Search

Begin New Search Topic Semiconductors Publication Year within 5 Years

21. Despite disruptions, US-China trade is likely to grow

Author:
Megan Hogan and Gary Clyde Hufbauer
Publication Date:
10-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
Abstract:
The United States and China hit record trade levels in 2022, despite a prickly relationship, suggesting that calls for severe or even total economic decoupling between the world’s two economic superpowers may be ill-advised, say Hogan and Hufbauer. The dollar value of US-China trade grew significantly between 2019 and 2022, notwithstanding declines in trade flows of certain products such as semiconductors and aircraft due to the trade war. The persistence and even growth of the two countries’ total trade despite political and economic disputes reflects the mutual benefit that private firms see in this commercial relationship. The authors conclude that partial decoupling between the United States and China has not, so far, redrawn the world trade map. Nor does it seem likely to do so on an aggregate trade basis between now and 2025.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Trade Policy, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

22. Chipping Away: Assessing and addressing the labor market gap facing the US semiconductor industry

Author:
Dan Martin and Hamilton Galloway
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Oxford Economics
Abstract:
Thanks in large part to enactment of the landmark 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, a significant share of expected new chip manufacturing capacity and R&D is expected to be located in the US. We project the semiconductor industry’s US-based workforce will grow by nearly 115,000 jobs by 2030, from approximately 345,000 jobs today to approximately 460,000 jobs by the end of the decade. We estimate that roughly 67,000, or 58%, of these new jobs risk going unfilled at current degree completion rates. Of the unfilled jobs: 39% will be technicians, most of whom have two-year degrees or less; 35% will be computer scientists, or engineers with four-year degrees; and 26% will be engineers at the master’s or PhD level. For the US economy as a whole, we estimate that 3.85 million additional jobs in these three technical fields will be created by the end of 2030. Of those, 1.4 million jobs risk going unfilled unless the pipeline for such workers is expanded. To address the skills gap facing the broader economy and the semiconductor industry, we present three core recommendations to strengthen the US technical workforce: Strengthen support for regional partnerships and programs aimed at growing the pipeline for skilled technicians for semiconductor manufacturing and other advanced manufacturing sectors. Grow the domestic STEM pipeline for engineers and computer scientists vital to the semiconductor industry and other sectors that are critical to the future economy. Retain and attract more international advanced degree students within the US economy.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, Regulation, Manufacturing, Labor Market, Workforce, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

23. Australia's semiconductor manufacturing moonshot: securing semiconductor talent

Author:
Bronte Munro, Alex Capri, and Robert Clark
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
Semiconductors are a critical component in all modern technologies, from personal communication devices and medical devices to weapons systems. Crucial to producing semiconductors is the availability of a highly skilled workforce, managing clean-room facilities and highly specialised equipment to execute the hundreds of unique steps needed to manufacture a single wafer, depending on the complexity of the chip. ASPI’s 2022 report, Australia’s semiconductor national moonshot, laid out the strategic reasons why Australia must embark on a capacity-building initiative to create a homegrown semiconductor manufacturing ecosystem. Every item on the Australian federal government’s List of Critical Technologies in the National Interest is dependent on semiconductors. By committing to growing a semiconductor-manufacturing industry from a mature-process-scale baseline, policymakers would position Australia to manufacture chips relevant to the energy, transport, health, IT and defence sectors. Such an industry would enable Australia to execute long-term critical technology strategies in areas such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence, to mitigate supply-chain risk against disruption from conflict or natural disaster, and provide highly skilled jobs in affordable locations, enriching the Australian economy. It’s important to note that both AUKUS Pillar 2 and the Albanese government’s April 2023 publication of the Defence Strategic Review reflect a shift in Australia’s strategic thinking on defence and national security, and the important correlation and greater cooperation between industry, education and defence priorities, particularly when it comes to technology. Delivering on that shift will be difficult and often costly, but this report provides a series of recommendations of what that correlation and cooperation could look like. For Canberra, such an endeavour is of the same magnitude as America’s historic ‘moonshots’ during the 1960s and 1970s. It’s a once-in-a-generation challenge that will determine Australia’s place in the world, and human capital is central to ensuring success. Opting out of semiconductor manufacturing for the long term would severely constrain Australia’s growth as a technological nation and consign it to second-tier status. This report expands on the recommendations made in the 2022 ASPI report for establishing a semiconductor-manufacturing capability in Australia and focuses on the importance of creating a talent pipeline that can support a scaled industry. Achieving a semiconductor moonshot requires stepping up Australia’s very respectable semiconductor device fabrication R&D to industry-compatible prototyping via a dedicated facility, together with attracting (through that capability and by government incentives) a semiconductor manufacturer to locate a mature-process-scale foundry in Australia—which will require support from an upskilled Australian talent pipeline. This is an ambitious move but is an essential step in growing such a capability. The ability to grow and maintain a high-skilled workforce is a foundational challenge for Australia that can be addressed through close examination of trailblazing public–private partnerships (PPPs) that aim to provide talent-pipeline security in the US, Taiwan and Japan. Australian governments, industry and academia can emulate and engage with the examples highlighted through case studies in this report to attract semiconductor industry investment, boost talent-pipeline development and strengthen industry R&D. Australia’s states and territories all have varied capacity to o›er support to a semiconductor-manufacturing capability.
Topic:
Cybersecurity, Manufacturing, Artificial Intelligence, Emerging Technology, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
Australia

24. Friend-shoring in the Indo-Pacific

Author:
Akhil Ramesh and Rob York
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine highlight the challenges of increased economic interconnectedness with adversarial states. The shortages in critical sectors such as pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and other industries significant for technological advancement in the fourth industrial revolution have revealed the importance of select supply chains to the American public and the broader global community. As the strategic competition between the US and China accelerates, understanding of their importance will only grow. The Biden administration, to its credit, realized early on the importance of four critical sectors for the future of US supply chain security: pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, large-scale batteries, and semiconductors. Alarmingly, through the research presented here by Akhil Ramesh and myself, we see that the People’s Republic of China has deeply embedded itself in three of these four sectors, and still seeks to strengthen its position in the fourth (semiconductors). Also, one of the recurring problems highlighted in this research is the tendency of the administration to consider the job done once it sources a critical technology from somewhere other than China—not realizing that the PRC serves as a source for that country elsewhere in the supply chain.
Topic:
Pharmaceuticals, Supply Chains, Semiconductors, Batteries, and Critical Minerals
Political Geography:
United States of America and Indo-Pacific

25. Semiconductors Are Not a Reason to Defend Taiwan

Author:
Christopher McCallion
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Defense Priorities
Abstract:
Taiwan’s dominance in advanced semiconductor manufacturing and rising U.S.-China tensions have produced alarm that a Chinese invasion or blockade of Taiwan could cause a major disruption of the global semiconductor supply chain. This has led some to claim that the U.S. should defend Taiwan in order to maintain its supply of advanced chips. Fears that China could seize Taiwan’s chip-manufacturing capacity and leapfrog the U.S. technologically are overblown. Interdependence cuts both ways; if China invaded Taiwan, it would be cut off from the vital inputs controlled by the U.S. or its allies, and therefore unable to resume chip production under new management. Others fear Taiwanese chips could be disrupted during a Chinese blockade or a protracted conflict and tend to recommend bolstering U.S. capabilities to deter China. However, there are strong reasons to doubt the U.S. can ultimately deter Beijing if it feels that force is its only option for national reunification. Further efforts by the U.S. to deter China may only present Beijing with a closing window, encouraging it to use force before its prospects worsen, and precipitating the very conflict the U.S. seeks to prevent; a war between the U.S. and China would be exponentially costlier than any potential semiconductor supply shock resulting from a cross-strait invasion. Instead, the U.S. should seek to dial down the temperature with Beijing in order to maintain the political and territorial status quo and buy the time needed to diversify its own semiconductor supplies by onshoring or “allyshoring” chip manufacturing. The U.S. should therefore avoid provoking Beijing unnecessarily, and reaffirm the substance of the One China Policy while seeking to develop a longer-term settlement with Beijing over the future of the region.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Manufacturing, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

26. Reboot: Framework for a New American Industrial Policy

Author:
Martijn Rasser, Megan Lamberth, Hannah Kelley, and Ryan Johnson
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
This paper presents an initial framework for a new American industrial policy, a blueprint for what is needed to ensure the United States has the vision, goals, plans, and resources for an era of sustained strategic competition. The concept, informed by an overarching national technology strategy and a supply chain resilience strategy, is the initial contribution in a larger effort to provide policymakers with a comprehensive toolkit to navigate competition with China and engage with countries around the world, friend and foe alike.4 To provide tangible real-world examples of a new sensible American industrial policy and to illustrate how policies would vary by sector and over time, subsequent reports will detail what a new American industrial policy would look like in action for three key sectors: biotechnology, semiconductors, and green technologies.
Topic:
Economy, Green Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, Biotechnology, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China, North America, and United States of America

27. Rewire: Semiconductors and U.S. Industrial Policy

Author:
Chris Miller
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
As the United States considers industrial policy for the first time in decades, it should learn lessons from prior government efforts to shape the semiconductor industry, in the United States and abroad. The U.S. government has played a major role in the semiconductor industry since the invention of the first integrated circuit, via funding scientific research and via military procurement, which has driven the commercialization of new technology. However, though government—and specifically, the Defense Department—has had deep connections with the chip industry, it has played only a supportive role in building America’s semiconductor industry, with the key innovations and firms emerging from private-sector expertise. Other countries have experimented with industrial policy toward semiconductors too. Success stories in industrial policy generally have involved investing in skilled workforces and ensuring competitiveness by pushing domestic firms to sell to international markets. Simply pouring capital into a country’s chip industry rarely has been a winning strategy. Today, the U.S. government should focus policy toward the semiconductor industry around four main objectives: promoting technological advances, guaranteeing security of semiconductor supply, retaining control of choke points, and slowing China’s technological advances.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, Semiconductors, and Policymaking
Political Geography:
China, North America, and United States of America

28. When the Chips Are Down: Gaming the Global Semiconductor Competition

Author:
Becca Wasser, Martijn Rasser, and Hannah Kelley
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for a New American Security (CNAS)
Abstract:
The United States is in a strategic competition with a well-resourced and capable opponent. China seeks a global role that is broadly at odds with the strategic interests and values of America and fellow democracies. Technology, a key enabler of political, economic, and military power, is at the center of this competition. Within this competition, semiconductors loom large. Chips are a driving force for breakthroughs in a range of critical technology areas, from AI to synthetic biology to quantum computing. Semiconductors are essential to the military systems used by the United States and its allies and partners to defend themselves and their interests. At a fundamental level, the day-to-day functioning of modern society hinges on dependable access to chips; critical infrastructure, transportation networks, and digital communication cannot function without them. Semiconductor supply chains form an intricate global web, with several countries and companies serving as important nodes. Some of these nodes have such outsized importance that any disruption would have significant and detrimental cascading effects for U.S. national and economic security. Taiwan is the central node in the semiconductor supply chain. Home to the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), the world’s largest contract chip foundry, more than half of the world’s outsourced semiconductor manufacturing and nearly all leading-edge manufacturing capacity is in Taiwan. Secure access to the output of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is therefore a strategic necessity. Yet, while policymakers understand the critical importance of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, the myriad of factors and nuances essential to developing policies and plans that protect its integrity, mitigate risk, and reduce second-order consequences are insufficiently studied.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Strategic Competition, Industry, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, North America, and United States of America

29. Microchips and Semiconductors: The U.S. Seeks Autonomy

Author:
Andrzej Dąbrowski
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The United States has turned to support of the domestic microchip industry in response to the increased risk of Chinese aggression against Taiwan, one of the leading producers, as well as to address disruptions in supply chains caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. A law on this passed with bipartisan consent and is intended to help finance a more resilient American sector towards global changes in manufacturing these components. Thanks to the CHIPS Act, the U.S. can reduce its dependence on microchip imports and undermine China’s ability to dominate the market.
Topic:
Markets, Science and Technology, Autonomy, Industry, Supply Chains, Semiconductors, and Microchips
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

30. Lessons for Europe from China’s quest for semiconductor self-reliance

Author:
Alicia Garcia-Herrero and Pauline Weil
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Semiconductors are a critical input to production of information and communication technology and many other goods. The major economies want to be able to produce chips at home to avoid excessive dependence on supply chains in an increasingly unpredictable world, where trade is being compromised because of national security concerns. China was first in terms of timing and scale of funding to support its its semiconductor industry. Since 2015, China has spent $150 billion upgrading its semiconductor industry. Success, however, has been limited. China’s massive industrial policy effort has been most successful in increasing capacity for assembly of chips, though that is also the least value-added part of the semiconductor supply chain. Progress on chip design and fabrication in China remain underwhelming. The United States has also started implementing its $50 billion package to support the production of chips. The European Union, meanwhile, has not yet fully finalised its main semiconductor initiative, the European Chips Act. China’s experience offers a number of lessons. First, chip fabrication requires massive fixed asset investment and, therefore, large subsidies, but with no guarantee of success. Second, one reason for the underwhelming results of China’s semiconductor policy is US containment, through export controls and other measures. In this respect, the EU should find it easier than China to upgrade its chips industry but, given the costs, focusing on the highest-end part of the supply chain would be the best approach. Assembly and production of lower-end semiconductors already face overcapacity, given the financial resources already invested by China.
Topic:
International Relations, European Union, Economy, Trade Policy, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
China and Europe