Neither chains nor networks: Modeling ambivalence in the US automotive sector

Abstract

The US automotive industry stands at an inflection point amid the transition to electric vehicles. The relations of production that once governed the industry are drifting into obsolescence even as a new system has yet to fully crystallize. This paper critiques global production network (GPN) theory, arguing that its fixed, cartographical approach fails to account for the ambivalent character of transitional processes. GPN's diagrammatic logic is ill-suited for capturing the fluid, highly contingent power dynamics of an industry whose final form remains profoundly undecided. GPN theory may be adequate to periods of relative stasis or equilibrium, but breaks down when confronted by practices of realignment and reconfiguration. In place of GPNs, this paper draws on topological geographic thought to model distortions of space and power. Major findings, centered on the United Auto Workers’ 2023 contract negotiations and subsequent developments, reveal that labor was partially successful in mobilizing discursive influence alongside material power to shape the terms of the “green transition.” Specifically, labor was strategically positioned to compel the vertical reintegration of suppliers and the horizontal reintegration of core competencies. Conversely, labor retreated to protectionism when confronted with the transition's geopolitical dimension. Ultimately, while labor secured significant domestic gains, its alignment with economic nationalism limited its ability to extend transnational solidarity.