In a recent article I referred to the growing heterogeneity of Latin America.
There, I alluded to the different trajectories of growth and macroeconomic stability that characterize the countries of the region.
Now I will refer to another important dimension: the way of inserting oneself into the global economy, that is, with whom and what type of goods are traded.
In this dimension, gradually but constantly, greater heterogeneity has also manifested itself among the countries of the region.
I consider this to be relevant because the way it is inserted into the global economy will be crucial to understanding which countries have the greatest potential to benefit from the process of relocation of activities (
nearshoring
) that we will observe in the coming years.
Considering the geopolitical motivations that gave rise to relocation, there are two key indicators to monitor in different countries: who is their main trading partner and how much manufacturing specialization exists in the export sector.
As for who the most important trading partners are, Latin America is practically divided into two large groups: those that trade predominantly with the United States (in parentheses the percentage of all their foreign trade with the United States), such as Mexico (60%) , Costa Rica (41%), Nicaragua (41%), Honduras (39%), El Salvador (34%), Guatemala (32%), Colombia (26%) and Ecuador (23%);
and those that trade predominantly with China, such as Brazil, Chile, Peru, Panama, Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay (in these last three cases, their main partner is actually Brazil, although followed by China, so we consider them within the sphere of China's commercial influence).
On the other hand, in terms of their export specialization, the countries of the region are once again divided into two large groups.
On the one hand, there are those with a percentage of manufacturing exports greater than 35% of their total exports.
This group includes Mexico (76%), El Salvador (76%), Costa Rica (60%), Guatemala (47%) and Nicaragua (38%).
All other countries in the region have specialized in the export of raw materials.
In fact, in several of these cases the participation of manufacturing exports in total exports is even less than 15%, as in the case of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Panama, Peru, Paraguay, Argentina and Chile.
In summary, we can classify Latin American countries into three large groups in terms of their way of inserting themselves into the global economy.
On the one hand, there are those who sell more to China than to the United States and who, moreover, all of them fundamentally specialized in the export of raw materials: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay and Panama.
In a second group are those countries that maintain strong commercial ties with the United States, but whose export sector remained specialized in raw materials.
This group includes Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela and Honduras.
Finally, a third group of countries remained commercially connected with the United States and has specialized in the export of manufactured products.
This group includes Mexico, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala and Nicaragua.
The above classification suggests that not all countries in the region will be equally prepared to benefit from the industrial relocation process.
In fact, some countries will face the double disadvantage of having opted for a type of insertion into globalization that led them to trade more with China than with the United States, while at the same time choosing to do so through export specialization of raw materials and not of manufactured products.
This implies that for them there will not necessarily be
friend
or
ally-shoring
, while their export sector does not seem to have the ideal characteristics, in terms of labor qualification or participation in global value chains, to become a recipient. of important flows of foreign investment.
On the other hand, there is a second group of Latin American countries that will have a certain disadvantage by not having an export sector specialized in manufacturing activities, despite having remained important trading partners of the United States.
Finally, the countries that seem best prepared to benefit from
nearshoring
are Mexico and some Central American countries such as El Salvador, Costa Rica and Guatemala.
Although Nicaragua seems to have conditions for insertion into globalization similar to those of its Central American neighbors, the reality is that its dictatorial regime will hardly make it attractive enough to benefit from the process of reorganization of globalization.
Evidently, Mexico, both due to its greater geographical proximity to the United States and its internal market size, its human capital and its greater experience in participating in global value chains, is the one that will benefit the most from industrial relocation.
For this to really happen, the next administration must implement a series of measures that guarantee more favorable conditions to attract greater investment flows, both domestic and foreign.