Jonathan PrewittThe postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent FTI Consulting’s positions, strategies or opinions.
The Crossroads of Global Supply Chains
As the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches, the world of international trade is bracing for potential shifts that could significantly impact global supply chains. The foreign policy agendas of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris represent two very different paths, each with the potential to reshape how goods move across borders, how trade relationships are managed, and how businesses navigate the complexities of global commerce.
Supply chains, the backbone of international trade, are highly sensitive to political changes. From trade agreements to tariffs and international relations, the decisions made in the White House can ripple across the globe, affecting everything from the cost of raw materials to the availability of critical components. As supply chain managers and business leaders, understanding these potential shifts is crucial for strategic planning and risk management.
In this article, I will explore the key aspects of Trump’s and Harris’ foreign policy approaches, focusing on how they might influence global supply chains. The goal is not to take sides but to provide a balanced analysis that helps you prepare for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead, regardless of the election outcome. I have also provided a TL;DR section at the end for those in a rush.
Trade Agreements – The Backbone of Stability
Trade agreements serve as the bedrock upon which global supply chains are constructed. They establish the rules of engagement for how goods move across borders, dictate tariff structures, and set the standards that businesses must follow to ensure compliance in international markets. As we approach the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the contrasting visions of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris for managing these agreements offer a glimpse into two very different futures for global trade and supply chain stability.
Donald Trump’s approach to trade agreements has been a defining feature of his economic policy. Rooted in his “America First” philosophy, Trump has shown a strong preference for renegotiating or even withdrawing from trade deals that he perceives as disadvantageous to the United States. His administration’s most notable action in this arena was the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which was replaced by the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2020. The USMCA was crafted to strengthen protections for American workers and industries, introducing stricter rules of origin and higher labor standards, particularly in the automotive sector.
While the USMCA was intended to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. and reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, particularly from countries like China, it also introduced significant uncertainty into global supply chains. Businesses that had long relied on the stability of NAFTA had to quickly adapt to new rules, tariffs, and compliance requirements. The unpredictability of Trump’s approach to trade agreements created a challenging environment for supply chain managers, who were forced to navigate an ever-changing landscape of trade policies.
On the other hand, Kamala Harris is expected to advocate for a more multilateral and cooperative approach to trade agreements. Her foreign policy vision is likely to focus on rebuilding alliances and reinforcing global institutions that facilitate international trade. Harris may seek to engage with existing trade agreements in a way that promotes not only economic interests but also ethical considerations, such as fair trade practices, environmental sustainability, and labor rights.
This multilateral approach could lead to more stable and predictable trade relations, which would be a welcome change for businesses weary of the unpredictability that has characterized recent years. However, Harris’ emphasis on ethical standards and sustainability might introduce new regulatory challenges for companies. Businesses that have traditionally relied on less stringent international standards could face increased compliance costs and the need to revamp their supply chain practices to meet higher environmental and labor benchmarks.
The implications of these differing approaches are profound. Trump’s transactional and often unilateral strategy may encourage businesses to localize their supply chains, reducing dependency on foreign suppliers, particularly in regions perceived as politically or economically unstable. This could enhance resilience in some areas but at the cost of higher operational expenses and more complex logistics. Conversely, Harris’ focus on global cooperation and ethical trade practices could foster a more stable international trading environment, but it might also demand greater transparency and accountability from businesses, increasing the regulatory burden.
Food For Thought
As we consider the potential outcomes of the 2024 election, it’s clear that the direction taken by U.S. trade policy will have significant ramifications for global supply chains. Trump’s approach could lead to a reconfiguration of supply chains, with a focus on reducing foreign dependencies and enhancing domestic production capabilities. Meanwhile, Harris’ multilateral vision might offer greater stability and encourage sustainable practices, but it could also require businesses to invest more in compliance and regulatory adherence. As the election draws nearer, it’s crucial to evaluate how these different paths could impact your supply chain strategy and prepare accordingly.
Tariff Tango – Dancing Around the Costs and Consequences
Tariffs have long been a powerful tool in the arsenal of U.S. foreign policy, wielded to protect domestic industries, rebalance trade relationships, or exert pressure on foreign governments. As we look toward the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the starkly different tariff strategies proposed by Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are poised to shape the future of international trade and, by extension, the stability and efficiency of global supply chains.
During his first term, Donald Trump demonstrated a readiness to use tariffs as a key instrument in his broader “America First” economic policy. His administration’s trade war with China stands out as a particularly impactful example. Trump imposed tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Chinese goods, aiming to address long-standing issues such as intellectual property theft and trade imbalances. While these tariffs were intended to pressure China into making concessions, they also had significant repercussions for businesses that relied heavily on Chinese imports.
For supply chain managers, the sudden imposition of tariffs meant grappling with increased costs and a more complex operating environment. Companies that sourced components or finished products from China were forced to either absorb the additional costs or pass them on to consumers, which could affect competitiveness. In response, many businesses began to diversify their supply chains, shifting production to countries like Vietnam, India, or Mexico, or even considering reshoring manufacturing to the United States. However, these shifts often required significant investments and time, introducing new logistical challenges.
Trump’s tariff strategy was not limited to China. His administration also imposed tariffs on goods from other major trading partners, including the European Union, Canada, and Mexico, as part of broader efforts to renegotiate trade deals that he viewed as unfavorable to the United States. This approach created an environment of uncertainty, where businesses had to be prepared for sudden changes in the cost and availability of key materials and components.
In contrast, Kamala Harris is likely to adopt a more measured approach to tariffs. Harris has generally opposed the use of tariffs as a unilateral tool, criticizing their impact on American consumers and businesses. If elected, Harris may seek to reduce some of the tariffs imposed during Trump’s presidency, particularly those that have proven most disruptive to global supply chains. Instead of using tariffs as a primary means of addressing trade disputes, Harris might favor resolving these issues through diplomacy and multilateral negotiations, working with allies to apply collective pressure on countries like China.
While a reduction in tariffs under a Harris administration could lower some of the immediate costs associated with global trade, it might also come with a renewed emphasis on compliance with labor and environmental standards. Harris is expected to prioritize ethical considerations in trade agreements, which could lead to stricter regulations and higher compliance costs for businesses operating in global markets. This could particularly affect industries that have benefited from lower-cost, less-regulated production environments abroad.
Food For Thought
The divergent tariff strategies of Trump and Harris present distinct challenges and opportunities for global supply chains. Trump’s continued use of tariffs as a leverage tool could drive further diversification of supply chains, reducing reliance on any single country but potentially increasing costs and complexity. On the other hand, Harris’ approach to reducing tariffs might offer more stability and predictability, but it could also introduce new regulatory challenges that businesses must navigate.
As we move closer to the 2024 election, it is crucial to consider how these differing approaches to tariffs could impact your supply chain strategy. Whether it’s building resilience through supplier diversification or preparing for potential regulatory changes under a new administration, the ability to adapt to the evolving trade landscape will be key to maintaining a competitive edge in the global market.
The Global Chessboard – International Relations and Supply Chain Stability
International relations are the unseen forces that shape the landscape of global supply chains. The diplomatic stances and foreign policy decisions of world leaders can either smooth the path for international trade or introduce new obstacles that disrupt the flow of goods across borders. As we approach the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the contrasting approaches of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris to international relations will have significant implications for supply chains that depend on stable and predictable global partnerships.
Donald Trump’s foreign policy has been marked by a strong preference for unilateral action and a willingness to challenge long-standing alliances. His administration frequently employed a confrontational approach, particularly in dealings with China, which was characterized by escalating tensions and the imposition of tariffs that led to a trade war. This approach forced many companies to reconsider their reliance on Chinese suppliers and to explore alternative sourcing options, often at significant cost.
Beyond China, Trump’s broader strategy involved a reevaluation of America’s role in international organizations and agreements. His decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was emblematic of his administration’s retreat from multilateralism. While these moves were framed as efforts to prioritize U.S. interests, they also introduced uncertainty into global supply chains that rely on the stability provided by international agreements and cooperative frameworks.
For supply chain managers, Trump’s approach meant navigating a landscape where geopolitical volatility was a constant concern. The unpredictability of foreign relations under Trump required businesses to be agile, developing contingency plans for potential disruptions and staying alert to the possibility of sudden shifts in trade policy. The challenge was not just about managing costs but also about ensuring continuity in the face of rapidly changing global dynamics.
In contrast, Kamala Harris is expected to pursue a more diplomatic and cooperative approach to international relations. Harris’ foreign policy vision likely emphasizes the importance of rebuilding alliances and strengthening global institutions that have been strained in recent years. Her administration might prioritize re-engagement with international agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, and seek to restore America’s leadership role on the global stage. For supply chain managers, this could translate into a more stable and predictable environment for international trade.
However, Harris’ focus on multilateralism might also come with new complexities. Working within international frameworks can sometimes slow decision-making processes, particularly in response to global crises. This could mean that supply chains, while more stable in the long term, might need to be more resilient in the short term to navigate any delays or challenges that arise from multilateral negotiations. Additionally, Harris’ emphasis on ethical governance and sustainability could lead to increased scrutiny of supply chain practices, particularly in areas such as labor rights and environmental impact.
Food For Thought
The differing approaches to international relations between Trump and Harris present unique challenges and opportunities for global supply chains. Trump’s unilateral strategy could lead to increased volatility and require businesses to be highly adaptable in response to shifting geopolitical landscapes. In contrast, Harris’ emphasis on rebuilding alliances and fostering global cooperation might offer greater stability but could also introduce new layers of complexity, particularly in terms of compliance with international standards and regulations.
As we look ahead to the 2024 election, it is essential to consider how these divergent foreign policy strategies could impact your supply chain operations. Whether it involves preparing for potential disruptions under Trump or navigating the intricacies of multilateralism under Harris, understanding and planning for these scenarios will be critical to maintaining supply chain resilience and ensuring business continuity in an unpredictable world.
Supply Chain Resilience – Building Strength in Uncertain Times
Supply chain resilience has become a buzzword in recent years, particularly as global disruptions have exposed the vulnerabilities inherent in complex, interconnected supply networks. The 2024 U.S. presidential election brings this issue to the forefront, with Donald Trump and Kamala Harris offering contrasting visions that will likely influence how businesses approach the concept of resilience in their supply chains.
Donald Trump’s presidency has been characterized by a strong push toward economic nationalism and reducing dependency on foreign suppliers, particularly those from countries perceived as geopolitical adversaries. Trump’s policies, such as the trade war with China, have underscored the risks associated with over-reliance on single-source suppliers, prompting many businesses to rethink their supply chain strategies. His administration’s focus on reshoring—bringing manufacturing and supply chains back to the U.S.—has been a key component of this strategy.
For supply chain managers, Trump’s emphasis on reshoring presents both challenges and opportunities. On the one hand, bringing production closer to home can reduce exposure to international risks, such as tariffs, geopolitical tensions, and supply chain disruptions caused by global events like pandemics. It can also create opportunities to streamline operations and improve oversight of the supply chain. However, reshoring is not without its costs. The process of shifting production from low-cost regions like Asia back to the U.S. can be expensive and time-consuming, and it often results in higher operational costs due to differences in labor and material expenses.
Trump’s approach to resilience is fundamentally about enhancing self-sufficiency and reducing reliance on foreign entities that could become liabilities in times of crisis. This strategy encourages businesses to build supply chains that are less vulnerable to external shocks and more capable of withstanding economic or political disruptions.
In contrast, Kamala Harris is likely to focus on a different aspect of resilience—one that emphasizes collaboration, sustainability, and ethical practices. Harris’ approach to supply chain resilience is expected to prioritize building strong, sustainable networks that can withstand global challenges through diversification and cooperation. Her policies might encourage businesses to engage more deeply with international partners, strengthening global supply chains by diversifying risk across multiple countries and regions.
Harris is also expected to emphasize the importance of sustainability in supply chain management. This could mean encouraging or even mandating that businesses adopt practices that reduce environmental impact, improve labor conditions, and promote corporate responsibility. While this approach can enhance long-term resilience by building supply chains that are more sustainable and socially responsible, it may also introduce new challenges, particularly for companies that are not yet equipped to meet these higher standards.
For businesses, the challenge under a Harris administration might be to balance the need for ethical and sustainable practices with the demands of operational efficiency and cost management. While building more resilient and responsible supply chains can create a competitive advantage, it can also require significant investment in new technologies, processes, and partnerships.
Food For Thought
The contrasting approaches to supply chain resilience between Trump and Harris offer different pathways for businesses to consider. Trump’s focus on reshoring and reducing foreign dependencies might appeal to companies looking to enhance control and security over their supply chains, but it could also lead to higher costs and more complex logistics. On the other hand, Harris’ emphasis on global cooperation and sustainability could foster more resilient and ethical supply chains, but it might also require significant adjustments in how businesses operate and manage their networks.
As we approach the 2024 election, it’s crucial for supply chain managers to assess how these differing visions might impact their operations. Whether it’s investing in domestic production capabilities under Trump or embracing global collaboration and sustainability under Harris, the ability to adapt and innovate will be key to building strong, resilient supply chains that can thrive in an increasingly uncertain world.
Regulatory Landscapes – Navigating the Changing Rules of Global Trade
In the ever-evolving world of global supply chains, regulatory compliance is a critical factor that can make or break a business’s ability to operate smoothly across borders. As we look ahead to the 2024 U.S. presidential election, it’s clear that the regulatory approaches of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris will play a pivotal role in shaping the rules and standards that govern international trade. Understanding these potential changes is essential for businesses looking to stay ahead in a complex and often unpredictable regulatory environment.
During his first term, Donald Trump made deregulation a cornerstone of his economic policy. His administration worked to roll back numerous regulations that were seen as burdensome to businesses, particularly those in industries like manufacturing, energy, and finance. Trump’s regulatory philosophy was rooted in the belief that reducing government intervention would spur economic growth, create jobs, and make American companies more competitive on the global stage.
For supply chain managers, Trump’s deregulation efforts had both positive and negative implications. On the one hand, fewer regulations meant reduced compliance costs and greater operational flexibility, allowing businesses to streamline processes and improve efficiency. On the other hand, the rapid pace of deregulation sometimes created uncertainty, as companies struggled to keep up with the changing landscape and anticipate future regulatory shifts. Moreover, Trump’s focus on loosening environmental and labor regulations led to concerns about potential reputational risks, particularly for businesses operating in markets with stricter standards.
If Trump were to win the 2024 election, we might expect a continuation of this deregulatory approach. This could mean further reductions in regulatory oversight, particularly in areas like environmental protection, labor rights, and corporate governance. While this might benefit businesses in the short term by lowering costs and easing compliance burdens, it could also increase exposure to risks related to global market expectations, where higher standards are increasingly becoming the norm.
Kamala Harris, on the other hand, is likely to take a more proactive approach to regulation, particularly in areas related to sustainability, labor rights, and corporate responsibility. Harris has consistently advocated for stronger environmental protections, fair labor practices, and greater accountability in corporate governance. Her administration might seek to introduce or tighten regulations that align with these values, with a focus on promoting ethical business practices both domestically and internationally.
For supply chain managers, a Harris presidency could mean navigating a more complex regulatory environment. Companies might need to invest more in compliance programs, ensuring that their operations meet higher standards for environmental sustainability and social responsibility. This could involve adopting new technologies, improving transparency across the supply chain, and working more closely with suppliers to ensure adherence to regulatory requirements.
However, Harris’ approach could also open up new opportunities for businesses that are able to position themselves as leaders in sustainability and ethical practices. As consumers and investors increasingly prioritize companies with strong environmental and social credentials, those that can demonstrate compliance with higher standards may gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
Food For Thought
The regulatory landscape under Trump and Harris will present distinct challenges and opportunities for businesses. Trump’s focus on deregulation might lower compliance costs and increase operational flexibility, but it could also heighten reputational risks in a global market that values sustainability and ethical practices. Harris’ approach, while potentially increasing the regulatory burden, could drive innovation and open up new market opportunities for businesses that are able to meet higher standards.
As the 2024 election approaches, it’s crucial for supply chain managers to assess how these differing regulatory approaches might impact their operations. Whether it’s preparing for further deregulation under Trump or navigating more stringent regulations under Harris, staying informed and proactive will be key to maintaining compliance and competitiveness in a rapidly changing global market.
Technological Innovation – Shaping the Future of Supply Chains
Technological innovation has become a driving force in the evolution of global supply chains. Advances in automation, artificial intelligence (AI), and data analytics have transformed how goods are produced, tracked, and delivered across the world. As the 2024 U.S. presidential election looms, the policies of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris will likely influence the pace and direction of technological adoption in supply chain management, with far-reaching implications for businesses striving to remain competitive in a rapidly changing landscape.
Donald Trump’s first term saw a strong emphasis on bolstering American technological capabilities, particularly in areas related to national security and economic competitiveness. His administration’s policies included efforts to protect American intellectual property, especially from perceived threats like China. Trump’s stance on technology was closely tied to his broader economic agenda, which aimed to reduce the country’s reliance on foreign technologies and encourage domestic innovation.
For supply chain managers, Trump’s focus on national security and intellectual property protection meant increased scrutiny of technology partnerships and supply chain dependencies, particularly those involving Chinese companies. The U.S. government’s restrictions on companies like Huawei and its push to decouple from Chinese technology suppliers forced many businesses to reevaluate their technology strategies. While these policies aimed to strengthen American technological independence, they also introduced new challenges, such as the need to find alternative suppliers and manage the risks associated with supply chain disruptions.
Trump’s emphasis on deregulation also played a role in shaping the technological landscape. By rolling back certain regulations, his administration sought to create a more favorable environment for technological innovation and entrepreneurship. This approach encouraged investment in emerging technologies like AI, blockchain, and the Internet of Things (IoT), which have the potential to revolutionize supply chain management by improving efficiency, transparency, and resilience.
On the other hand, Kamala Harris is expected to adopt a different approach to technology, one that emphasizes the ethical implications of technological advancement. Harris has been a vocal advocate for ensuring that technology serves the public good, and her administration is likely to prioritize policies that promote the responsible and equitable use of technology. This could involve introducing new regulations to address concerns around data privacy, cybersecurity, and the impact of automation on the workforce.
For supply chain managers, Harris’ focus on ethical technology could mean navigating a more regulated environment. Companies may need to invest in compliance programs to ensure that their use of technology aligns with new regulatory standards. This could include adopting stronger cybersecurity measures, enhancing data privacy protections, and considering the social impact of automation on workers throughout the supply chain.
However, Harris’ emphasis on ethical technology could also open up new opportunities for innovation. Businesses that can demonstrate a commitment to responsible technology use may find themselves well-positioned to attract customers and investors who value sustainability and corporate responsibility. Moreover, Harris’ support for green technologies could drive the adoption of new tools and practices that enhance the sustainability of supply chains, such as energy-efficient transportation methods and environmentally friendly packaging solutions.
Food For Thought
The future of technological innovation in supply chain management will be shaped by the policies of the next U.S. president. Trump’s focus on national security and deregulation may continue to encourage rapid technological adoption, but it could also lead to increased scrutiny of international technology partnerships. Harris’ emphasis on ethical technology and regulation could introduce new compliance challenges, but it might also drive innovation in sustainability and corporate responsibility.
As the 2024 election approaches, supply chain managers must consider how these differing approaches to technology will impact their operations. Whether it’s navigating the complexities of international technology partnerships under Trump or aligning with new ethical standards under Harris, staying ahead of technological trends and regulatory changes will be key to maintaining a competitive edge in the global market.
Environmental Impact – Balancing Growth and Sustainability
Environmental sustainability has emerged as a central concern for businesses and governments alike, as the impact of climate change becomes increasingly evident across the globe. The 2024 U.S. presidential election is poised to significantly influence how environmental policies shape supply chain operations, with Donald Trump and Kamala Harris presenting sharply contrasting approaches to managing environmental risks and opportunities.
Donald Trump’s administration was characterized by a deregulatory approach to environmental policy, aimed at reducing what he viewed as unnecessary burdens on businesses. Trump rolled back numerous environmental regulations, including those related to carbon emissions, water quality, and land use. His administration’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, a global accord aimed at combating climate change, was a particularly significant move that signaled a shift away from international cooperation on environmental issues.
For supply chain managers, Trump’s environmental policies have meant fewer regulatory constraints and lower compliance costs, particularly in industries such as manufacturing, energy, and agriculture. The deregulation of environmental standards allowed some businesses to streamline operations and reduce expenses associated with environmental compliance. However, this approach also raised concerns about long-term sustainability, as the rollback of environmental protections could lead to reputational risks and increased scrutiny from consumers and investors who prioritize sustainability.
Trump’s focus on promoting domestic energy production, particularly fossil fuels, also had implications for supply chains. His administration’s support for coal, oil, and natural gas industries created a favorable environment for businesses reliant on these energy sources, but it also positioned the U.S. at odds with the global trend toward renewable energy and carbon reduction. This divergence raised questions about the future competitiveness of American supply chains in a world increasingly focused on sustainability.
In stark contrast, Kamala Harris has consistently advocated for stronger environmental protections and a transition toward a green economy. Harris has made climate change a central issue in her political career, emphasizing the need for comprehensive action to reduce carbon emissions, protect natural resources, and promote environmental justice. If elected, Harris is likely to re-enter the Paris Agreement and pursue ambitious climate policies that align the U.S. with global efforts to combat climate change.
For businesses, a Harris administration would likely introduce stricter environmental regulations, particularly in areas related to carbon emissions, energy efficiency, and sustainable sourcing. Supply chain managers might need to invest in new technologies and processes to reduce the environmental impact of their operations, from production and transportation to packaging and waste management. Compliance with these regulations could increase costs in the short term, but it might also drive innovation and create new market opportunities in the growing green economy.
Harris’ environmental agenda could also emphasize the importance of transparency and accountability in supply chains. Businesses may be expected to provide more detailed reporting on their environmental impact, including the carbon footprint of their products and the sustainability of their sourcing practices. This could require greater collaboration with suppliers to ensure that environmental standards are met throughout the supply chain.
Food For Thought
The environmental policies of the next U.S. president will have profound implications for global supply chains. Trump’s deregulatory approach may reduce compliance costs in the short term but could also expose businesses to reputational risks and potential market disadvantages as the world shifts toward sustainability. Harris’ commitment to strong environmental protections could drive significant changes in supply chain operations, requiring businesses to invest in sustainability initiatives and adapt to a more regulated environment.
As the 2024 election approaches, it’s essential for supply chain managers to evaluate how these differing environmental policies might impact their operations. Whether it’s preparing for stricter regulations under Harris or navigating the opportunities and risks of Trump’s deregulatory stance, integrating environmental considerations into supply chain strategy will be key to achieving long-term resilience and competitiveness.
Geopolitical Alliances – The Impact on Global Supply Chain Networks
Geopolitical alliances and the broader international landscape play a critical role in shaping the flow of goods and services across the globe. The relationships that the United States maintains with other nations, whether as allies or adversaries, directly influence trade policies, supply chain networks, and the stability of global markets. As we approach the 2024 U.S. presidential election, the differing approaches of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris to managing these alliances will have significant implications for global supply chains.
Donald Trump’s presidency was marked by a preference for bilateral agreements and a willingness to challenge long-standing alliances. His “America First” doctrine often led to strained relationships with traditional allies and introduced a level of unpredictability into global trade. For example, Trump’s criticism of NATO, his trade disputes with the European Union, and his tariffs on goods from Canada and Mexico reflected a shift away from multilateralism in favor of more transactional, nation-to-nation dealings.
For supply chain managers, Trump’s approach meant operating in a more uncertain global environment. The shift towards bilateral agreements and the frequent imposition of tariffs created a volatile trade landscape where the rules of engagement could change quickly and with little warning. Companies with supply chains that spanned multiple countries had to be particularly agile, as changes in trade policy could disrupt supply routes, increase costs, and introduce delays. The need to continuously monitor geopolitical developments and adjust strategies accordingly became a critical aspect of managing global supply chains under Trump’s administration.
On the other hand, Kamala Harris is expected to take a more traditional approach to geopolitical alliances, emphasizing the importance of rebuilding and strengthening multilateral relationships. Harris has consistently advocated for re-engaging with international institutions and restoring America’s leadership role in global governance. Her approach would likely involve working closely with allies to address common challenges, such as climate change, global security, and economic inequality, through coordinated efforts and collective action.
For supply chain managers, a Harris presidency could bring greater stability to international trade relationships. Rebuilding alliances and reinforcing multilateral institutions might lead to a more predictable and cooperative global environment, which could reduce the risks associated with sudden policy shifts or trade disputes. This stability would be beneficial for companies that rely on complex, cross-border supply chains, as it would allow for more consistent planning and long-term strategy development.
However, Harris’ focus on multilateralism might also involve greater alignment with international standards and regulations, particularly in areas like environmental protection, labor rights, and corporate governance. This could mean that businesses with global supply chains would need to ensure compliance with higher standards, potentially increasing operational costs and requiring more robust oversight and reporting mechanisms.
Food For Thought
The geopolitical strategies of Trump and Harris offer two very different futures for global supply chains. Trump’s focus on bilateral agreements and transactional relationships could lead to a more volatile trade environment, requiring businesses to remain highly adaptable and responsive to changes in policy and alliance dynamics. Conversely, Harris’ emphasis on rebuilding multilateral alliances might provide greater stability and predictability, but it could also introduce new regulatory challenges that businesses must navigate.
As we approach the 2024 election, it’s crucial for supply chain managers to consider how these geopolitical strategies could impact their operations. Whether it’s preparing for potential disruptions under Trump or aligning with higher international standards under Harris, understanding and adapting to the global political landscape will be essential for maintaining a resilient and efficient supply chain network.
TL;DR (why so many words?!?!?!)
Alright, let’s cut to the chase. Here’s the quick and dirty version of what you need to know about how the 2024 U.S. presidential election could mess with—or maybe even improve—global supply chains.
Trade Agreements: If Trump wins, expect more renegotiated trade deals that prioritize American interests, potentially causing headaches for businesses relying on stable, long-standing international agreements. You might need to localize your supply chains to avoid disruptions. If Harris takes the helm, she’ll probably go for a multilateral approach, working with allies and prioritizing fair trade and sustainability. This could mean more stable agreements but with stricter compliance requirements.
Tariffs: Trump’s love for tariffs isn’t going away. If he’s re-elected, you might see more of these, forcing businesses to rethink their sourcing strategies and potentially raise costs. Harris, however, would likely dial down the tariff wars and focus on diplomacy. That said, she’ll likely push for higher standards in labor and environmental practices, so get ready for possible new regulations.
International Relations: Trump’s “America First” policy has made global trade more unpredictable. If he stays in office, prepare for more bilateral deals and less reliance on traditional alliances, which could lead to supply chain volatility. Harris would probably work to mend relationships and strengthen multilateral ties, offering more stability in trade relations—but also more international regulations to follow.
Supply Chain Resilience: Trump’s strategy focuses on making supply chains more self-sufficient by bringing production back to the U.S. This could reduce some risks but increase costs and complexity. Harris, on the other hand, would emphasize sustainability and ethical practices, likely pushing businesses to adopt greener, more transparent operations.
Regulatory Landscapes: Trump would continue his deregulatory crusade, reducing compliance burdens but possibly increasing reputational risks as global markets lean greener. Harris would likely introduce tougher regulations, especially on environmental and labor standards, so get ready to invest in compliance if she wins.
Technological Innovation: Expect Trump to push for technological advances that protect national interests, especially in areas like AI and cybersecurity, but with a focus on U.S. dominance. Harris would likely emphasize ethical use of technology and may introduce more regulations around data privacy and sustainability, so innovation will need to align with these values.
Environmental Impact: Trump’s deregulation approach means fewer environmental constraints but greater scrutiny from eco-conscious consumers and investors. Harris will push hard on environmental protections, so companies will need to prioritize sustainability to stay compliant and competitive.
Geopolitical Alliances: Trump prefers one-on-one deals, leading to potential instability in global trade. Harris would aim to rebuild and strengthen alliances, offering more predictability but likely with more global regulations to navigate.
Bottom Line: The election will bring either continued unpredictability with a focus on American interests (Trump) or a push towards global cooperation with higher ethical and environmental standards (Harris). Either way, you’ll need to stay adaptable, keep an eye on compliance, and be ready to pivot your supply chain strategies to thrive in whatever political landscape emerges post-election.
Thank you for reading!
Jonathan Prewitt