National structural power and security risks in the global new energy equipment trade network

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2026.05.20250730

Abstract

Abstract:

As global efforts toward carbon neutrality accelerate, trade in new energy equipment has become both a new driver of international trade growth and a key arena of strategic competition among the major powers. This study examines the structural power and security risks of countries within the global new energy equipment trade network. Using complex network analysis and structural power theory, we assess the distribution of national power, construct a trade security index to evaluate import and export vulnerabilities, and apply a cascading failure model to simulate the dynamics of risk transmission. The results show that: ① Structural power in global new energy trade is multidimensional and unevenly distributed. Germany, the United States, China, and France exhibit strong direct, leverage, and prestige power, while the United Kingdom, the United States, the Netherlands, and South Africa possess significant channel power, indicating partial misalignment between power dimensions; ② Structural power shows incomplete consistency with import/export security: Import security is more closely linked to structural power than export security, suggesting that greater power does not necessarily ensure stronger export resilience; ③ The global trade network remains robust under random shocks but is highly sensitive to disruptions in key countries such as China, the United States, and Germany, where cascading failures display a "high-concentration, long-tail" pattern; and ④ Risk propagation differs across leading economies. U.S.-induced shocks show a "deep-layer amplification" pattern, whereas those originating from China exhibit "broad-coverage, rapid-propagation" pattern. The trade networks for photovoltaic and wind power exhibit extensive reach and multi-level structures, while nuclear power equipment networks demonstrate limited dissemination. Significant heterogeneity exists across industries. This study aims to provide theoretical support and policy reference for global energy governance and trade security.

Key words: new energy equipment, global trade network, structural power, security risk, cascading failure

摘要：

随着碳中和进程的加快，新能源设备贸易成为国际贸易增长的新引擎和国家权力博弈的一个主战场。本研究聚焦全球新能源设备贸易网络中的国家结构性权力及安全风险，采用复杂网络分析和结构性权力理论，综合衡量国家在全球贸易网络中的权力分布，并构建贸易安全指数评估国家在进出口贸易中的安全风险，进一步利用级联失效模型模拟风险传播路径。研究发现：①国家结构性权力在全球新能源设备贸易中呈现多维异质性，德国、美国、中国、法国等国家具备较高的直达权力、借势权力以及声望，英国、美国、荷兰、南非等国拥有较高的通道权力，但国家通道权力与其他权力呈现不匹配关系；②国家结构性权力与进出口安全存在不完全一致性，进口安全与权力呈现显著的正相关，但结构性权力的增强未必直接强化出口安全；③全球贸易网络在随机扰动下表现稳健，但在关键国家遭遇冲击时，风险传播呈现梯度上升趋势，其中中国、美国、德国等少数国家引起的级联失效呈现“高度集中+长尾效应”的双重格局；④仿真模拟结果显示，美国引发的风险表现为“深层级放大型”，而中国引发的风险则呈现为“广覆盖快速传播型”，表明不同权力主导下贸易风险传播具有差异性。光伏与风电设备贸易网络风险传播范围广、层次多，核电设备贸易网络的风险传播有限，行业间传播机制存在显著异质性。本研究旨在为全球能源治理和贸易安全提供理论支撑和政策参考。

关键词: 新能源设备, 全球贸易网络, 结构性权力, 安全风险, 级联失效

Aiping WU, Xiaoping ZHANG, Wenhua LIAN, Jiawen SONG, Zhongjing PAN. National structural power and security risks in the global new energy equipment trade network[J]. World Regional Studies, 2026, 35(5): 1-18.

吴爱萍, 张晓平, 练文华, 宋佳雯, 潘仲璟. 全球新能源设备贸易网络中的国家结构性权力与安全风险[J]. 世界地理研究, 2026, 35(5): 1-18.

Figures/Tables 13

Fig. 1 Research framework

Tab. 1 New energy equipment product categories and their codes

类别	HS代码	含义
核电产品	8401	核反应堆、核反应堆非辐照燃料元件、同位素分离的机器及装置
光伏产品	280461、280469	硅材料
	854140	光伏电池和组件
	850239、853080、940550	光伏发电系统和产品
风电产品	848340	齿轮箱
	848210、848220、848230、848240、848250、848280	轴承
	841290	叶片
	850161、850162、850163、850164	发电机
	853710、853720、902830、903020、903031、903032、903033、903039	控制设备
	850231	轮毂
	730820	塔筒

Tab. 2 Static indicators of node structural power in the trade network

指标	权力维度	含义及作用	计算公式
加权入度/出度	直达权力	衡量国家与直接贸易伙伴的联系强度，反映其在全球价值链中的规模与影响力	$S i i n = ∑ j = 1 N w j i; S i o u t = ∑ i = 1 N w i j$
中介中心度	通道权力	衡量国家在贸易路径中的“桥梁”地位，体现对关键贸易通道的控制能力	$B C i = ∑ s ≠ i ≠ t σ s, t \| i σ s, t$
特征向量中心度	借势权力	通过贸易伙伴的重要性间接获得权力，体现“富人俱乐部”效应	$A x = λ x$
PageRank中心度	声望权力	衡量国家在整体网络中的可达性和声誉，反映其贸易伙伴对其依赖程度	$P R v = 1 - d N + d ∑ u ϵ B v P R u o d u$

Tab. 2 Static indicators of node structural power in the trade network

指标	权力维度	含义及作用	计算公式
加权入度/出度	直达权力	衡量国家与直接贸易伙伴的联系强度，反映其在全球价值链中的规模与影响力	$S i i n = ∑ j = 1 N w j i; S i o u t = ∑ i = 1 N w i j$
中介中心度	通道权力	衡量国家在贸易路径中的“桥梁”地位，体现对关键贸易通道的控制能力	$B C i = ∑ s ≠ i ≠ t σ s, t \| i σ s, t$
特征向量中心度	借势权力	通过贸易伙伴的重要性间接获得权力，体现“富人俱乐部”效应	$A x = λ x$
PageRank中心度	声望权力	衡量国家在整体网络中的可达性和声誉，反映其贸易伙伴对其依赖程度	$P R v = 1 - d N + d ∑ u ϵ B v P R u o d u$

Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of risk propagation driven by node failure

Fig. 3 Ranking of national centrality indicators in the global new energy equipment trade network

Fig. 4 Correlation chart of power indicators of new energy equipment trade networks

Fig. 5 Cross-sector differences in countries’ structural power in trade networks

Fig. 6 Import and export security of countries in the global new energy trade network

Fig. 7 Nonlinear relationship between national security and structural power in global new energy equipment trade

Fig. 8 Changes in the connectivity of global trade networks for new energy equipment under random and deliberate attacks

Fig. 9 Node failure results under a trade network risk simulation

Fig. 10 Propagation path of trade risk with China and the U.S. as initial infection points

Fig. 11 Heterogeneity of risk propagation across national networks for solar， wind， and nuclear equipment trade networks

References 40

[1]	ANDREAN G. Energy Technology Perspectives 2024. Paris: IEA, 2024.
[2]	KLEIMANN D, POITIERS N, SAPIR A, et al. Green tech race? The US inflation reduction act and the EU net zero industry act. The World Economy, 2023, 46(12): 3420-3434.
[3]	李季. 美国对华301措施的新动向、影响与中国应对. 国际贸易, 2025(1): 86-96.
	LI J. New trends and influence of U.S. Section 301 measures against China and China's responses. Intertrade, 2025(1): 86-96.
[4]	GENG R, CAI Q, WANG H. The impact of the EU's CBAM on China's carbon emission policy. Climate, 2025, 13(1): 5.
[5]	何樱灏. 从边缘到核心:欧盟气候政策的演进研究. 世界地理研究, 2025, 34(9): 16-28.
	HE Y. From the periphery to the core: The evolution of the EU climate policy. World Regional Studies, 2025, 34(9): 16-28.
[6]	SHEN W, WANG Y. Governing the Green Belt and Road initiative: From a concept to institutional changes. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 2025: 1-36.
[7]	苏珊·斯特兰奇. 国家与市场. 上海: 上海人民出版社, 2012.
	STRANGE S. States and Markets. Shanghai: Shanghai Renmin Press, 2012.
[8]	DREZNER D W, FARRELL H, NEWMAN A L. The Uses and Abuses of Weaponized Interdependence. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2021.
[9]	孙成昊, 王叶湑, 董一凡. 相互依赖武器化的机制探析——权力来源与政策实践. 欧洲研究, 2024, 42(2): 63-86.
	SUN C, WANG Y, DONG Y. An exploration of the mechanism of weaponized interdependence: Sources of power and policy practices. Chinese Journal of European Studies, 2024, 42(2): 63-86.
[10]	斯蒂芬·克莱斯纳. 结构冲突 : 第三世界对抗全球自由主义. 杭州: 浙江人民出版社, 2001.
	STEPHEN D. Structural Conflicts: The Third World Against Global Liberalism. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Renmin Press, 2001.
[11]	杨宇, 何则. 能源地缘政治与能源权力研究. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(3): 524-540.
	YANG Y, HE Z. Energy geopolitics and power. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(3): 524-540.
[12]	张强, 杜德斌, 郭卫东, 等. 全球能源结构性权力时空格局演变及其关键驱动因素. 地理学报, 2023, 78(9): 2316-2337.
	ZHANG Q, DU D, GUO W, et al. Spatio-temporal evolution and key drivers of global energy structural power. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2023, 78(9): 2316-2337.
[13]	谢琛, 潘锐. 美国主导的多边出口管制合作——以对华芯片封锁为例. 美国研究, 2023, 37(6): 126-157.
	XIE C, PAN R. U.S.-Led multilateral export controls on China: A case study of American-led chips blockade against China. The Chinese Journal of American Studies, 2023, 37(6): 126-157.
[14]	IRENE. Geopolitics of the Energy Transition: Energy Security. Abu Dhabi: International Renewable Energy Agency, 2024.
[15]	丁泰夫, 高飞. "相互依存武器化"背景下的泛安全化解析——以美国对华科技竞争为例. 国际安全研究, 2024, 42(1): 81-107.
	DING T, GAO F. Analysis of pan-securitization in the context of the weaponization of interdependence: A case study of U.S. technological competition with China. Journal of International Security Studies, 2024, 42(1): 81-107.
[16]	FARRELL H, NEWMAN A L. Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 2019, 44(1): 42-79.
[17]	ZHAO L, YANG Y, BAI X, et al. Structure, robustness and supply risk in the global wind turbine trade network. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2023, 177: 113214.
[18]	ZHANG G, DUAN H. How does international trade network affect multinational diffusion of wind power technology?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 276: 123245.
[19]	MIAO C, WAN Y, KANG M, et al. Topological analysis, endogenous mechanisms, and supply risk propagation in the polycrystalline silicon trade dependency network. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2024, 439: 140657.
[20]	WANG C, HUANG X, HU X, et al. Trade characteristics, competition patterns and COVID-19 related shock propagation in the global solar photovoltaic cell trade. Applied Energy, 2021, 290: 116744.
[21]	WANG M, MAO X, XING Y, et al. Breaking down barriers on PV trade will facilitate global carbon mitigation. Nature Communications, 2021, 12(1): 6820.
[22]	吴爱萍, 张晓平, 宋现锋, 等. 2000—2019年全球核电设备贸易网络结构及其影响因素. 经济地理, 2022, 42(7): 126-134+194.
	WU A, ZHANG X, SONG X, et al. Network structure of global nuclear power equipment trade and its influencing factors from 2000 to 2019. Economic Geography, 2022, 42(7): 126-134+194.
[23]	潘峰华, 赖志勇, 葛岳静. 经贸视角下中国周边地缘环境分析——基于社会网络分析方法. 地理研究, 2015, 34(4): 775-786.
	PAN F, LAI Z, GE Y. The surrounding geopolitical environment of China: A social network analysis based on trade data. Geographical Research, 2015, 34(4): 775-786.
[24]	李彦征, 富宁宁, 葛岳静, 等. "流空间"视角下中美在南亚国家的地缘位势解析. 世界地理研究, 2025, 34(3): 70-85.
	LI Y, FU N, GE Y, et al. Analysis on the geo-potential of China and the United States in South Asia from the perspective of space of flows. World Regional Studies, 2025, 34(3): 70-85.
[25]	潘锐, 谢琛. 网络性权力与美国主导的多边出口管制合作——基于产业网络视角. 国际关系研究, 2023(5): 42-66+156-157.
	PAN R, XIE C. Network power and U.S.-led multilateral export control——From the perspective of industrial network. Journal of International Relations, 2023(5): 42-66+156-157.
[26]	张宏伟, 黄希宇, 张杨, 等. 全球钨产业链贸易多层网络需求短缺风险传播机制. 资源科学, 2024, 46(5): 948-959.
	ZHANG H, HUANG X, ZHANG Y, et al. Mechanisms of demand shortage risk propagation in the multi-layer trade network of global Tungsten industry chain. Resources Science, 2024, 46(5): 948-959.
[27]	HOTCHKISS E, URDANETA M, BAZILIAN M. Comparing methods for criticality and security in minerals for clean energy. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2024,17:101402.
[28]	HELBIG C, BRADSHAW A, WIETSCHEL L, et al. Supply risks associated with Lithium-Ion battery materials. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 172: 274-286.
[29]	BRINK S, KLEIJN R, SPRECHER B, et al. Identifying supply risks by mapping the Cobalt supply chain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2020, 156: 104743.
[30]	ALTHAF S, BABBITT C. Disruption risks to material supply chains in the electronics sector. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2021, 167: 105248.
[31]	MI J, LV D, GE J. Examining the influence of United States tax policies on Chinese new energy sector amidst RCEP tax reductions. Applied Economics Letters, 2025: 1-6.
[32]	HOU B, YAO Y, LIAO D. Identifying all-around nodes for spreading dynamics in complex networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 2012, 391(15): 4012-4017.
[33]	HAVLIN S, STANLEY H, BASHAN A, et al. Percolation of interdependent network of networks. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 2015, 72: 4-19.
[34]	GAO Y, CHEN S, NIE S, et al. Robustness analysis of interdependent networks under multiple-attacking strategies. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 2018, 496: 495-504.
[35]	叶琴, 曾刚, 蒋海云. 随机与蓄意攻击下长三角城市知识网络稳健性特征及其对创新绩效的影响. 地理研究, 2024, 43(5): 1088-1106.
	YE Q, ZENG G, JIANG H. Robustness of knowledge networks in the Yangtze River Delta and their impact on innovation performance under random and targeted attacks. Geographical Research, 2024, 43(5): 1088-1106.
[36]	ZHANG Z, JIANG C, GAO C, et al. The impact of the Russia–Ukraine conflict on renewable energy trade in countries along the Belt and Road: A cascading failure model. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 2025, 17(1): 015908.
[37]	LIU Y, DU C, SHI L. Establishing the robustness of chip trade networks by dynamically considering topology and risk cascading propagation. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14(1): 20687.
[38]	CAMPOCCIA A, DUSONCHET L, TELARETTI E, et al. Comparative analysis of different supporting measures for the production of electrical energy by solar PV and wind systems: Four representative European cases. Solar Energy, 2009, 83(3): 287-297.
[39]	GRAHAM E, FULGHUM N, ALTIERI K. Global Electricity Review 2025. London: Ember, 2025.
[40]	LI D, ALKEMADE F, FRENKEN K, et al. Catching up in clean energy technologies: A patent analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 2023, 48(2): 693-715.