technologies. This can also help reduce supply-side risks and contribute to the global public good of greater resilience in these global value chains.

It is important to distinguish between products relating to minerals and raw materials, and those relating to manufacturing. Both are important for solar, wind and EV technologies, but these two product categories entail different types of development strategies and considerations. Developing export competitiveness in manufacturing products – particularly products that are more technologically sophisticated – has been linked to a wide range of economic benefits such as higher economic growth, employment growth, productivity increases and technological upgrading (Hausmann et al., 2006; Anand et al., 2012). Export-oriented manufacturing growth strategies also played an important role in the East Asian ‘growth miracles’ of the 20<sup>th</sup> century (Stiglitz, 2018). Although recent premature de-industrialization trends across many countries have led scholars and policy makers to question whether manufacturing-led growth is still a viable development path (Rodrik, 2016), growth in demand for green technologies and products could unleash sizable new growth opportunities (Hausmann, 2023).

While minerals-oriented development strategies have been successful in certain countries and contexts, they generally create less productivity benefits, fewer growth-enhancing linkages across other economic sectors (Hirschman, 1958) and are also associated with greater resource curse risks (Papyrakis, 2016). However, with the overall demand for critical minerals projected to increase by nearly 500% by 2050 to meet decarbonization goals (Hund et al., 2020), it will be increasingly important to encourage economically and environmentally responsible mineralsoriented development strategies, and to take active strategies to reduce resource-curse risks.

There are plenty of avenues for future research. First, one could extend the product mapping to other tradeable decarbonization technologies and services with pro-development characteristics (OECD, 2017). For example, understanding countries’ productive capabilities to recycle and maintain solar panels could help generate labor demand in small and medium sized enterprises. Second, exploring how countries’ policy space relates to their strengths in decarbonization technologies is another open question. Do countries with competitive exports in decarbonization technologies have lower trade costs, more ambitious nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and decarbonization targets, benefit from domestic subsidies and low regulatory barriers to FDI or other policies? Finally, diffusion of decarbonization technologies beyond production hubs is critical to help countries transition to a more low-carbon economy. This requires a better understanding of the structural and policy drivers behind countries’ and firms’ adoption of decarbonization technologies.

# 4.) Methods

The analysis in this paper involved (i) developing a new mapping of global value chain products for solar PV, wind turbines and EVs, (ii) merging this mapping with export data, and (iii) constructing and calculating several metrics.

## 4.1) Mapping global value chains of key decarbonization technologies

We used the 6-digit product classification of the Harmonized System (HS) to identify tradeable products associated with the value chains of solar PV, wind turbines and EVs. The 6-digit HS classification is the most granular, internationally harmonized classification of products. While many existing classifications of environmental goods have been based on the 6-digit HS coding classification<sup>4</sup> , it has some limitations, notably dual use and product specificity.

> 4 <mark>Steenblik, R. (2005). Environmental goods: A comparison of the APEC and OECD lists (No. 2005/4). OECD Publishing; Sugathan, M. (2013). Lists of environmental goods: an overview. International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development.</mark>

11