Investigates spatio-temporal patterns of service trade in China and RCEP nations, suggesting the need for balanced resource management.
With the gradual implementation of the RCEP agreement, China’s service sector market has opened up further. According to statistics from the OECD database, in 2023, China’s service imports from other RCEP member states accounted for approximately 33% of its total service imports. The growing volume of service trade underscores the importance of trade with other RCEP member states in helping China achieve its goals of enhancing the quality of its service sector and establishing a sustainable and healthy development model. Based on the virtual water trade theory and using input–output tables for each year provided by China’s National Bureau of Statistics, this paper calculates the virtual water imports and exports associated with China’s service trade with other RCEP member states from 2007 to 2020. Based on these results, the paper analyzes the spatiotemporal patterns of service trade between China and other RCEP member states. By constructing a water resource carrying capacity evaluation system, this study analyzes whether China’s service trade with other RCEP member states aligns with virtual water theory. The results indicate that China has consistently been a net importer of virtual water in its service trade with other RCEP member states. Net imports rose from approximately 56 million cubic meters in 2007 to approximately 380 million cubic meters in 2020. From a spatiotemporal perspective, China’s virtual water trade in services with other RCEP member states has been evolving toward a diversified and balanced import pattern. In terms of the water carrying capacity index, although China ranks in the middle range, an index of water resource carrying capacity based on the entropy weighting method indicates that China is in a state of mild overload. It still imports virtual water from regions with lower water carrying capacity. This paper provides a reference for analyzing China’s virtual water trade in services under the RCEP framework.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from Water