Monday

11th Dec 2017

Opinion

Steel overcapacity crisis - from Europe to China

  • Brussels is urging Beijing to overcome overcapacity by allowing massive defaults. That, however, is not the way the US and Europe resolved their postwar steel crises. (Photo: Thyssengroup)

The current debate about China’s steel overcapacity may ignore the lessons of the postwar steel crisis in the US and Europe.

Steel has featured prominently on the European agenda for a while now. Last February, thousands of demonstrators protested against Chinese dumping of steel, which they argue threatens jobs and investment.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

In the recent Hangzhou summit, European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said the G20 “must urgently find a solution to the problems facing the steel industry”. Moreover, the German government raised the issue at the G20 meetings. In this endeavour, the two were backed by both Washington and Tokyo.

As Brussels sees it, the flood of cheap Chinese manufactured goods, particularly steel and aluminium, is challenging Sino-EU ties at the time when China hopes to obtain market-economy status in Europe by the year-end.

During the February demonstrations in Brussels, European Chamber of Commerce in China released a report about steel overcapacity in China. It included a section on the “history of overcapacity”, but focused on China since the 1990s. That, however, ignores the EU-US postwar steel crisis – and its lessons.

The postwar steel overcapacity

“Recent years… have been very difficult ones for the steel industries of the US and Europe. Production in both regions has dropped by more than one-third and employment has fallen even more. In recent years there have been either large losses or small profits.”

That could have been one of the Western critics of China in Hangzhou. But it wasn’t. Instead, it was David Tarr, a senior economist with the US Federal Trade Commission, who in 1988 was examining the lingering steel crisis in the US and Europe.

Since the postwar era, crude steel production has grown in three phases. In the postwar era, global steel production grew a strong 5 percent annually. It was driven by Europe’s reconstruction and industrialisation, as well as catch-up growth by Japan and the former Soviet Union.

As this growth period ended in the 1970s, a period of stagnation ensued and global steel demand increased barely by 1.1 percent annually.

A third period ensued between 2000 and 2015 when China enjoyed its massive expansion in steel production and demand, which drove annual output growth by 13 percent. While China’s urbanisation will continue for years to come, the most intensive period of expansion is behind. Once again, the sector is facing huge overcapacity and new stagnation.

Brussels is urging Beijing to overcome overcapacity by allowing massive defaults. That, however, is not the way the US and Europe resolved their postwar steel crises. In the US, policymakers shunned intervention in the domestic market. As domestic firms suffered large losses, huge plant closures ensued. In contrast, Brussels administered a de facto domestic cartel. Initially, it imposed production quotas and minimum prices; later, it restrained subsidies and investment but reduced capacity.

As both Washington and Brussels sought to protect their market through non-tariff barriers, they embraced protectionist external policies.

How China seeks to navigate out of crisis

European critics of China's steel policy urge Beijing to take stock of the late 1990s, when Premier Zhu Rongji shut down state-owned enterprises (SOEs), which left 40 million workers redundant. But would it work today?

When Zhu began his stabilisation programme in the mid-90s, China’s urbanisation rate was 30 percent; as India’s today. There was great potential for industrialisation, urbanisation, export-led expansion and thus for catch-up growth. So between 1995 and 2015, China shifted more than 300 million people to the cities; equivalent to almost the entire US population.

Assuming stability and steady growth, China can still move more than 290 million to the cities between 2014 and 2050. Yet, double-digit catch-up is no longer possible. Moreover, as advanced economies – including EU – linger in secular stagnation, export-led growth is no longer in the cards.

Chinese SOE reforms in 2016-20 are likely to feature mixed ownership, corporate governance changes and asset restructuring rather than full-scale privatisation. China is opting for gradual SOE reforms, as many other nations before from Europe to Asia.

If current overcapacity is reduced by 30 percent in steel, coal mining and cement, up to 3 million workers will be laid off in China in the next two to three years. In the coal and steel sectors, Beijing is allocating $15.4 billion in the next two years to help laid-off workers find new jobs.

Four decades ago, the leading industrial nations opted for costly protectionist policies in the steel sector. In contrast, China is more eager not just to sustain globalisation but to accelerate world trade and investment, as evidenced by the Hangzhou-hosted G20 Summit, the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative and the creation of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and the BRICS New Development Bank.

Internationally, these initiatives can render some support to China and its industrialising regional trade partners. It is a way to facilitate China’s economic rise and industrialisation and thus steel expansion in India and other emerging economies in the future.

Dr Dan Steinbock is guest fellow of Shanghai Institutes for International Studies (SIIS), a leading global think-tank in China. This commentary is based on his SIIS project on “China and the multipolar world economy.”

EU still divided on Chinese steel

Despite growing political pressure, trade ministers at a meeting Friday are not expected to reinforce EU trade defense against Chinese dumping.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. ACCACFOs Risk Losing Relevance If They Do Not Embrace Technology
  2. UNICEFMake the Digital World Safer for Children & Increase Access for the Most Disadvantaged
  3. European Jewish CongressWelcomes Recognition of Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel and Calls on EU States to Follow Suit
  4. Mission of China to the EUChina and EU Boost Innovation Cooperation Under Horizon 2020
  5. European Gaming & Betting AssociationJuncker’s "Political" Commission Leaves Gambling Reforms to the Court
  6. AJC Transatlantic InstituteAJC Applauds U.S. Recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital City
  7. EU2017EEEU Telecom Ministers Reached an Agreement on the 5G Roadmap
  8. European Friends of ArmeniaEU-Armenia Relations in the CEPA Era: What's Next?
  9. Mission of China to the EU16+1 Cooperation Injects New Vigour Into China-EU Ties
  10. EPSUEU Blacklist of Tax Havens Is a Sham
  11. EU2017EERole of Culture in Building Cohesive Societies in Europe
  12. ILGA EuropeCongratulations to Austria - Court Overturns Barriers to Equal Marriage

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Centre Maurits CoppietersCelebrating Diversity, Citizenship and the European Project With Fundació Josep Irla
  2. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceUnderstanding the Social Consequences of Obesity
  3. Union for the MediterraneanMediterranean Countries Commit to Strengthening Women's Role in Region
  4. Bio-Based IndustriesRegistration for BBI JU Stakeholder Forum about to close. Last chance to register!
  5. European Heart NetworkThe Time Is Ripe for Simplified Front-Of-Pack Nutrition Labelling
  6. Counter BalanceNew EU External Investment Plan Risks Sidelining Development Objectives
  7. EU2017EEEAS Calls for Eastern Partnership Countries to Enter EU Market Through Estonia
  8. Dialogue PlatformThe Turkey I No Longer Know
  9. World Vision7 Million Children at Risk in the DRC: Donor Meeting to Focus on Saving More Lives
  10. EPSU-Eurelectric-IndustriAllElectricity European Social Partners Stand up for Just Energy Transition
  11. European Friends of ArmeniaSignature of CEPA Marks a Fresh Start for EU-Armenia Relations
  12. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Energy Ministers Pledge to Work More Closely at Nordic and EU Level