This is also why China has heavily invested in high-speed rail. Even today, many people who are influenced by persistent misinformation and years of criticism toward China continue to question its high-speed rail system, asking why China doesn’t follow the U.S. model of relying on cars and airplanes instead. But China’s limited ability to rapidly scale commercial aviation means it would have to purchase large numbers of aircraft at high prices to meet domestic passenger demand, while also keeping ticket prices low. That is fundamentally not feasible. In this sense, high-speed rail is China’s only viable solution. Even though many lines are not profitable on a strict accounting basis, the enormous social and systemic benefits make the investment worthwhile.
This is somewhat similar to the camera industry. It is a shrinking market, while iterative improvements in smartphone cameras are where the real economic returns are. This is why the traditional camera industry remains dominated by Japan, while China has gradually captured adjacent markets such as smartphones and products like DJI. Of course, the barriers to entry in traditional cameras are not as deep.
As the article suggests, China is mainly “late” in certain areas. The industries are not always large, the profit pools are limited, and compliance requirements can be cumbersome. In this sense, the Chinese government does not seem to have made any major strategic mistake here. The current pattern of catching up and lagging behind is largely predictable.
Unlike in high-end semiconductors, I do think China has made significant mistakes here. In state-led industrial programs of this kind, a lack of market discipline and episodes of corruption scandals have repeatedly slowed progress and led the government to become more cautious. However, given that China already holds a dominant position in mid-to-low-end semiconductors, the overall outlook may still be optimistic.
Since it is currently World Cup season, Chinese football is another example of a similar structural issue. The system is simply deeply broken and incapable of properly identifying and cultivating top talent.
China has invested into high-speed rail for the same reason that Japan, France and Spain did: the big cities tend to be in the "sweet spot" distance of 250-750 km from one another, which is very comfortable to ride in a high-speed train.
Distances over 1000 km are already favorable for passenger jets. Even in today's Western Europe, there just aren't that many really long distance trains (by which I mean something like Amsterdam-Barcelona or Copenhagen-Milan).
Beijing - Shanghai is about 1200 km. HSR has a 70% market share. The trip takes 4.5 hours.
The only real reason you would fly this route would be as a connecting flight. But if you just want to travel from Beijing to Shanghai, HSR is the obvious choice. It probably takes less time overall, and it's way more comfortable. You can even order takeout from restaurants along the way, delivered to your seat.
High speed rail in China is a disaster. Basic safety failings have led to repeated crashes and deaths. Confiscation of property on a massive scale has damaged government credibility. Trillions of dollars worth of investment is not paying off while depreciation does it's work. Prices have been cranked up, large numbers of workers have been fired, and the whole system is still deep in the red. The only solid good coming from Chinese high speed rail is the demonstration of how much damage out of control dictators can do to the bottom line.
This delulu take. PRC HSR only had 1 disaster WenZhou, after which they shaped up and is functionally as safe as Japan, i.e. best in the world, more than euro operators, except on a magnitude larger network. Prices was kept flat literally for 10 years plus, after hike it is still far below inflation / wage increase. The whole system basically pays for itself in a few years on domestic fuel import savings alone, i.e. the aviation and freeing up slow rail from passenger to to freight which displaces diesel/trucking displaces like 1.5m barrels of oil PER DAY... ~50b+ per year in fuel cost alone never mind emissions avoided. It is objectively one of the highest ROI projects PRC has ever build, and stupendous bargain at 1T, which US overspends every 6 months on healthcare.
Like everyday US wastes on healthcare over OECD basline = enough $$$ for PRC to build like 300km of HSR, stations hardware and all. 1 week of US healthcare waste can build out entire Beijing to Shanghai route. Chinese HSR is best demonstration of why developmental dictatorship works.
This is somewhat similar to the camera industry. It is a shrinking market, while iterative improvements in smartphone cameras are where the real economic returns are. This is why the traditional camera industry remains dominated by Japan, while China has gradually captured adjacent markets such as smartphones and products like DJI. Of course, the barriers to entry in traditional cameras are not as deep.
As the article suggests, China is mainly “late” in certain areas. The industries are not always large, the profit pools are limited, and compliance requirements can be cumbersome. In this sense, the Chinese government does not seem to have made any major strategic mistake here. The current pattern of catching up and lagging behind is largely predictable. Unlike in high-end semiconductors, I do think China has made significant mistakes here. In state-led industrial programs of this kind, a lack of market discipline and episodes of corruption scandals have repeatedly slowed progress and led the government to become more cautious. However, given that China already holds a dominant position in mid-to-low-end semiconductors, the overall outlook may still be optimistic.
Since it is currently World Cup season, Chinese football is another example of a similar structural issue. The system is simply deeply broken and incapable of properly identifying and cultivating top talent.