Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The prominence of e-commerce in international trade is escalating, marking it as a pivotal sector in China's foreign trade evolution. Cross-border e-commerce (CBEC) China is advancing towards a phase of high-quality development. Nonetheless, the advent of the post-pandemic era and the tendencies towards reverse globalization pose significant challenges to the industry's adaptive capabilities and its sustained growth trajectory. This study employs SWOT-PEST analysis to dissect the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats facing the industry, against the backdrop of its current status and the overarching macroeconomic environment influencing CBEC China landscape. The analysis reveals that CBEC China benefits politically from an evolving policy and regulatory framework, economically from robust market demand, socially from an increasingly mature cross-border logistics infrastructure, and technologically from advancements in supply chain technologies. Conversely, it faces political challenges from international legal constraints, economic limitations due to inefficiencies hindering economies of scale, a social gap in industry-specific talent, and technological setbacks in international payment settlements. Opportunistically, the "Belt and Road" initiative catalyzes policy-driven economic incentives, digital economy growth presents economic prospects, and the initiative's urban development potential alongside new information technologies offers social and technological advancements respectively. However, threats manifest in the form of anti-globalization sentiments, product homogenization, consumer skepticism towards transaction success, and financial risks exacerbated by currency fluctuation. Through a comprehensive industry analysis, this paper delineates a strategic direction for the future development of CBEC China, aiming to bolster the country's international trade growth.
Xiujun Huang (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: