Examines supply chain resilience in Chinese high-tech firms, suggesting ways to mitigate negative effects.
As the U.S. entity-based control-list regime has evolved into a multidimensional restriction on technology access, collaboration, and financing, its implications for high-tech firms’ supply chain resilience remain insufficiently understood. Building on resource dependence theory and dynamic capabilities theory, this study aims to examine how the regime affects the supply chain resilience of Chinese high-tech firms, explore the underlying transmission mechanisms, and investigate the internal and external conditions under which its adverse effects can be mitigated. Using Chinese A-share listed high-tech firms from 2014 to 2024 and a staggered difference-in-differences design, we find that the regime weakens supply chain resilience. Mechanism tests show that reduced supply chain efficiency and financing constraints are two channels. Moderating analyses using pre-treatment interaction terms and triple-difference specifications show that this negative effect is attenuated by internal structural reconfiguration and capability activation, as reflected in lower supply chain concentration, greater digital transformation, and stronger continuous innovation, as well as by external resource support, as reflected in greater regional openness, stronger science and technology financial support, and a more favorable digital resource environment. The time-lag analysis further indicates that the adverse effect is more pronounced in the first post-shock year and becomes less evident in subsequent periods. Further analyses reveal industry peer effects and provide preliminary evidence that the supply chain resilience of potential domestic supplier firms may improve following the relevant downstream industry shock. This study advances supply chain risk management research by identifying how a specific geopolitical regulatory shock affects supply chain resilience and the conditions under which resilience losses can be mitigated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: