行业对本地化的看法_推动本地工业发展的亲商措施_23页_5mb

GWEC Industry Perspective on Localization: Pro-Business Measures Report Summary

Executive Summary

Localization aims to reduce supply chain risks and stimulate local industrial development. However, overly restrictive Local Content Requirements (LCRs) threaten wind industry cost-competitiveness and development due to their negative economic effects and legal controversy. While LCRs may boost development in nascent industries, they should be exceptional, time-bound, and phased out as local industries become globally competitive. Effective alternatives include market-friendly policies that leverage international competition, ensure policy coherence, and develop local industrial strengths.

Key Findings

1. Role of Localization: Aims to reduce supply chain disruptions by situating strategic supply chain stages in regions with key stakeholders or end users. However, when pursued with restrictive policies, it can harm renewable energy cost-competitiveness.
2. LCRs as Non-Tariff Barriers: LCRs restrict investment, raise costs, and limit market access. They are legally controversial under WTO rules and can cause project delays by creating artificial supply chain bottlenecks.
3. Economic Impact: LCRs can hinder local supply chains, reduce competitiveness, and slow down renewable energy expansion. They should be accompanied by complementary policies like skills training and industrial support.
4. Pro-Business Alternatives: Effective localization can be achieved through alternative strategies such as international competition, policy coherence, consistent market signals, leveraging local industrial strengths, workforce development, and regional collaboration.

Recommendations

Principles for Pro-Business Localization Policies

1. Harness International Competition: Avoid overly restrictive LCRs to maintain a level playing field.
2. Ensure Policy Coherence: Align renewable energy policy with industrial and grid development policies at all governance levels.
3. Focus on Market Continuity: Provide predictable demand-side mechanisms to encourage long-term investment.
4. Leverage Local Strengths: Utilize existing industries and infrastructure to support supply chain localization.
5. Incentivize Investment: Offer tax credits, grants, and contracts-for-difference (CfDs) to attract investment.
6. Empower Local Workforce: Invest in training programs to enhance local skills in turbine manufacturing and O&M.
7. Consider Regional Collaboration: Strengthen regional supply chains to mitigate global vulnerabilities and increase investment opportunities.

Case Studies Provided:

1. Taiwan’s restrictive LCRs increased costs; relaxation was agreed with EU after delays and higher energy prices were observed.
2. Brazil’s grid connection issues and China’s policy inconsistencies led to market stagnation.
3. South Africa’s auction delays stalled local wind industries and discouraged investment.
4. Denmark’s (Esbjerg) O&G expertise transitioned to offshore wind, leveraging existing infrastructure.
5. Poland’s incentive-based CfD scheme supported offshore wind development without LCRs.
6. India’s training initiatives (NIWE, Vayumitra) built a skilled workforce for turbine manufacturing and export.
7. US regional hubs and EU collaboration frameworks supported technology transfer and supply chain resilience.

Conclusions

Localization goals should not rely on high-impact barriers like LCRs. Market-oriented strategies that encourage investment and leverage regional collaboration are more effective and sustainable for developing local supply chains.