Research
My substantive research interests focus on the political behaviors of firms on climate regulations and geopolitical tensions. While firm-centered studies have explored multinationals’ political influence in promoting global economic integration over the past decades, my dissertation aims to investigate their political efforts to respond to the rising tide of political disintegration in the global market, where firms and states are already interconnected through supply chain networks. My research delves into how firms politically maneuver in response to foreign policies that may create trade barriers, especially considering their integration within global supply chains, shifting firms’ viewpoint from passive policy recipients to proactive participants. Specifically, I concentrate on two significant issues: the U.S. economic sanctions against trading partners, mainly Russia, and the imposition of carbon emission tariffs on imported goods from outside Europe. I am also working on collaborative projects. One co-authored project with Professor Xun Cao studies formal and informal political activities on climate politics, which explores how firms’ assessment of the impact of climate change motivates firms’ political actions in the context of climate politics.
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.
(Under review) Download
Do Firm-level Climate Change Risks Drive Firm Lobby in Climate Change Policies? (with Xun Cao)
Abstract
Are firms associated with higher climate change physical risks (e.g., from wildfire and floods) and regulatory risks (e.g., regulations banning/heavily taxing fossil fuel extraction) more likely to act politically to affect climate change policies? Do firms associated with climate-related opportunities (e.g., those in renewable energy) push for more climate policies? To answer these important questions, we use a newly available data on firm climate risks, and we test whether and how these firm level climate risks affect three types of firm political actions: 1) lobbying, 2) participation in ad hoc climate coalitions, and 3) donations. Our empirical analysis covers all listed companies in North America from 2001 to 2020. We find that first, a firm’s physical exposure to climate change has no effect on any type of political action. Second, both firm regulatory and opportunity exposures increase the chances of a firm lobbying in climate-related policies. Third, firm regulatory exposure is positively associated with coalition membership regardless of whether a coalition supports or opposes climate policies, while opportunity exposure is only positively associated with coalitions favoring climate policies. Finally, we find that none of the firm-year level climate exposure measures is associated with firm donation.
Work in progress
Supply Chains and Political Strategies: Analyzing Firm Responses to the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism
Abstract
The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) charges a carbon price on imported products whose production-related emissions have not been taxed by the exporting states. This mechanism is intended to incentivize more states and regional organizations to develop carbon pricing schemes to obtain the exemption status and reduce emissions in collective efforts. However, the levels of emission regulation development vary significantly among exporting states, as states are either reluctant or incapable of mitigation efforts. Therefore, this paper aims to explore whether EU-based firms’ supply chains with suppliers from different exporting states would shape contrasting political preferences on the mechanism. Conventionally, firms sourcing from foreign partners are considered unconditionally against importing regulatory costs. I argue that depending on the footprints of supply chains, some firms can be strategically supportive to the mechanism: importing firms with suppliers from states with relatively advanced levels of emission regulations (suppliers from “cleaner states”) are more likely to support the additional importing tariff as they are more likely to enjoy the exemption or reduction benefits. Meanwhile, the CBAM poses additional costs to their competitors who partner with suppliers from states with limited levels of carbon regulation development (suppliers from “dirtier states”). On the contrary, firms with suppliers from “dirtier states” are more likely to oppose the CBAM due to the additional carbon price.
Using firm-level supply chain data and the EU lobbying records, the empirical analysis examines whether firms’ reliance on suppliers from cleaner or dirtier states shapes their stances on supporting or opposing the CBAM and related legislation. Specifically, the main outcome variable is on EU-based firms’ political activities using the lobbying and public expressions archived provided by the EU Transparency Register. The paper not only determines whether a firm has lobbied on relevant issues but also analyzes the firms’ stances using text analysis approaches applied to the documents they submitted during the EU’s public consultation sessions. The main independent variable is based on firm-level supply chain information from the Factset Revere Dataset and the state-level emission regulation development indicators based on the Regulatory Indicators for Sustainable Energy (RISE) Dataset provided by the World Bank.