Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,073

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

China's manufacturing locus in 2025: With a comparison of “Made-in-China 2025” and “Industry 4.0”

Li, Ling·2018·Technological Forecasting and Social Change
DOI 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.028
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this study, we have compared Germany's “Industry 4.0” and China's “Made-in-China 2025” and estimated China's locus in “Made-in-China 2025”. “Made-in-China 2025” has clear goals, measures and sector focus. Its guiding principles are to enhance industrial capability through innovation-driven manufacturing, optimize the structure of Chinese industry, emphasize quality over quantity, train and attract talent, and achieve green manufacturing and environment. Data show that currently China is no longer the lowest–cost labor market; it is being squeezed by newly emerging low-cost producers such as Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. Meanwhile, China is not the strongest player in the high-tech arena; well-established industrialized nations, the US, Germany, and Japan, have all effectively deployed digital technology to create new industrial environments, produce new products, and improve their well-established brands. Having analyzed the data from the World Bank and China's National Bureau of Statistics, we find an upward trajectory in China in manufacturing capability development, research and development commitment, and human capital investment. However, implementing an ambitious strategic plan such as “Made-in-China 2025” is coupled with challenges. This research helps us understand the relationship between technological entrepreneurship and socio-economic changes in emerging economies such as China. Furthermore, the experience accumulated in China can be referenced by both emerging economies and developed nations to advance their technological entrepreneurship.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.028

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 1,073

Metadata

Authors
Li, L.
Venue
Technological Forecasting and Social Change
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-10
Volume
135
Pages
66-74
ISSN
0040-1625 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.028
OpenAlex
W2742910676
Cited by
1,073
References
33
FWCI
83.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.