A recent report on manufacturing site selection contains both good news and bad news for the US.
First, the good news. According to the report, "Reshoring Global Manufacturing: Myths and Realities," by the Hackett Group, the cost gap between manufacturing in China and production in the US is narrowing. By 2013, says the report, the total landed cost of manufacturing in China will be only 16 percent lower than that of the US. This margin, analysts believe, represents the "tipping point" where manufacturers consider reshoring as a viable option.
Now, the bad news. The study also finds that companies are pursuing sites in other developing nations as a low-cost alternative to China. China has been a handy scapegoat in the debate about US jobs moving offshore. According to the Hackett Group, jobs will still remain offshore -- just not in China:
Countries including India, Thailand, Vietnam, and Brazil continue to successfully grow their share of global manufacturing as they become more cost effective countries for manufacturing. "The cost increases in China are impossible for companies to ignore," said The Hackett Group Chief Research Officer Michel Janssen. "As Chinese wage rates rise, companies are looking to maintain their competitive edge by either bringing that production closer to developed markets, moving it to lower wage countries, or increasing productivity in China."
From my perspective, the question now becomes: Will these nations become as vilified as China? They are, after all, landing jobs that 20 years ago would have existed in the US. I think it depends on whether the US accepts the fact that these jobs are never coming back: "Few of the low-skill Chinese manufacturing jobs will ever return to advanced economies; most will simply move to other low-cost countries," the report concludes.
There are other factors that have contributed toward the vilification of China: the theft of IP, human rights abuses, unfair trading practices, and low-quality merchandise among them. But from a purely practical perspective, costs in the US and China aren't that different:
Reshoring is expected to become more viable with each passing year, as the total landed cost gap of manufacturing offshore shrinks. The Hackett Group’s research found that the cost gap between the U.S. and China has shrunk by nearly 50 percent over the past eight years, and is expected to stand at just 16 percent by 2013. This trend is largely driven by rising labor costs in China, as well as rising fuel prices globally, which affects shipping costs.
Total landed manufacturing cost continues to be the leading factor in companies' site selection. The key components of this cost are raw material and component costs; manufacturing costs; transportation and logistics; inventory carrying costs; and taxes and duties. According to the Hackett Group, the cost differential between other developing nations and the US is as much as 20 percent. As long as the majority of manufacturers -- 85 percent, according to the study -- measure cost as the main driver in site selection, manufacturing is likely to remain offshore.
@Barbara: Labour force has very well understood situation and behaved in debonair way. Now it is turn for middle and higher management to compromise. With this US will become very competative and many more job will come back to US.
@Barry--thanks for pointing that out. The report does mention the BRIC nations and says the following:
"Between 1990 and 2010, the nominal value of global exports of manufactured goods more than quadrupled. When adjusted for inflation, this equates to a nearly tripling of value and a CAGR of 5.5%. To put this into perspective, during the same period, the combined GDP of North America, Europe, Japan and the BRIC countries grew at a CAGR of 3.0%, resulting in real GDP gorwth of 80%. China has been the biggest beneficiary of these developments. Between 1990 and 2010, its shre in global manufacturing exports grew from 1.8% to 14.4%."
I don't think pulling out of BRIC is going to happen large-scale: many manufacturers want to sell into those markets as well as export from them. I think the report indicates that there will be some rationalization of what makes sense to manufacture closer to home markets.
On your last point, I agree: manufacturing is so automated that you won't have a big surge in jobs. However, the perception in the US is that if manufacturing returns, so will job growth.
I wonder if Western countries will ever accept paying 20% more for goods for the greater good of their local communities and jobs. I understand why companies keep chasing low cost manf locations but is it truly the long term solution?
I do not agree. When people unfortunately lost jobs, they had reality check and now are ready to work at much lower rate. This is true for everyone - unskilled labour to highly intellectual engineer or scientist.
Unfortunately the analysis leaves out an important fact. It becomes highly more unlikely you will pull out of China or SE Asia and return to the U.S. if you are selling to those countries. And for the first time, the combined GDP of BRIC countries has exceeded those of developed countries. So where does the future lie in terms of increasing sales and being close to your market?
Also, I don't see employment being such a large beneficiary of any increased manufacturing done in the U.S.- at least not as much as it used to be. There's too much automation now. Instead, support industries to manufacturing, i.e. engineering, specialized training, knowledge-base industries, are the ones that will be more directly affected. The key, therefore is manufacturing the items that will enhance our technological edge- not the low-laying fruit which carries little overall advantage for us.
You are right. In addition to that, after the BRICS ---- according to Goldman Sachs Asset Management department, the next emerging group of countries called next 11 (N-11) – Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, South Korea, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Philippines, Turkey, and Vietnam
Chipmonk--I can actually see people in the US supporting outsourcing to Vietnam. Regardless of the reasoning at the time, the US inflicted a lot of damage on that nation during the war. Seeing businesses (rather than government) adding to its economic growth would be heartening.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.