Search

Under the background of the global value chain (GVC) crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, using methods of risk analysis of input-output table and geopolitical deduction, and based on the latest datasets of carbon dioxide emissions and the world energy trade, this paper analyzes the global value chain risks and energy security issues from three dimensions: climate governance dilemma, the global value chain crisis, and energy security and energy transition. It then presumes changes in world energy trade and geopolitical evolution and assesses their impact on China. The main findings and viewpoints of this paper are as follows: (1) The brokage, fragmentation, cutoff, and even production stoppage of the global value chain have done huge damage to the world economy, and it is urgent to rebuild a safe, stable, resilient, and green global value chain in the post-COVID-19 era. (2) Due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the flow direction and volume of the world' s energy trade have changed greatly, and the energy supply chain has gradually formulated into five formulas: the ' Europe-U.S. supply chain,' the ' Eurasian supply chain,' the ' U.S., Japan, Australia, and India supply chain,' the ' OPEC supply chain,' and a ' new Europe supply chain.' Among them, the United States has increased rapidly its LNG exports to Europe, and Russia has significantly increased its energy exports to Asian countries, inducing a new ' Eurasian energy supply chain.' (3) The world' s energy geopolitics is evolving in such a way that the United States is strengthening its grip on Europe to jointly restrain Russia' s power and initiating a Asia-Pacific ' four-sided mechanism' to counter China' s rise. Consequently, energy security has been bound to geopolitics. (4) China should act as a geopolitical ' power of equilibrium' to avoid the increasing risk of a new Cold War or a ' quasi-Cold War' to ensure its own energy security, to promote its dual goals of reaching peak carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality actively and gradually, and to steadily follow the path of peaceful development. We conclude that: the ' dual carbon' goals set up a timetable for China' s transitions in terms of energy, economy, and development mode. At the same time, the strategy of 'decoupling with China' promoted by some countries gives China an opportunity instead and forces China to accelerate its industrial transition, trade upgrading, and optimization of economic structure, in order to build an upgraded version of the ' world factory' and fully realize a high-quality, green, sustainable development with a goal of achieving net-zero carbon emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]