Protectionist Trends in Industrial Policy amid a Changing Global Order

The new global trend of economic development – self-sufficiency and national autarky – is examined. The reasons and features of the transition to a self-sufficient industrial policy are identified in the context of the geopolitical fragmentation of the global economy and intensifying competition among major economies for technological leadership. Growing uncertainty and unpredictability in modern economic development, which are unacceptable for long-term investments, also drive this strategy. It is shown that protectionist policies and sanctions have had a serious impact on world trade, becoming a driver of the reorientation of trade flows between global economic leaders – the United States and China. However, this situation is likely to worsen due to the escalation of trade wars, which began with a sharp increase in US import tariffs on goods from more than 180 countries in April 2025 and provoked a strong response from China. This may lead to the breakdown of existing value chains and a global recession, significantly increasing the traditional costs of a self-sufficient industrial policy due to rising of production costs, dispersion and inefficient distribution of financial and material resources, accelerating of inflation, and a decline in the technological level and quality of goods. It is concluded that the trend toward national autonomy and self-sufficient industrial policy in the context of a changing world order may prove to be an extremely difficult task not only for the main players, but also for many other participants in the global economy.

1. Bacchus J., Lester S., Zhu H. (2018). Disciplining China’s Trade Practices at the WTO. Policy Analysis. No. 856. Available at: https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/ disciplining-chinas-trade-practices-wtohow-wto-complaints-can-help-make-china-more#don-t-always-believe-the-hype,accessed22.02.2025.

2. Banaszyk P. (2023). Reshoring and Friendshoring as Factors in Changing the Geography of International Supply Chains. Engineering Management in Production and Services. Vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 25– 33. DOI: 10.2478/emj-2023-0026.

3. Bown C.P. (2022). How COVID-19 medical supply shortages led to extraordinary trade and industrial policy. Asian Economic Policy Review. Vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 114–135. DOI: 10.1111/aepr.12359.

4. Buckley P.J. (2020). The theory and empirics of the structural reshaping of globalization. Journal of International Business Studies. Vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1580–1592. DOI: 10.1057/s41267-020-00355-5.

5. Evenett S. J. (2019). Protectionism, state discrimination, and international business since the onset of the global financial crisis. Journal of International Business Policy. Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 9–36. DOI: 10.1057/s42214-019-00021-0.

6. Helleiner E. (2020). The Diversity of Economic Nationalism. New Political Economy. Vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 229–238. DOI: 10.1080/13563467.2020.1841137.

7. Howard P., Saggi K. (2006). Is There a Case for Industrial Policy? A Critical Survey. The World Bank Research Observer. Vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 267–297. DOI: 10.1093/wbro/lkl001.

8. Hufbauer G.C., Jung E. (2021). Scoring 50 years of US industrial policy, 1970–2020. Peterson Institute for International Economics. Briefing 21-5. Available at: https://www.piie.com/publications/piie-briefings/2021/ scoring-50-years-us-industrial-policy-1970-2020,accessed 22.02.2025.

9. Juhász R., Lane N., Rodrik D. (2023). The New Economics of Industrial Policy. NBER Working Paper. No. 31538. Available at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w31538,accessed22.02.2025.

10. Li G., Branstetter L.G. (2024). Does “Made in China 2025” work for China? Evidence from Chinese listed firms. Research Policy. Vol. 53, no. 6, article 105009. DOI: 10.1016/j.re-spol.2024.105009.

11. Luo Y. (2022). Illusions of techno-nationalism. Journal of International Business Studies. Vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 550–567. DOI: 10.1057/s41267-021-00468-5.

12. Mariotti S. (2024). “Win-lose” globalization and the weaponization of economic policies by nation-states. Critical Perspec-tives on International Business. Vol. 19, no. 1. DOI: 10.1108/cpoib-09-2023-0089.

13. Reinert К.А. (2025). Subsidy wars and modern industrial policy // Columbia FDI Perspectives. No. 402. Available at: https://ccsi.columbia.edu/sites/ccsi.columbia.edu/files/content/docs/fdi%20perspectives/No%20402%20-%20Reinert%20-%20FINAL%20rev.pdf,accessed22.02.2025.

14. Reynolds E.B. (2024). U.S. industrial transformation and the “how” of 21st century industrial strategy. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade. Vol. 24, no. 8. DOI: 10.1007/s10842-024-00420-x.

15. Shih W. (2023). The New Era of Industrial Policy Is Here. Are you prepared? Harvard Business Review. September-October. Available at: https://hbr.org/archive-toc/BR2305,accessed22.02.2025.

16. Smorodinskaya N.V., Katukov D.D. (2024). Course towards technological sovereignty: a new global trend and Russian specifics. Baltic Region. Vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 108–135. DOI: 10.5922/2079-8555-2024-3-6.

17. The Return… (2024). Evenett S., Jakubik А., Martín F., Ruta М. The Return of Industrial Policy in Data. IMF Working Papers. No. 24/1. DOI: 10.5089/9798400260964.001.

18. Understanding… (2025). Li H., Hilletofth P., Eriksson D., Tate W. Understanding the manufacturing reshoring decision-making content through the lens of the Eclectic Paradigm: a systematic literature review. European Business Review. Vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 16–48. DOI: 10.1108/EBR-10-2023-0300.