Search

For several decades, multinational enterprises (MNEs) have offshored their manufacturing activities to low-cost countries to achieve significant productivity gains. However, changes in the relative competitiveness of countries, social effects of deindustrialization in advanced economies and the vulnerability of global value chains (GVCs) revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic have encouraged some firms, supported by governments, to "reshore" part, or all of their offshore industrial operations back to their home country. Reshoring decisions are motivated by a variety of endogenous and exogenous factors that are empirically analyzed in this paper to understand how reshoring policies implemented by governments can more effectively address the factors driving the firms' location decisions. A review of the reshoring policies implemented in Europe, the UK and the US is conducted to provide general policy recommendations regarding policy instruments, SMEs, innovation and regionalization of value chains. This paper fills a gap in the literature by connecting the micro-level supply chain management analysis of firms' reshoring drivers with the macro-level economic policy perspective on reshoring. The review of existing reshoring policies calls for an in-depth analysis by the manufacturing sector and at the local level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing interest in the nature and possible extent of de-globalization. This paper explores the impact that protectionist measures have on multinational enterprise (MNE) reshoring back to the UK. Besides taking into account the global trends indicating a return to protectionism, the existing literature highlights various firm-level and structural country-level determinants of reshoring decisions. We test a conceptual model with parent-subsidiary firm-level data for the period 2009 to 2017. We conclude that firms that are more sensitive to wage costs in their overseas subsidiaries were more likely to reshore. We did not find that more capital-intensive firms had a higher propensity to reshore. We find that our results are mostly driven from UK MNEs with subsidiaries in EU. This result has clear implications for a potential Brexit effect. Theoretically, we base our findings in transactional cost economics to help explain why different types of firms behave in the way they do, and why different types of firms may respond in quite different ways to the same mix of institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The manufacturing sector in the UK is currently undergoing a significant supply chain transformation and managers are re-evaluating supply chain location decisions to minimise the disruptions caused by Brexit. This entails manufacturing offshoring and back-shoring once again being considered as strategic decisions and companies ought to make informed choices with respect to where they source or manufacture their products. This paper aims to contribute to an improved understanding of the back-shoring phenomenon in the UK. Eight case studies of back-shoring have been analysed and compared using a theoretically informed framework. The results show that back-shoring can stem from both misjudgements of previous offshoring decisions as well as changes in the demand pattern in the home country. Unlike offshoring decisions being mainly cost-oriented, strategic shift aimed at increasing the value perceived by the customer has a pivotal role in the back-shoring decision. Furthermore, skill shortage is the main barrier for the implementation of back-shoring strategies in the UK and requires companies' attention prior to its repatriation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper aims to investigate the strategic consequences of manufacturing location decisions, with a focus on understanding the link between collocating manufacturing with other value chain activities, via reshoring or retaining and organizational agility. Design/methodology/approach: The paper uses qualitative data from 115 interviews with executives from UK high value manufacturing companies to explore the recent phenomenon of reshoring and the strategic effects of manufacturing location. Findings: The location of manufacturing is operationally and strategically important for multinational companies. The spatial dispersion of manufacturing is determined by firm-specific and external factors, both of which are subject to constant change. The analysis shows that concentrating on manufacturing in their home countries enables firms to increase organizational agility and stimulate innovation. Better integration with and more extensive collaboration between related value chain activities, such as research and development, sales and marketing, leads to higher flexibility, speed and responsiveness to customer requirements. However, under certain conditions, firms also continue to benefit from the known advantages of offshoring. Originality/value: This research sheds light on possible strategic downsides of global value chains, characterized by dispersed activities and intermitted processes. The results provide evidence that retaining manufacturing or bringing back manufacturing operations to a company's home country can increase organizational flexibility, speed, adaptability, innovativeness and responsiveness to customer requirements. As these capabilities are critical for long-term survival, especially in dynamic environments, firms need to review their global factory configurations and determine whether the short-term advantages of foreign locations continue to justify offshoring practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study investigates the impact of geopolitical disruptions on the manufacturing supply chain (SC) location decision of managers in UK multinational firms. The context of study is the UK manufacturing sector and its response to the UK's decision to leave the European Union (EU), or Brexit. Design/methodology/approach: The study adopts an abductive, theory elaboration approach and expands on Dunning's eclectic paradigm of international production. A Delphi study over four iterative rounds is conducted to gather and assess insights into manufacturing SC location issues related to Brexit. The panel consisted of 30 experts and managers from a range of key industries, consultancies, governmental organisations, and academia. The Delphi findings are triangulated using a focus group with 38 participants. Findings: The findings indicate that the majority of companies planned or have relocated production facilities from the UK to the EU, and distribution centres (DCs) from the EU to the UK. This was because of market-seeking advantages (being close to major centres of demand, ease of access to local and international markets) and efficiency-seeking advantages (costs related to expected delays at ports, tariff and non-tariff barriers). Ownership and internalisation advantages, also suggested by the eclectic paradigm, did not play a role in the location decision. Originality/value: The study elaborates on the OLI framework by showing that policy-related uncertainty is a primary influencing factor in the manufacturing location decision, outweighing the importance of uncertainty as an influencer of governance mode choices. The authors find that during geopolitical disruptions managers make location decisions in tight time-frames with incomplete and imperfect information, in situations of high perceived uncertainty. The study elaborates on the eclectic paradigm by explaining how managerial cognition and bounded rationality influence the manufacturing location decision-making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the meaning of reshoring and its drivers in the case of UK manufacturing and in particular its automotive sector. Drawing on interviews, policy reviews and a range of recent surveys, the paper finds that while reshoring is a discernable trend in UK manufacturing, it is less pronounced than many have claimed and that—in the UK case at least—there are severe limits as to how far this reshoring trend can go, particularly in relation to the availability of skills and finance in the supply chain. This in turn raises questions over the stance of British policy and whether more could be done, with comparisons made to US experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]