Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
International integration can preserve productive options while synchronizing exposure to demand shocks. We distinguish productive access from foreign final-demand exposure as the primary conceptual contribution while treating the empirical decomposition as exploratory; structural breadth and the resistance–recovery distinction organize the theory-guided antecedent tests. Using OECD TiVA data for 80 economies across the global financial crisis and COVID-19, we measure value-added intensity (VAI) as value added divided by gross production. Domestic breadth is positively associated with VAI resistance (β = 0.0111, p = 0.021), but the result is between economies, becomes imprecise with sector controls, and does not survive Benjamini–Hochberg adjustment across H1–H5 (q = 0.074). Backward GVC participation is multiplicity-robust in its designated test (β = 0.0075, p = 0.005, q = 0.035). In the exploratory joint model, access is positive and exposure negative; with all added controls, access remains positive (β = 0.0117, p = 0.018), whereas exposure attenuates (β = −0.0080, p = 0.217). Neither channel predicts recovery. CPPI, LPI, UNIDO, and ITIC yield mixed, domain-specific validation. The findings concern macrostructural value capture in two crises, not production, employment, welfare, or operational continuity, and do not identify causal policy effects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paredes et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: