RFG is proud to recognize Mark Hoover (Fletcher 2015) as the winner of the Dr. Michael Schneider Professional Writing Award for the fourth quarter of 2023. His award-winning piece, which Mark coauthored with Gabrielle Fong and Holly Milburn-Smith, is titled, “As City Diplomacy Grows, So Should Our Efforts to Engage Rural Communities in Foreign Policy.” The piece was originally published by the Aspen Institute in March 2023. Please note that the views expressed in this publication are entirely those of the authors and do not reflect the views, policy, or position of the United States Government or the Department of State.  

In her 2008 book, The Next American Century: How the U.S. Can Thrive as Other Powers Rise and persistently since (1), Ambassador Nina Hachigian has argued that American foreign policy must prioritize security challenges that could harm Americans where they live. This perspective is central to a growing discourse on subnational diplomacy, a paradigm rooted in the notion that local governments can and should play a role in foreign affairs. “Communities, cities, and states are coming up with some of the most innovative and creative ideas for tackling many of the global challenges we face,” said Hachigian just before her appointment as the first U.S. Special Representative for Subnational Diplomacy (2).

Much of the global focus on subnational diplomacy to date has been on the role of cities in tackling emerging foreign policy and security challenges. Yet while these challenges may “manifest most acutely in urban settings,” (3) urban residents are not alone in their vulnerability to growing transnational threats, nor alone in providing the ideas and human capital needed to address these threats. And while Americans largely agree on abstract principles in foreign policy, such as the role of the U.S. in world affairs, rural and urban Americans are most divided on the issues that have the greatest impact on their lived experiences, including climate change, trade and the economy, and immigration (4). 

It is critical that all Americans, no matter their proximity to urban centers, have the opportunity to be engaged in U.S. foreign policy decisions. The scope of today’s transnational threats demands engaged and informed, even if diverse, responses by urban, semi-urban, and rural communities.  While urban leaders are increasingly engaged in foreign policy, rural communities remain poorly represented, limiting America’s ability to respond to today’s challenges. To address this gap, the U.S. should consider new approaches to engage rural and urban cluster communities in foreign policy (5). 

Grounding Foreign Policy in America’s Rural Communities

Students and officials working in international affairs in the United States historically have been clustered on the East Coast. However, the expansion of telework and widespread familiarity with digital telecommunications technology, accelerated by COVID-19, presents a new opportunity for America’s 330 million citizens to interact directly with and inform America’s foreign policy.  Now more than ever, the federal government is observing its employees changing agencies to pursue more telework-friendly jobs (6). If expanded, telework could provide an opportunity to rejuvenate a federal workforce when record numbers of federal workers – including 20.9% of Department of State employees – are eligible for retirement in 2023 and fewer professionals are choosing federal employment (7,8,9). Another incentive to diversify where foreign policy professionals are able to live is the ample evidence demonstrating that early exposure to careers strongly influences youth career choices, with young people often attracted to professions they see in their communities (10,11). Expanding the job opportunities in diverse geographic locations will also generate taxpayer savings as according to law, employees living in New York City or Washington, D.C. cost taxpayers 35% and 31% more than employees in rural communities where they make the federal base salary. Lower minimum salaries outside of traditional hubs are often accompanied by benefits like lower housing, fuel, and tax costs. This is not unprecedented. The United Kingdom committed to moving 22,000 civil servants outside of London by 2030 even prior to COVID-19’s impact on mainstreaming telework in government (12).  Although geographically dislocated work can pose operational challenges (13), the economic, social, and policy benefits of including resident rural citizens in foreign policies outweigh the challenges.

Normalizing telework would also make possible a new initiative designed to attract professionals who choose to live in regions previously impractical for international affairs professionals. The Department of State should expand its Diplomat-in-Residence (DIR) program in small towns and rural communities for mid-grade civil or foreign service personnel to serve in for a two- to three-year tour. The current program employs 16 Foreign Service officers based at universities and focused on recruitment specifically to the Foreign Service. An expanded DIR program would bring Foreign Service and civil service practitioners of negotiation, human rights,  economic policy, and other fields into the communities the Department of State represents but who may perceive themselves neglected by U.S. foreign policy. In order to attract top talent, the DIR program should be treated as career enhancing for both the civil and Foreign Services. The State Department could work with governors’ offices to identify communities’ interest in hosting a DIR and rotate the position regularly among communities to expand its reach and impact. The DIR would provide a direct link back to the Department, empowering rural and urban cluster communities to raise their concerns and recommendations to inform policy-makers in Washington. A new benefit from these positions could be a formal process for DIRs to provide regular updates to the Department, to include recommendations on how to better engage and represent these communities in foreign policy. 

Once again, the State Department could work with governors’ offices to identify communities’ interest in hosting a DIR and rotate the position regularly among communities to expand its reach and impact. Once interested communities have been identified, the State Department could prioritize top candidates based on a number of factors, such as demonstrated local leadership and commitment to the initiative. The percentage of a community’s economic activity stemming from foreign direct investment could also help identify communities with the potential for meaningful foreign policy engagement. This is an especially timely standard as foreign investments are expected to increase with the implementation of the 2022 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act (14). In the first two months since the legislation passed, more than $28 billion in new clean energy manufacturing investments were announced, including EV battery manufacturing in Oklahoma, Kansas, North Carolina, and Ohio (15).

Stronger Rural American Communities Build Stronger Global Partnerships

A “Homeland-to-Homeland” professional exchange is an initiative designed to link residents, officials, or businesses in rural areas and urban clusters with their counterparts in another country. This exchange would complement the many diverse programs run by the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs. Operated over six weeks, the exchange could include international travel, joint travel to Washington, D.C., and digital exchanges with foreign counterparts through business, religious, agricultural associations, or local governments. Selection of paired communities could be designed to match communities that share economic profiles, climates, or demographics such as aging or immigrant-heavy communities. These types of exchanges would empower individual leaders and businesses to innovate and improve communities, which is particularly important in places where citizens prioritize private sector-led efforts to address problems (16). Limited research also indicates that international travel increases an individual’s interest in political affairs, which in turn is a predictor of increased political participation, a bedrock for a functional American democracy (17).  

Subnational people-to-people exchange strategies are supported by decades of evidence-based successes from cultural exchanges. For example, SisterCities International, a legacy of President Eisenhower, builds relationships between U.S. communities and global cities and claims its programs contribute over $500 million annually into U.S. communities (18). The strategies recommended here seek to address recent findings that Americans understand the importance of international affairs to their daily lives, but may not necessarily feel they can influence them (19).  These recommendations target rural and urban cluster communities, whose economies Pew Research found are the most export-dependent in the United States (20).  

Strategic Partnerships for Collective Action 

In recent years, cities have taken a leadership role on international issues like countering terrorism and climate change with the federal government playing a facilitating, rather than leading, role in those networks. In recognition of the power of subnational diplomacy, Denver and the U.S. Department of State hosted the first Cities Summit of the Americas in 2023, bringing hundreds of municipal leaders from the hemisphere together. Smaller cities and rural communities may lack the resources necessary to implement the same initiatives that cities have undertaken to advance their foreign affairs goals. To bridge the resource gap, Congress could pursue bipartisan legislation to support small cities and rural communities in their efforts to bolster international engagement on their most pressing issues. Until such additional resources are provided, small cities and rural communities should consider adopting comparable strategies such as forging strategic partnerships with community-based organizations, academic institutions, the private sector, philanthropic organizations, and other local governments. 

To this end, the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs should prioritize partnering with non-governmental and grassroots organizations to engage American communities on foreign policy. The Center on Rural Innovation’s Rural Innovation Network is one example of a potential partner. The nationwide community of local leaders, focused on advancing economic interest in small towns, is working to provide more than two dozen communities with resources for digital skills development and technological innovation, among other services. As an example, organizations like the Rural Innovation Network could work with offices like the Department of State’s Global Engagement Center to provide information on how foreign and non-state actors are using disinformation to influence American communities. The collaboration between State and grassroots organizations would connect rural communities with additional sources for veritable information on American foreign policy and ensure rural communities’ concerns and priorities are folded into USG foreign policy narratives. 

Local news outlets have long served as a source of information for rural communities. However, COVID-19 forced more than 500 local news outlets to close, creating news deserts in many rural communities and further isolating them from foreign policy conversations (21). Several news organizations are rising to fill this void and providing information tailored to rural communities on issues like the economy, climate change, and technology (22). Southerly is one such example, where founder, Lyndsey Gilpin, is equipping Southern communities with the information they need to address transnational threats like climate change and hold leaders accountable for their actions (or inactions). The Department of State and other agencies engaged in foreign policy could build on programs such as the State Department’s Hometown Diplomats to feature employees in their hometown newspapers or on their local radio stations. The Department could also offer local media outlets the opportunity to interview senior Department officials on issues impacting Americans’ daily lives. Additionally, the Department could partner with local universities through Diplomats in Residence or city-based foreign policy associations, among others, to promote and gain insights on foreign policy issues. These efforts would expose the foreign policy professionals to the views of rural and urban cluster communities through trusted local journalists and organizations. 

Rural America Contributes to An Inclusive and Ambitious American Foreign Policy 

Greater engagement by, and with, rural communities in foreign policy will arm America’s foreign policy institutions with the talent and representation the U.S. needs to achieve its ambitious foreign policy objectives. To do so, American foreign policy makers must build on the flexibility offered by telework and existing employment opportunities to align foreign policy objectives and communication with rural and urban cluster communities’ interests. New opportunities must be considered to develop strategic partnerships both abroad and at the domestic, grassroots level that will strengthen America’s resolve and ability to address the complexities of transnational threats. Foreign policy affects all Americans. Today local leaders are advancing exciting new efforts to expand city engagement in foreign policy, which should be celebrated. The recommendations here demonstrate the opportunities to build on this progress to include rural communities in the expansion of foreign policy formulation and implementation.

Footnotes

(1) Hachigian, Nina. “Local Governments Are Foreign Policy Actors, Too.” The Foreign Service Journal, Jan/Feb 2022. 

(2) Wilkinson, Tracy. “Garcetti deputy named to high-level U.S. diplomatic post.” Los Angeles Times, Oct. 3, 2022.

(3) Kosovac, Anna, Kris Hartley, Michele Acuto, and Darcy Gunning. Conducting City Diplomacy: A Survey of International Engagement in 47 Cities.” The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, October 2020. 

(4) Tabory, Sam, and Dina Smeltz. “The Urban-Suburban-Rural ‘Divide’ in American Views on Foreign Policy: Understanding Both Agreement and Disagreement Among the US Public.” The Chicago Council on Global Affairs, May 2017. https://www.thechicagocouncil.org/sites/default/files/2021-08/report_urban-rural-divide-us-foreign-policy_170524.pdf.

(5) Urban clusters are defined by the U.S. Census Bureau as areas containing at least 2,500 and less than 50,000 people.

(6) Heckman, Jory. “OPM Says Federal Employees ‘agency hopping’ to telework friendly offices.”  Federal News Network, July 2022.

(7) Katz, Eric. “The Federal Agencies Where the Most Employees Are Eligible to Retire.” Government Executive. June 18, 2018.

(8) 20.9% Statistic Provided by Department of State’’s Office of Organization and Talent Analytics. Jan 20, 2023

(9) Hill, Fiona. “Public service and the federal government.” Brookings Institute. May 27, 2020.

(10) “Fatherly Magazine. This Is What Kids In 2015 Want To Be When They Grow Up.”  November 18, 2015. https://www.fatherly.com/news/what-kids-want-to-be-when-they-grow-up

(11) Gore, Jennifer, Kathryn Holmes, Max Smith, Erica Southgate & Jim Albright. “Socioeconomic status and the career aspirations of Australian school students: Testing enduring assumptions.” The Australian Educational Researcher volume 42, pages155–177 (2015).

(12) Institute for Government. “Relocation of the civil service.”

(13) Indeed Editorial Team. “6 Challenges of Managing Geographically Distributed Teams.” December 14, 2021. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/managing-distributed-team-challenges

(14) Tomer, Adie. “Will the infrastructure law and Inflation Reduction Act transform American transportation? It’s complicated.” Brookings, Nov. 1, 2022.

(15) Marcacci, Silvo and Energy Innovation: Policy and Technology. “$28 Billion In New Clean Energy Manufacturing Investments Announced Since Inflation Reduction Act Passed.” Forbes, Oct 12, 2022.

(16) Parker, Kim, Juliana Menasce Horowitz, Anna Brown, Richard Fry, D’Vera Cohn, and Ruth Igielnik. “Urban, suburban and rural residents’ views on key social and political issues.” Pew Research Center. May 22, 2018.

(17) Wood, BL. “The effects of travel on political behavior and foreign policy opinions.” Washington State University Dissertation for partial fulfillment of requirements of a Doctor of Philosophy.  May 2019.

(18) SisterCities International. “Measures That Matter: A study on the economic benefits of sister city relationships in the U.S. and their impact on the global economy 2014-2015.” https://sistercities.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Measures-that-Matter.pdf

(19) Council on Foreign Affairs. “Americans Lack Knowledge of International Issues Yet Consider Them Important, Finds New Survey.” December 5, 2019.

(20) Desilver, Drew. “As trade disputes intensify, U.S. counties that rely most on exports tend to be small and in South, Midwest.” Pew Research Center. June 19, 2019.

(21) April Simpson, “As Local News Outlets Shutter, Rural America Suffers Most,” PewTrusts.org, The Pew Charitable Trusts, October, 21, 2019. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2019/10/21/as-local-news-outlets-shutter-rural-america-suffers-most. 

(22) Celeste Katz Marston, “Six Rural News Outlets Trying to Bridge the Information Divide,” NiemanReports.org, Nieman Reports, August, 26, 2021. https://niemanreports.org/articles/six-rural-news-outlets-trying-to-bridge-the-information-divide/. 

RFG is proud to recognize Diana Hajali (Bush 2020) as the winner of the Dr. Michael Schneider Professional Writing Award for the third quarter of 2023. Check out her award-winning piece below titled, “Standards Environment in the Middle East and North Africa.”

Overview

The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region has considerable potential value to U.S. commercial and foreign policy interests, particularly when it comes to increasing U.S. exports and assisting in the development of intra-regional economic ties. In 2020, U.S. exports to select MENA countries listed in the 2021 United States Trade Representative (USTR) National Trade Estimate (NTE) report totaled over $50 billion (1). While the MENA region shares a greater volume of trade with the European Union, the U.S. has several Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with MENA countries, specifically Jordan, Israel, Morocco, Bahrain, and Oman, as well as Trade and Investment Framework Agreements (TIFAs) with many others. 

MENA countries are generally standards takers rather than makers, adopting European standards or those developed through international standards organizations rather than developing their own standards. In recent years, however, the Gulf countries, specifically Saudi Arabia, have been updating existing regulations to bolster their global trade positioning, but have often failed to notify these changes to the World Trade Organization (WTO), have shut U.S. exporters out of the market by rejecting the use of U.S.-based international standards, or have implemented practices that differ from regional and international norms. This has led to several concerns among U.S. industry, as exporters must change their production processes to meet tailored country-specific provisions or undergo additional testing, registration of products, and other conformity assessment procedures to show they meet requirements. Another concern is that the MENA region often utilizes European standards exclusively, due to the influence Europe has on the region. A more flexible approach that relies on internationally accepted standards and recognizes multiple standards where available, as the U.S. system advocates, would be advantageous for both international commerce and for local producers that want to trade their goods in global markets. 

Issues and Recommendations 

Despite previous examples of U.S. projects and relationship-building in the MENA region, some outstanding areas of concern when it comes to standards and conformity assessment include: 

• A lack of U.S. engagement on standards in the MENA region could lead to future market access problems. There is a need to identify more proactive ways to engage with standards actors in these markets. 
• A trend towards greater acceptance of European standards in the MENA region has the potential to affect market access for U.S. exporters. 
• Development of national standards rather than accepting or incorporating existing international standards, including those developed by U.S.-domiciled standards developing organizations (SDOs) has and can lead to barriers to trade. 
• Updated regulations and new conformity assessment procedures in the region often lack transparency and create burdensome requirements and extra costs for U.S. exporters. 
• Countries in the region often fail to notify the WTO of new or updated draft technical regulations, and often do not allow a sufficient comment period for WTO members.

There are several pathways the U.S. could take to increase collaboration and partnership on standards and conformity assessment with the MENA region, including: 

• Encouraging MENA countries to increase their participation in international standards organizations and their committees – Codex, ISO, and others.
• Supporting the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in its MENA Initiative on Governance and Competitiveness for Development (2,3).
• Sponsoring or hosting in-person or virtual workshops between the U.S. public and/or private sector, including MENA standards bodies, about specific industries, regulations, best practices, etc.
• Incorporating standards-related provisions into FTAs signed with MENA countries, including chapters on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), Good Regulatory Practices (GRP), or sectoral issues. 
• Increasing collaboration between the U.S. and MENA countries at the G7 and G20 levels. 

Technical Barriers to Trade

U.S. companies face several technical barriers to trade when exporting abroad, especially in the MENA region where not all countries have well-developed or transparent standards systems and conformity assessment procedures, the technical infrastructure needed for more efficient global trade, or consistent regulatory practices. 

Countries in the MENA region do not always notify new or updated draft technical regulations to the WTO, allow for a sufficient comment period by WTO members, or provide easy access to technical documents, and often require companies to submit confidential business information, multiple test reports, and unnecessary third-party declaration of conformity. This has implications on the application of customs procedures, which include the collection of duties and taxes, conducting shipment inspections, and data collection (4). U.S. exporters often find issue with processing delays, shipment holding costs, unnecessary stamps on documentation, specific import license requirements, required certificates of conformity, and a lack of transparency. 

In addition, MENA countries frequently adopt European standards, and at times refuse to accept other international standards that would be more conducive to U.S. exporters and in line with international best practices. Many U.S. exporters have also found concerns with some MENA countries’ labeling requirements. For instance, the Gulf Standardization Organization (GSO) notified a technical regulation in 2016 requiring specific labeling for energy drinks, though there are still differences in labeling requirements among Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member states. Depending on their level of economic development and involvement in global trade, many countries also have inconsistent or unclear regulatory practices, and require paper registration and documents rather than electronic or digital versions. 

The most impacted U.S. goods and services when it comes to technical barriers to trade faced in the MENA region include: automobiles; pharmaceuticals; alcohol; pork; halal products; electrical goods; energy drinks; agricultural products, such as food and pesticides; energy drinks; telecommunications equipment; and media. The Gulf countries in particular have implemented regulations in these sectors that unnecessarily restrict trade and incur more costs on U.S. exporters. 

European Influence

The MENA region has grown in geopolitical and economic importance over the last decade (5), and although the total value of U.S. exports to the region totaled $15 billion in 2018, Europe remains the region’s top trading partner. The EU and MENA countries consistently cooperate on trade and investment, climate change, energy and environment, and research and development. The European Union (EU) and GCC trade in goods in 2020 alone amounted to 97.1 billion euros (6). The EU has become a leader in spreading its standards worldwide through regulatory power, the strength of its internal market and institutions, and promotion of its standardization system, which differs significantly from the U.S. system (7). The ‘Brussels Effect,’ often used to describe the EU’s power to unilaterally regulate global markets, suggests that the bigger and more affluent the consumer market, the more likely exporting companies will comply with its standards. Many companies prefer the benefits of market access, considering the large market size of the EU, compared to the cost of adjusting to the EU’s standards. The EU has effectively built in institutional architecture and policies that allow it to enforce its regulations, induce compliance, and deter violations (8). 

Unlike the U.S., with its bottom-up, private-sector led, voluntary, consensus-based approach to standards development, the EU relies on a more top-down approach with standards development following requests from the European Commission to meet essential requirements of EU-wide directives. The EU also actively incorporates standards provisions into its Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with other countries, specifically labor and environmental standards, will name specific standards development organizations that must be used, and require the withdrawal of non-EU standards from technical regulations to facilitate greater harmonization with EU Directives. The EU also initiates economic and commercial alliances with the MENA region through its Neighborhood Policy, which creates cooperation agreements with other countries to achieve close political association and economic integration with the EU. This includes financial support and technical assistance to align standards, legislative systems, and infrastructure. Within the MENA region, the EU has neighborhood action plans with Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, and Tunisia. The EU also offers a significant amount of technical assistance to MENA countries to encourage the development of good regulatory practices, institution building, market surveillance, and standardization efforts. 

Closer EU-MENA cooperation on standards has immediate and long-term implications for U.S. trade, particularly for small and medium sized U.S. manufacturers. Countries with partnership agreements with European standards bodies could limit both the voluntary standards choices possible in the market and standards referenced in mandatory technical regulations. More widespread acceptance of European standards in the region will disadvantage U.S. manufacturers who produce to other international standards. U.S. manufacturers could also face new testing and certification requirements in order to have their products accepted in the marketplace. Varying standards and conformity assessment requirements already present significant non-tariff barriers for small and medium-sized enterprises. Larger firms that produce for multiple markets may not face as much difficulty with the growing use of European standards, but smaller firms could be adversely impacted as they do not always have the appropriate resources or finances to retool their products to comply with changes in regulations. 

U.S. Efforts

The U.S. offers standards technical assistance to many MENA countries, through the provision of specialized advice and support on standards development, good regulatory practices, and conformity assessment procedures to help other countries meet their WTO TBT requirements and promote the use of internationally accepted standards. The U.S. also works with its FTA partners in the region to meet agreement obligations. The U.S. has several FTAs with MENA countries, with Israel and Jordan being among the earliest agreements negotiated. However, these earliest FTAs do not contain TBT provisions that provide a mechanism for addressing standards-related matters. More recent FTAs, such as those with Morocco and Bahrain, do contain TBT principles that go beyond those contained in the WTO TBT Agreement. In addition to FTAs, the U.S. has TIFAs with Bahrain, the GCC, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Turkey, the UAE, and Yemen. The TIFAs provide strategic frameworks and principles for dialogue on trade and investment issues, including market access issues, labor, the environment, enforcement of intellectual property rights, and capacity building (9). The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) also administers several programs and administers workshops that provide standards experts from other countries training opportunities on the U.S. standards and conformity assessment systems in a variety of industry sectors. 

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) also have a public-private partnership, Standards Alliance, which was announced in 2012 as a new funding facility to provide capacity building assistance to developing countries, specifically related to the implementation of the WTO TBT Agreement (10). This includes capacity building projects in the MENA region, specifically in Morocco and Jordan. Priority industry sectors for such work include renewable energy, healthcare technology and medical devices, and information and communication technology (ICT), environmental technologies, building and construction, and biotechnology (11). For example, in 2017, the Standards Alliance partnered with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) and the GCC GSO to hold a workshop on U.S.-Gulf GRP and Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) with a focus on GRP principles, the use of international standards and conformity assessment procedures, public consultation, and more. Participants included representatives from MENA-based standards organizations, U.S. government agencies, U.S.-based SDOs, and U.S. industry (12).

Further, in 2019, ANSI and the International Trade Administration (ITA) at the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) conducted a standards-specific trade mission to Saudi Arabia and the UAE with the primary goal of facilitating increased commercial ties between the U.S. and Gulf markets through business connections and deeper engagements. The mission’s goal was to support more effective cooperation between U.S. organizations and their Gulf counterparts on standards-related issues (13). During the mission, the delegation conducted more than 15 meetings with government agencies and private sector organizations in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, discussing standards development and participation processes for the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the Saudi Standards, Metrology, and Quality Organization (SASO), and the GSO. The American Petroleum Institute (API) also signed a MoU with the GSO focused on technical cooperation during the mission (14). 

Conducting more public and private led projects in the MENA region, specifically in the Gulf, can lead to a more positive relationship between the U.S. and the region over the long-term and can benefit the economies and trading sectors of both regions.

Footnotes

(1) https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021NTE.pdf

(2) https://www.oecd.org/mena/

(3) https://www.oecd.org/mena/economies/morocco/

(4) https://www.cbic.gov.in/resources//htdocs-cbec/rhs-misc/bnb-lecture.pdf

(5) https://www.ansi.org/trade-development/standardization/regions/middle-east-north-africa#.YJmXELVKhPY

(6) https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/regions/gulf-region/

(7) https://www.gfmag.com/magazine/february-2020/brussels-effect-eu-rules-world-anu-bradford

(8) https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/europe/2020-02-03/when-it-comes-markets-europe-no-fading-power

(9) https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/trade-investment-framework-agreements

(10) https://standardsalliance.ansi.org/Default.aspx

(11) https://standardsalliance.ansi.org/Countries/MENA/Default.aspx

(12) https://standardsalliance.ansi.org/Countries/Yemen/Gulf-Conference.aspx

(13) https://share.ansi.org/Shared%20Documents/Meetings%20and%20Events/ANSI%20Past%20Events%20Archive/ANSI-ITA-Trade-Mission-2019/ANSI-ITA%20Certified%20Trade%20Mission.pdf

(14) https://www.ansi.org/news/standards-news/all-news/2019/03/ansi-vice-president-joseph-tretler-leads-itacertified-trade-mission-to-gulf-focused-on-standards-and-29#.YKgIfahKhaQ

RFG is proud to recognize Emily Ashbridge (Bush, 2023) as the winner of the Dr. Michael Schneider Professional Writing Award for the second quarter of 2023. Check out her award-winning piece below titled, “Making the CHIPS Act Pay Off: How to Boost STEM Talent to Meet Industry Needs.” This piece was originally published by the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) when Emily was serving as a NDIA Fellow in 2022. 

In August, President Biden signed the CHIPS and Science Act into law. The act, which sets aside $52 billion in government subsidies to bring semiconductor manufacturing to the US and away from current East Asian productive hubs, marks a significant milestone in strengthening US technological competitiveness. However, as significant as these investments are, additional action is needed to ensure semiconductor companies have access to the human talent that keeps them competitive. Here, US allies and partners can help.

While the US pioneered chipmaking, domestic production has waned in recent years. Since 1990, US semiconductor manufacturing capacity has dropped from nearly 40% of the global supply to 12% today. During the same period, these chips have become essential to American life. Semiconductors not only underpin daily electronics from cell phones to cars, but have military uses that pose critical national security threats if America gets left behind.

The CHIPS Act is designed to shore up American vulnerabilities. By increasing domestic manufacturing of semiconductors, the US aims to become more resilient to supply chain disruptions and the significant security implications that come with them, like those that occurred during the pandemic. Further, as China steps up aggression towards Taiwan, where over 90% of the world’s most advance chips are produced, Washington feels pressure to build resiliency in the event of East Asia production grinding to a halt.

While the CHIPS Act is a significant step in strengthening supply chain security, American capacity to manufacture chips faces an unexpected barrier: human capital. For high-tech industry, a small yet critical core of high-skilled workers is essential. However, decades of declining investment in STEM education have produced a critical shortage of qualified American workers. In 2015, economic projections estimated a need for 1 million more STEM professionals in the US for the country to maintain its preeminence in science and technology. While the US missed this mark, demand for STEM professionals has only increased.

The talent bottleneck is particularly visible within semiconductor applications. To meet capacity needs for only the critical semiconductor applications, the US will need to increase its current workforce by 50%. If the U.S. were to not just handle critical needs but become self-sufficient, it would require nearly four times more manufacturing plants and associated jobs. While the Government Accountability Office has recognized the need to implement workforce development policies to increase the STEM talent pool, the effects of these policies will take years to materialize.

At the same time, semiconductor manufacturers are grappling with an insufficient supply of workers now. Last month, the Taiwanese Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation was forced to delay the opening of a chip manufacturing plant in Arizona by six months due, in part, to labor shortages. As companies decide whether to pursue government subsidies through the CHIPS Act or not, the availability of skilled labor will be a central consideration in their process. Washington’s Investment through the act will not pay off unless it addresses the talent bottleneck.

Boosting the talent pool will require both long-term and short-term action. Long-term efforts must focus on funding STEM education and, in effect, revitalizing the American research and defense industrial base. Throughout history, federal support for research and development has fostered a pipeline of innovators that has changed the tide of war and propelled economic and technological growth. The government’s drive is needed again. By expanding STEM scholarship opportunities and boosting federal training programs that re-skill labor to meet the demands of semiconductor companies, the US can make and sustain strides to closing the labor supply gap.

At the same time, more immediate solutions are necessary. While there are not enough native-born Americans equipped with the skills to meet labor demand, the US continues to educate and graduate foreign nationals that do. Allowing these students to stay in the country could help alleviate the labor shortages semiconductor firms face. In Ohio, where Intel has pledged $20 billion to build two new plants, foreign-born workers in chip-making occupations constitute 10 percent of the labor force, which is double the state’s average immigrant share. As more companies shift manufacturing back to the US, thousands of new jobs will remain vacant unless the industry is empowered to retain foreign talent.

To boost chip-manufacturing, Washington must reform its immigration policy. One avenue is to extend visas for foreign-born students educated in STEM fields at American universities to stay in the country. Following graduation and successful corporate sponsorship, these foreign students could convert student visas into work visas for a duration of five years. In addition to filling the current labor gap, smart immigration reforms can also advance US geopolitical goals. Prioritizing citizens from like-minded countries, such as India and Japan, could further demonstrate Washington’s commitment to allies and partners while boosting the labor supply.

Now that President Biden has signed the CHIPS Act, semiconductor companies will decide how and whether to leverage the subsidies set aside to boost domestic chip manufacturing. Their decision to do so rests, in part, on the availability of qualified workers. Expanding the talent pool to include highly skilled foreign talent will not only meet the demands of the industry, but also help to advance US geopolitical goals with key partner nations. While the CHIPS Act is a first step in bolstering American competitiveness, more work is needed.