Global Production Network: The New Template of Power and Profit in the Regime of Empire

  • Satyaki RoyEmail author


Functional fragmentation of production and spatial dispersion actualized through global production networks (GPN) increases participation of developing South in global trade by way of specializing in particular tasks. This change in production organization as conceived in GPN literature is a new phase of fast-tracking industrialization in developing countries. A continuous process of upgradation and efficient governance would allow developing countries to move up the value ladder. The paper first of all argues that because of higher participation rate, it is largely the advanced countries who accounted net gain in returns while most of the developing countries incurred a net loss with increased participation in global production network. The paper then questions the notion of ‘value added’ and analyses the asymmetry as a structural phenomenon of global capitalism invoking Marxian notion of production, appropriation of surplus value and its distribution in the form of rent and profit. Value capture takes place by inter- and intra-industry transfer of surplus and through asymmetric distribution of potential rents conditioned through the new architecture of institutions in the era of globalization. Finally, the paper concludes that global production network emerges as the new template of power and profit in the age of Empire.


GPN Surplus value Value added Rent Profit 


  1. Baldwin, Richard. 2012. Global Supply Chains: Why They Emerged, Why They Matter, and Where They Are Going. Working Paper FGI-2012-1, Asian perspectives Global Issues series, Fung Global Institute.Google Scholar
  2. Blair, Jennifer. 2005. Global capitalism and commodity chains: looking back, going forward. Competition & Change 9(2):153–180.Google Scholar
  3. Gereffi, G. 1994. The Organization of Buyer-Driven Global Commodity Chains: How US Retailers Shape Overseas Production Networks. In Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism, Ed. G. Gereffi and M. Korzeniewicz. Westport, CT and London: Greenwood Press, 95–122.Google Scholar
  4. Gereffi, G. 1999. International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics 48(1):37–70.Google Scholar
  5. Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., and T. Sturgeon. 2005. The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy 12(1): 78–104.Google Scholar
  6. Heintz, James. 2006. Low-wage manufacturing and global commodity chains: a model in the unequal exchange tradition. Cambridge Journal of Economics 30(4):507–520.Google Scholar
  7. Hodgson, G. 1980. The theory of exploitation without the labour theory of value. Science &Society 44(3): 257–273.Google Scholar
  8. Kaplinsky, R. 1998. Globalization, Industrialization and Sustainable Growth: The Pursuit of the nth Rent, Discussion Paper 365, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.Google Scholar
  9. Kaplinsky, R. 2005. Globalization, Poverty and Inequality: Between a Rock and a Hard Place, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Kaplinsky, R. 2007. Capability Building in SSA: What Difference do the Asian Drivers Make? SLPTMD Working Paper Series, 10, Department of International Development, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Kemeny, Thomas. 2009. Are international technology gaps growing or shrinking in the age of globalization? Journal of Economic Geography 11:1–35.Google Scholar
  12. Maizels, A., et al. 1998. Trends in the Manufacturing Terms of Trade of Developing Countries. Oxford: Mimeo, Finance and Trade Policy Centre, Queen Elizabeth House.Google Scholar
  13. Marx, Karl. (1959). Capital (Vol. III). Moscow: Foreign languages Publishing House.Google Scholar
  14. Marx, Karl. 1963. Theories of Surplus Value (Vol. 1). Moscow: Progress Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. OECD. 2012. Global Production Networks and Employment: A Developing Country Perspective.Google Scholar
  16. Porter, M. E. 1985. Competitive Advantage. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Prebisch, R. 1962. The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems. Economic Bulletin for Latin America 7(1): 1–22 (N. York, United Nations).Google Scholar
  18. Roberts, Bruce. 1987. Marx after Steedman: separating Marxism from ‘Surplus Theory’. Capital & Class 11(2):84–103.Google Scholar
  19. Roy, Satyaki. 2017. Rent and surplus in global production network: identifying value capture from the south. Agrarian South Journal of Political Economy 6(1).Google Scholar
  20. Sheikh, Anwar. 1982. Neo-Ricardian economics: a wealth of algebra, a poverty of theory. Review of Radical Political Economics 14(2):67–83.Google Scholar
  21. Singer, H.W. 1950. The distribution of gains between investing and borrowing countries. American Economic Review 40(2): 473–485.Google Scholar
  22. Steedman, I. 1977. Marx After Sraffa. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
  23. UNCTAD. 2013. World Investment Report, 2013: Global Value Chains: Investment and Trade for development. Geneva: UNCTAD.Google Scholar
  24. UNIDO. 2013. 21st Century Manufacturing. UNIDO.Google Scholar
  25. Wolf, Richard D., Bruce Roberts, and Antonino Callari. 1982. Marx’s (not Ricardo’s) ‘Transformation Problem’: a radical reconceptualization. History of Political Economy 564–582.Google Scholar
  26. Wood, Ellen Meiksins. 2003. Empire of Capital, London. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
  27. World Bank. 2018. The Trouble in the Making? The Future of Manufacturing-led Development.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Studies in Industrial DevelopmentNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations