetings:

Scholarly exchange is still occurring but at a much lower level compared with 5 to 10 years ago. 
Scholarly exchange is suffering collateral damage from the deteriorating US-China relations.

Challenges to scholarly exchange exist within both countries.
Rozelle remarked, “when we [the 10 academics from the US] got together with our academic colleagues from China, we immediately bonded and opened up with a sense of camaraderie, we almost immediately knew we were facing the same challenges on both sides of the Pacific.”

Through discussion, Rozelle documented 15 different issues that are inhibiting research efforts within China, (such as increased privacy laws, shutting off access to public databases, putting strict limits on access to archives, and more,) and 10 things in the US hindering research (such as, not issuing visas to engineering/biomedicine/science Ph.D students and post-docs from China). 

The biggest issue both sides face is the perception that scholarly exchange may compromise national security.
A small fraction of scholarly exchange is related to national security issues, the other share of scholarly exchange is much more related to positive outcomes in research, technology, and national growth. A secular decline of scholarly exchange is going to have large negative impacts on growth, equity and happiness in both countries as well as around the world.

Leaders in both countries need to define what types of scholarly exchange concern national security.
What can be done to improve scholarly exchange? Both countries have stated that scholarly exchange is related to national security, which is what has led to the decline (and prohibition, in some cases,) of scholarly exchange.

The challenge is that there has been no definition or clarification given of what types of scholarly exchange are sensitive to this matter. As a result, lower-level bureaucrats both in the United States and in China have taken risk-averse approaches in implementing these efforts by making it difficult to do almost all research. The two groups of scholars almost unanimously agreed that what is urgently needed is for upper-level leaders in the two countries to officially define what specific topic areas are national security concerns, and which are not.

In early October 2023 the delegation from China will join the US delegation in Washington DC to continue the conversation and strategize on how to foster more scholarly exchange between the two nations.

Rozelle is currently working on producing a brief that will seek to demonstrate both the benefits of US-China scholarly exchange as well as the cost of the disruption. Once published, the brief will be part of the overall effort as well as being linked here.
 

Read the original article by Stanford Graduate School of Business

Joseph Piotroski, the Robert K. Jaedicke Professor of Accounting at Stanford GSB, concluded, “Through development and application of new ideas and technologies, innovative organizations are uniquely positioned to improve lives and outcomes. This forum has highlighted the exciting role that Southeast Asia will play in shaping our shared future.”

Watch the 2023 Forum Recording