Introduction
In the intricate chessboard of global geopolitics and economy, the COVID-19 pandemic and recent supply chain disruptions have brutally exposed a structural vulnerability that Mexico, along with much of the world, had chosen to ignore or underestimate: excessive reliance on imports. This fragility, manifesting from critical medical supplies to essential industrial components, is not merely a statistical detail; it poses a latent threat to our economic sustainability, market stability, and ultimately, the well-being of our citizens. The pressing question in discussion forums is: how long will we continue to gamble on external fluctuations instead of building a robust internal production fortress?
The Need for a Favorable Legislative, Regulatory, and Normative Framework
The answer seems clear: it is necessary to design and implement a legislative, regulatory, and normative framework that prioritizes national manufacturing. This is not a return to outdated protectionism but a smart strategy of resilience and development, a bet on productive capacity in an increasingly interconnected world.
Why Prioritize National Manufacturing?
Reducing import dependence is not an ideological whim but a lesson learned from crises. When factories in Asia close, when shipping freight skyrockets, or when geopolitical tensions strangle trade, Mexico feels the impact immediately. Shortages of chips for the automotive industry, lack of essential medicines, or increased raw material costs are just a few recent examples of how globalization, without a solid internal production base, can become an imminent risk factor. Prioritizing national manufacturing means building shorter, more controllable, and therefore more resilient supply chains. It means generating specialized jobs in our own territory, fostering technology transfer, and developing productive capabilities that, in turn, drive long-term innovation and competitiveness.
A Gradual Transformation, Not an Abrupt Shift
However, this transformation should not be abrupt or dogmatic. It must be a progressive process. A radical and uncompromising shift towards import substitution could create market distortions, inefficiencies, and ironically, make products more expensive for the end consumer. Progressiveness implies setting realistic, phased goals for increasing national content in strategic sectors. It means identifying producers with the highest growth potential and lowest opportunity cost, and focusing incentives on them. It requires a thorough analysis of existing capabilities, technological gaps, and human capital availability. A progressive policy allows businesses to adapt, invest, and grow organically without being overwhelmed by unattainable requirements. It’s a gradual construction path where each step strengthens the country’s productive might.
Mixed Investments: A Collaborative Effort
To materialize this vision, fostering mixed investments promoting private initiative and state participation is indispensable. The investment magnitude required to reshape our production chains and establish new manufacturing capabilities is colossal, surpassing any single actor’s capacity. The state, through its development institutions, procurement policies, and infrastructure, must act as a catalyst, an economic agent. Private initiative, with its dynamism, innovation capacity, and market/technology access, must be the engine.
Articulating Mixed Investments
The state can provide specific tax incentives for national manufacturing, such as R&D investment credits, accelerated deductions for high-tech machinery purchases, or special regimes for plant installation in strategic zones or “Well-being Poles.” It can also, crucially, use its purchasing power to ensure guaranteed demand through multi-annual contracts. This is the most potent signal for private initiative, enabling them to plan long-term investments knowing there’s a secure market for their production. Private initiative, in turn, must commit not just to producing but also investing in technology, personnel training, local supplier development, and intellectual property generation.
Clear Guidelines: The Cornerstone of Sustainability
However, without precise rules on how incentives are granted, accessing multi-annual contracts, or verifying national content compliance, the risk of public funds misuse or inefficiency is extremely high. The policy’s sustainability directly depends on its ability to generate confidence and genuine investment, not just opportunistic ones.
The Role of Regulatory Bodies: More Than Just Oversight
Of course, this framework isn’t without challenges. Implementing a national manufacturing promotion policy must be carefully calibrated to avoid contravening international trade commitments like the T-MEC. The risk of foster mechanisms being perceived as hidden subsidies or non-tariff barriers is real and could trigger retaliatory measures affecting other Mexican export sectors. Local product quality must be non-negotiable, and supervision capabilities must meet the highest standards.
Conclusion
In conclusion, establishing a legislative, regulatory, and normative framework prioritizing national manufacturing is a strategic imperative for Mexico. It’s not a return to the past but a forward-looking vision aiming to build resilience and productive sovereignty. The success of this construction depends on the intelligence with which progressiveness is designed, the efficiency with which mixed investments between the state and private initiative are fostered, and most importantly, the clarity and certainty of its guidelines. Only then can we ensure that “Made in Mexico” is a tangible reality strengthening the economy, ensuring supply, and positioning Mexico as a relevant actor in global value chains.
*The author has 25 years of experience in the health sector in Mexico and Latin America, is a founding partner of a consultancy focused on public policy analysis in health, digital health, and sustainability.
