3.1. Spatial and Temporal Evolution of Trade Network Patterns
3.1.1. Overall Transaction Volume
Figure 1 illustrates the fluctuating growth trend of the total trade in electronic products for all countries from 2000 to 2021, with four distinct stages. The first stage covers the years 2000–2003, with the total trade volume fluctuating around USD 200 billion. The second stage occurred from 2004–2007, during which the total trade volume surged from USD 264.5 billion (2004) to USD 357.2 billion (2007). The third stage is characterized by a “V” pattern of total trade from 2008–2011, which resulted from the global financial crisis in 2008. The total trade volume sharply declined from USD 368.3 billion (2008) to USD 316.1 billion (2009) and then gradually rose to USD 393.8 billion in 2010. The fourth stage, spanning from 2012 to 2021, was marked by a steady increase in the total trade volume, which rose continuously from USD 416.8 billion (2012) to over USD 500 billion in 2018, and finally reached USD 540 billion in 2021.
This study examined the electronic product trade of all nations in the world using four time-nodes. The investigation started in the year 2000, which served as the first time-node. The year 2009, marked by a sharp decline in the total trade volume due to the global financial crisis, was considered the second significant time node. The third key time node was 2019, which experienced a slight dip in overall trade volume. In 2021, the global total trade in electronic products reached its peak, representing the most recent development in trade. Therefore, 2021 was regarded as the fourth important time node.
3.1.2. Increased Country Participation and Centralized Distribution of Trade Volume
Table 1 presents the top 10 countries and regions involved in global electronics trade from 2000 to 2021, with predominantly Asian countries and regions. The United States consistently ranked among the top three North American countries, and Mexico only made the top 10 in 2021. The list includes only the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands from Europe, and Germany and the Netherlands consistently ranked in the top 10. No African, Oceanic, or South American countries or regions made the list. Over the period of 2000 to 2021, the top 10 countries accounted for 62.76% to 66.83% of total global trade, reflecting the increasing polarization of electronics trade worldwide. The number of countries and regions participating in trade increased slightly from 240 to 246, indicating a modest increase in country participation.
Since 2000, the global electronics trade pattern has been characterized by a “tripartite confrontation”, which is unevenly distributed across regions, with Asia, North America, and Europe dominating, while most countries in Africa, South America, and Oceania are under-represented. However, since then, developing countries, led by China, have gained momentum, with China and Malaysia appearing in the top 10 in 2009, and Mexico entering the top 10 ranking in 2021. Although the majority of the top 10 countries are developed countries, the proportion of developing countries has increased, indicating that developed countries no longer have an absolute advantage in dominating global trade in electronics, and developing countries have taken their place through their own development.
The dominance of China in the global electronics trade is noteworthy, with the country ranking first in 2009, 2019, and 2021. Hong Kong also consistently appeared in second or third place. The total trade volume between the two regions increased from USD 81.752 billion in 2000 to USD 196.855 billion in 2021, and its share of total trade rose from 25.86% to 36.45% in the same period. This trend indicates that China has established itself as a leader in the international market for electronic products, and its market share is continually growing.
3.3. Unbalanced Trade Networks, Dominated by a Few Countries
Table 4 shows the top 10 countries and regions ranked by closeness centrality in the global electronics trade network from 2000 to 2021. The high representation of European and American countries suggests that they are at the center of the global electronics trade network, with frequent trade exchanges among themselves and better spatial accessibility to other countries in the network. In 2000, Burundi and Eritrea, two African countries, had the highest closeness centrality, indicating that they were the most efficient in trading with other countries and the least vulnerable to the influence of other countries’ control. However, in 2009, 2019, and 2021, the closeness centrality of the two countries was zero. Both countries have experienced political upheavals in the 21st century, such as protests and violence in Burundi’s presidential election in 2015, and restrictions on civil rights and freedoms in Eritrea in 2001 under a system of general mobilization. These are among the reasons for the sharp decline in the centrality of the two countries. Apart from 2000, China’s closeness centrality ranked in the top 10 in all other years, remaining at number 4 in both 2009 and 2019, and increasing from 0.88 to 0.897 in absolute terms. However, it slightly dropped to 0.881 in 2021, and fell to number 5. This drop can be attributed to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on China’s imports and exports. Among other Asian countries, only South Korea and India made it to the top 10 in 2009 and 2019, respectively, with 0.855 and 0.862 in absolute terms. None of the South American and Oceanic countries made it to the list due to their geographical locations.
Table 5 shows that the top 10 countries and regions in the betweenness centrality ranking of the global electronic product trade network varied considerably by geographical distribution from 2000 to 2021. In 2000, North America, led by the United States and Canada, and Europe, led by the United Kingdom, Germany, and France, dominated the top 10 countries. Australia, an Oceanic nation, and South Africa, an African nation, were also on the list, with respective values of 998.388 and 929.406. However, no Asian nations were featured. In 2009, European and American nations remained relatively unchanged, but no African nations made the list. China, an Asian nation, ranked fourth with 1363.075, while Australia remained in the top ten. After 2019, the top 10 countries consisted entirely of North American, European, and Asian nations. In addition to China and Hong Kong, the United Arab Emirates joined the list in 2019 and 2021, with 882,815 and 557,445 inhabitants respectively. The preceding analysis demonstrates that European and American countries have always been at the center of the trade network and have strong control over global electronic product trade, while Oceanic and African countries have lost control, and Asian countries have gradually increased their influence, resulting in a triple balance of power.
By considering both the comprehensive closeness centrality and the betweenness centrality, the global electronics trade network exhibits a three-tiered trend. European and American countries have maintained a stable central position, while Asian countries have gradually increased their ability to trade in electronic products and are becoming less subject to control by other regions.
3.4. Community Division
Using Gephi to partition the global electronics trade network into communities for the period of four years, the results are presented in
Figure 4,
Figure 5,
Figure 6 and
Figure 7. Each community is represented by a distinct color, and the size of the node corresponds to its importance. The links between countries represent the trade activities, and the edge weight indicates the strength of the connection and transaction volume.
In 2000, the global electronic products trade network was classified into four communities: the first community was dominated by the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands, accounting for 61.27% of the total number of countries in the world. The countries within this community were mainly concentrated in Europe. The second community, led by the United States, Singapore, and Japan, accounted for 28.43%, with countries primarily located in North America and East Asia. The third community, led by China and Hong Kong, accounted for 9.31%. Finally, the fourth community comprised only two countries, Suriname and Guyana.
In 2009, the global electronics trade network was divided into five communities. The first community still included Germany, the Netherlands, and France, but its proportion dropped to 39.51%. The second community was mainly composed of developing countries, such as Malaysia, Thailand, and India, and accounted for 30.73% of the total number of countries in the world. The third community, led by the United States, accounted for 11.71%. The fourth community, led by China and Hong Kong, accounted for 11.71% and also included Singapore and Japan, which were in the second community in 2000. The fifth community had only one region, named the neutral zone, between Iraq to the southeast and Saudi Arabia to the northeast, and both countries had equal rights over the zone.
In 2019, the global electronics trade network was divided into three communities. Germany and the Netherlands dominated the first community, which comprised 75.25% of the world’s countries. China, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Singapore dominated the second community, accounting for 14.36%. The United States headed the third community, accounting for 10.4%. This community structure indicates a shift in global trade patterns, with developing countries gradually gaining more influence in the network.
In 2021, the number of communities remained the same as in 2000, but the proportion of countries in each community tended to be more balanced, with 43.48% (the first community), 28.99% (the second community), 15.94% (the third community), and 11.59% (the fourth community). The community led by China and Hong Kong ranked first, followed by the German- and Dutch-led community in second place. The third community included the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and other Middle East nations. Although the proportion of the fourth community led by the United States had not changed significantly, it had the smallest proportion compared to the other societies.
In summary, the number of communities in the global electronics trade network follows a fluctuating “up-down-up” pattern. Communities display spatial continuity, with stronger trade links between countries on the same continent and weaker links between countries on different continents, which is more evident after 2019. It is noteworthy that countries with higher nodal weights, indicating greater trade volumes, do not necessarily belong to the largest communities. Instead, the geographical location plays a more significant role in community division, considering the variations in logistics costs [
20,
21], product acceptance [
22], and national economic power [
23,
24,
25] that influence trade activities among countries.