Research
My research investigates how firms embedded in transnational supply chains navigate and shape global climate governance and other foreign policies. By integrating insights from political science, economics, and corporate studies, I develop a new framework for understanding global trade politics that emphasizes how firms’ regulatory exposure across supply chains generates distinct political preferences and coalitions. This approach uncovers new cleavages in corporate lobbying around climate regulations, sanctions, and industrial policy. My dissertation explores three core questions: (1) how supply-chain exposure across different regulatory contexts drives corporate political preferences over transnational carbon regulations, (2) how firm-level interdependence shapes corporate responses to sanctions, and (3) how asset exposure informs corporate climate policy engagement. My other research projects examine how firms reconfigure supplier networks under new climate rules, spread environmental norms and policies to emerging economies, and manage regulatory risks in authoritarian markets. My research utilizes large-scale observational data on firms, their supply chain characteristics, and their political activities. I have also developed a novel text analysis pipeline with computational methods to infer political stances.
Additionally, I am interested in other issues related to de-globalization. A co-authored paper with Professor Enze Han on Chinese public backlash against international migration has been published in the Journal of Contemporary China.
Publications
Naturalized Athletes and Racialized National Identity in China (with Enze Han)
Abstract
This paper focuses on how the phenomenon of naturalized athletes has caused unprecedented domestic discussions on issues of national identity in China. Using online data collected from Sina Weibo, it discusses how the Chinese public reacted to prominent cases of naturalization of athletes in such different sports fields as men’s football and a variety of winter sports. It interrogates how Chinese citizens view the possibilities and realities of this particular category of immigrants, and how the appropriate boundaries of ‘Chineseness’ have been debated and contested. The paper found that Chinese public reaction to naturalization of foreign athletes is overall mixed, which is conditioned on an ethno-racial view of Chinese descent, cultural heritage and linguistic affinity. The paper concludes with reflections on the ethno-racial foundation of the Chinese national identity and the challenges the country will face in a future of accelerated international migration.
Journal of Contemporary China, 33(145), 52–64.Link
Working paper
Global Value Chains and Corporate Opposition to Sanctions
Abstract
Economic sanctions entail high costs not only for target states but also for sending states, particularly their business sectors. While considerable literature exists on state-level factors that affect sanction design and enforcement, less is known about business actors’ responses to and political influence on sanctions. This paper examines the circumstances under which firms attempt to influence sanction policies during the decision-making process of the state imposing them. Specifically, it investigates how firms’ international connections affect their motivation to lobby against sanctions in the US Congress. I argue that firms will be more likely to lobby against sanctions on a particular state when the state plays a more important role in the firms’ global value chains, as well as when the sanctions would harm the firms’ foreign investments and trade. I test my argument using original data on US firms’ lobbying over bills proposing economic sanctions against Russia from 2014 to 2022. The findings support my expectations. This paper is the first to explain, from the perspective of firms, how their global economic ties shape their stance on sanctions, offering an understanding of how private sector interests influence foreign policy decisions.
(Conditionally Accepted at International Studies Quarterly) [Download]
Do Firm-level Climate Change Exposures Drive Firm Political Actions in Climate Change? (with Xun Cao)
Abstract
Are firms with higher climate change physical and regulatory risks more likely to influence climate policies? Do firms with climate-related opportunities push for stronger climate policies? Drawing on newly available data, we examine how firm-level climate risks shape three political actions: lobbying, ad hoc coalition participation, and donations. Our analysis covers all listed firms in North America from 2001 to 2020. We find that firm physical exposure to climate change does not affect political actions, while regulatory and opportunity exposures both increase the likelihood of lobbying. Furthermore, regulatory exposure is positively linked to joining either pro- or anti-climate policy coalitions, whereas opportunity exposure is positively associated only with pro-climate coalitions. Finally, none of the climate exposure measures predicts firms’ political donations. Overall, these findings highlight the distinct ways in which firm-level climate change risks and opportunities drive political engagement in climate politics.
(Revise and Resubmit at British Journal of Political Science) Presentation Slides
Embedded Global Supply Chains and Firms’ Political Strategies: The Case of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism
Abstract
This paper examines how transnational supply chains shape firms’ political responses to climate-related trade policies. I argue that global supply chains generate asymmetric regulatory exposure: firms face different political incentives depending on the environmental regulations governing their upstream suppliers. Firms sourcing from highly regulated jurisdictions are more likely to support carbon tariffs, which reinforce their competitive advantage by imposing costs on less-regulated rivals. In contrast, firms embedded in supply chains linked to the least regulated jurisdictions are more likely to resist such policies, given the compliance costs they incur. To test the theory, I analyze the case of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Using firm-level supply chain data and political activity records from the EU Transparency Register, I empirically analyze whether reliance on suppliers from states with different levels of emission regulatory stringency shapes EU-based firms’ support or opposition to CBAM and related legislation. Text analysis techniques are also applied to firms’ submitted documents during the EU’s public consultation to determine their stances. The results show that variation in suppliers’ regulatory environments systematically divides firms’ positions on climate tariffs, underscoring how global supply chains produce new political cleavages in climate governance.