Dong-sung Cho, Chair of the Institute for Industrial Policy Studies (IPS), explained how the IPS model helps understand competitiveness by considering both physical and human factors as the sources of competitiveness, and expanding the scope of competitiveness from a domestic to an international view. Dilong Huang, Professor at aSSIST University and Research Director at IPSNC, presented the 2024 IPS National Competitiveness Rankings, covering two overall strategy and eight factor rankings. Hwy-chang Moon, President of aSSIST University, discussed key insights and implications from the rankings by analyzing the intra-group trends, running simulations, and using the Term-Priority (TP) matrix approach, with a focus on comparing competitiveness between the US and China.

There are three key global institutions that release national competitiveness ranking reports annually: The International Institute for Management Development (IMD), the World Economic Forum (WEF), and IPSNC. Both the IMD and WEF each release a single overall competitiveness ranking, while IPSNC differs by releasing two distinct strategy rankings—cost and differentiation strategies. By effectively leveraging the two strategic options, they can positively influence their rankings.

Global Focus: US-China Conflict

The IPS strategy rankings 2024 provide critical insights into how geopolitical tensions are reshaping the landscape of national competitiveness across the globe. This year, the report comes at a particularly sensitive time, offering clues about the repercussions of the US-China conflicts on national strategy rankings.

In a year marked by escalating global tensions, the US and China followed divergent paths in their competitiveness rankings. The US ranked fourth in both Cost Strategy (CS) and Differentiation Strategy (DS) categories (out of 62 countries/regions). This positive trajectory implies that the US’s focus on innovation and industrial development has been effective, potentially mitigating some of the adverse effects of its geopolitical challenges. In sharp contrast, China experienced a significant setback, dropping to 22nd place in the DS ranking, while maintaining its 9th place in the CS ranking. This decline indicates that ongoing geopolitical disputes have undermined its competitive edge on the global stage. Despite their differences and conflicts over sensitive issues, such as political systems, culture, and ideology, there is a room for cooperation as well as competition between the two. The analysis of the US and China will give important implications for other economies to analyze their competitive and cooperative relationship with other economies.