China Research

A discussion forum on emerging markets, mainly China – from a macro, micro, institutional and corporate angle.

Advanced countries lose and emerging markets gain export momentum

October 29, 2025

Below, we examine the WTO statistics on the main exporting nations. Many advanced countries had quite bleak performances in 2024 due to weak global demand. Quite a number of emerging markets on the other hand achieved more favorable developments. The magnitude of trade damage caused by President Trump’s protectionism starting in 2025 remains to be seen.

China was still the largest exporting nation in the world after a 6-percent increase in current prices last year, giving the Middle Kingdom a global export share of almost 15 percent. This was partly made possible as a result of further Chinese progress in the emerging world, particularly in Africa and South America. China counts for roughly 7 percent of total global goods exports. For 2025, China is predicted to achieve record shipments in Africa, Latin America and Asia.

India remains lagging behind, Vietnam is catching up

Despite the enormous size of the country, India still has not advanced further than to number 18 of the globe’s leading exporting nations. This is sometimes regarded as disappointing. However, one should remember that India for a long time only had very limited foreign competition at home and for this reason insufficient conditions for exporting to the rest of the world on a broader scale of products. India as a country is still catching up also when it comes to exports and product diversification.

By the way, only a few emerging markets are among the top 20 exporting nations – but they dominate in the third group from number 21 to 30. Particularly in the medium and longer run, they will most probably improve their positions further.

In detail, the list of the 30 leading exporters of goods in 2024 looked as follows (in billion USD, in brackets all changes in percent and in current prices in, source WTO):

1    China 3577 (+6)   

2    U.S. 2065 (+2)

3    Germany 1682 (-1)

4    Netherlands 921 (-2)

5    Japan 707 (-1)

6    South Korea 684 (+8)

7    Italy 674 (0) 

8.   Hong Kong 64z6 (+12)

9     France 639 (+11)

10   Mexico 617 (+4)

11   UAE 604 (+6)

12   Canada 569 (0)

13    Belgium 536 (-6)

14    UK 513 (-2)

15    Singapore 506 (+6)

16    Taiwan 474 (+10)

17    Switzerland 447 (+6)

18    India 443 (+3)

19    Russia 433 (+2)

20    Spain 424 (0)

21    Vietnam 405 (+14)

22    Poland 380 (0)

23    Australia 341 (-8)

24    Brazil 337 (-1)

26    Malaysia 330 (+6)

26    Saudi Arabia 305 (-5)

27    Thailand 301 (+5)

2    Indonesia 265 (+2) 

29   Czech Republik 263 (+3)

30   Turkey 262 (+2)

Source: WTO.org

Asia in the lead regarding suppliers from emerging countries

Interestingly, Asian emerging countries had the most successful export performance in 2024 (but again, without knowing how much they are now affected by Trump’s ongoing protectionism). This position can be expected to remain in place in the foreseeable future. It also should be mentioned that particularly Vietnam benefited more recently from shifting global supply chains.

Surprisingly, Russia remained also in 2024 quite a successful exporting nation due to oil and gas exports to China, India and other countries still dealing substantially with Russia.

Conclusion: Trade statistics from the WTO remain illuminating, especially on the corporate level – for both purchasing, sales and production managers.

Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University

Publication of article on China by Hubert Fromlet in Economic & Financial Review by the EEFC at the University of London

October 9, 2025

Abstract: This study traces the transformation of China over the years. It examines the country’s high debt position which is in all sectors including central government, local governments, corporates and private households which according to the IMF totals 80 percent of GDP. Local debt conditions continue to deteriorate for different reasons – particularly as a consequence of the ongoing real estate crisis but also due to the weakening economic growth potential. The author also highlights the role of BRICS II as an organisation ready for increasing Chinese influence. The study concludes China’s real estate crisis may be much more serious than usually understood by most Western analysts.

Read the full article here.

Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University

Companies from OECD- and emerging countries – do they want to invest in Trump’s U.S.?

April 14, 2025

President Trump’s trade war has certainly caused a lot of concern in most countries in the world, to a high extent in the U.S. as well. As I have tried to explain in my previous two blogs on this issue, many emerging markets are about to be hit dramatically by Trump’s economic world war (https://blogg.lnu.se/china-research/?p=3650¸ https://blogg.lnu.se/china-research/?p=3642). In this respect, one specific question still seems to be analytically neglected – which foreign companies actually want to invest in the U.S. in the foreseeable future.

Uncertainty vs large market
One can read and hear frequently these days that the ongoing trade war has been causing a lot of uncertainty about the future American behavior – or rather the future behavior of President Trump. And as we know from corporate practitioners and academics, uncertainty means a major stumbling block for investors (see for the latter group, for example, Bloom et al https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/BFI_WP_2022-149.pdf). This leads us to the crucial question of this blog: How will foreign investors behave in the U.S.?

Looking more carefully at all the negative policy and institutional conditions created by President Trump, uncertainty exists at every corner and end. But at the same time President Trump wants foreign companies to move production to the U.S. Aren’t these two developments contradictory?
Looking somewhat more profoundly into ongoing institutional conditions, things are indeed on a deteriorating trend. Examples are

¤ President Trump’s unpredictable and changing psychological attitudes and decisions (which could be described as an institutional weakness);

¤ the determination of President Trump and his administration to appoint their supporters for important jobs (even in jurisdiction);

¤ the ongoing cuts of federal money to the research of famous American universities, meaning that many American academic researchers would like to leave the country; by the way, why are (most) Swedish academic institutions reacting so reluctantly on this new opportunity to attract disappointed American researchers;

¤ the recently started American “movement” to make conditions more complicated for incoming foreign visitors and foreign residents in the U.S.

Thus, the question remains – why should foreign companies like to move their production to the U.S. under all these negative institutional and behavioral (psychological) conditions? Even if President Trump recently has announced a 90-day pause on ‘reciprocal’ tariffs for most countries (but except China), uncertainty remains in place – also for foreign corporations with potential plans to invest in the U:S.

However, certain companies will do so all the same – but nobody knows how many of them indeed will take such a step in these uncertain times. Usually or often, poor or worsening institutional conditions turn out to be sufficient for refraining from a new foreign direct investment – but not in the last decades in

China as an outstanding exception.
Quite some time ago, I made a survey on this Chinese issue. The result was not very surprising – telling me that the enormous (potential) size of this giant market served as the main incentive for investing there despite the country’s political and institutional shortcomings. Maybe also then still existing good growth prospects (which under current conditions should not be the case in the U.S.). The same main argument of a market’s enormous size will probably be applied by the foreign companies that still want to invest in the U.S. – despite President Trump irrational behavior.

But how frequently will this happen?

Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University