The dilemma came from the outsourcing many of these critical materials. If you look at semiconductors, they are not just used in electronics but also in cars, airplanes, weapons, in the thermostat of your house, so they are everywhere. We have outsourced the production of semiconductors largely to the country of Taiwan. I know an executive in electronics who says: “I have a nightmare every night”, which is that there is an earthquake in Taiwan because the majority of semiconductors are produced by a single a company, the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC). If they shut down, the entire global supply chains of every industry will shut down too. It increases dependencies and thus it increases risks. In a certain sense, it also hollows out key skills. We do not make anything in the United States anymore, we only make very little. The Department in Defense is concerned because we are very often and completely relying on the Chinese for the goods that we require for our national defense. That allows the risks of potentially having back doors and we saw this recently. It also opens up the possibility of hacking. We had a cyber attack, the Colonial Pipeline cyber-attack here a couple of weeks ago that shut down gasoline pumps all over the East Cost. I could not buy gas in North Carolina and I had to stay home for a week since there was no gas.
As you pointed out several factors from cyber attacks to the recent Suez crises to global health crises increased the risks of significant disruptions in various global supply chains. This also revealed the weaknesses of outsourced productions. What, in your view, are the major lessons learnt?
I think the lesson learnt is when you have this very long supply chain that goes all over the world, it is very difficult to start them up or shut them down. We are seeing this today: massive shortages of fuel, shortages of appliances, shortages of lumber. Because what happened during the coronavirus pandemic is that most of the supply chains were shut down. When we shut a supply chain down, you cannot just start it up automatically. It is not like stepping on the gas and move forward. Instead, you step on the gas and wait several months before you can move forward: there is a startup period. When you have something like the Suez crises, which shuts down the entire global shipping industry that goes through that single bottleneck, that also delays it even further. We have created in a sense these very vulnerable supply chains that have led us to this situation. We created it through the pursuit of lower and lower costs while ignoring the risks of these outsourced supply chains to low cost countries.
However, from a broader perspective, we can also witness renewed efforts to realign global supply chains closer to home countries. For example, the US-China trade war already pushed companies to explore options elsewhere than China. The French president also announced his commitment to relocate strategic production sites in France. Protecting economic sovereignty is on the rise. How do you see this trend and its effects on supply chains?
These trends are certainly significant. What we are seeing now is a movement towards I would call “localization of supply chains.” For instance, I believe that an economic regionalization will occur. I suspect you will see closer ties between U.S., Canada and Mexico, between Europe, Eastern Europe and Northern Africa, and between China and South East Asia. You will start to see regionalized supply chains beginning to emerge. What I envision in my latest book titled Flow: How the Best Supply Chains Thrive is greater regionalization that combines low cost labor, natural resources with the ability to bring domestic manufacturing back. I recently testified in a Senate hearing this week. There is a U.S. bill (the HOME – Help Onshore Manufacturing Efficiencies for Drugs and Devices) that is seeking to encourage domestic manufacturing of critical drugs and devices.