Global Journal of Management and Business Research, B: Economics and Commerce, Volume 23 Issue 1

a) Contributions and Limitations of the Literature on GVCs: Tensions between Profitable Integration and Costly Domination Starting from a presentation of the complex relationship between multinational firms and national economy that highlights the crucial role of the multinational firms in the governance of GVC through the participation of countries and companies in the manufacture and trade of intermediate parts and Kierskowski, 2001; Gereffi and Fernandez-Stark, 2016), we review the value-added trade as well as the different models of governance and integration of GVC. Thus, the GVC concepts are associated with the promotion of industrial upgrading and governance of multinational firms advocating the transfer of technology and know- how to emerging countries and investment in Research and Development in industrial countries (Gereffi et al, 2005; Bair, 2008 and 2015; Ryan P. et al. 2022, Kano et al 2021). The notion of the GVC corporate network makes it possible to go beyond sectors of activity and national economies to establish new forms of participation and relationship (Hudson, 2004; Coe & Hess., 2008; Anner, 2015; Hammer & Plugor, 2019; Coe & Yeung, 2019), social and environmental criticism of GVC leading MNEs to support more entrenched collective dynamics and more strategic rapprochements (acquisitions, mergers or even a more regional organization) and define a more participatory and sustained political framework around shared interests and values. The multinational firm shares in value, but above all in its raison d'être, commercial conception, and technological standards. The goal is to secure its upstream integration and to face shortages along supply chains (mUNCTAD, 2013; Bair and Palpacuer, 2015; ILOT, 2016; Kano et al 2020/2021; Ashwin & Kabeer, 2020; Gereffi et al. 2021/2022; Philips et al., 2022, Amachraa & Quelin, 2022). The GVC offers an appropriate policy framework to build a sustainable global system to guarantee its partner’s products and services at the best value for money to ensure the maximum well-being of stakeholders with the fairest use of resources. The GVC is indeed a global perspective to activate all the contributions and initiatives of national economies by promoting investment, learning, and synergies. Thus, countries and companies seek a role to play in the global economy instead of destructive competition. This context also encourages MNEs to outsource innovation to SME networks to limit country and investment risks but also to upscale and improve business skills (Mudambi et al 2008; Strange & Magnan, 2018, Amachraa & Quelin, 2022). In addition, the economic performance of the Global Value Chain will depend on its various activities and functions. These contribute to this performance, which shifts the issue of the competitiveness of companies to the efficiency of value chains. These develop a global capacity to fragment production and coordinate it in a country’s offer. As a result, the performance of GVC and the dynamics of development depend on the ability of foreign and local actors (suppliers and subcontractors) to offer innovative services to multinational firms and to set up productions that differentiate them from competitors, either through the specificity of the intermediate good itself, or through the specificity of quality and/or through innovative design processes, production, marketing, and development. In global economics, the popularity of the GVC concept is marked by the fragmentation of global production among several countries and companies. Thus, more and more countries are getting involved in GVC integration policies. In these policies, the trend towards developing more integrated global groups and deep local integration is confirmed through a dynamic of mergers of companies and positioning of SMEs as service providers and sources of innovation proposals to GVC. This trend has fostered the global networking of multinationals, suppliers, and SMEs. In this perspective, clusters or technological innovation centers have become privileged tools of MNEs to promote adaptation, R&D, and innovation. The theoretical debate allows us to begin the analysis of the integration of the Moroccan economy into the Global Value Chains, where we are strongly interested in the competitiveness of GVC in Morocco, their adaptation, and the implementation of innovation to create integrative clusters. In this complex and multidimensional integration process, there is no ready-made recipe for success. Still, good practices observed and reflections that should generate debate, it should not be imagined that Morocco's participation in Global Value Chains will be what has been achieved in other Asian countries. Cultures are not the same, nor are ecosystems, resources, technologies, price structures, price structures, markets, etc. On the other hand, Morocco must have its own place by its environment and its African ambition. In a country like Morocco, favoring employment and projects with a human dimension appears to be the best way, which does not exclude the use of new technologies and participation in sophisticated value chains. The gap between international and local actors should also be reduced. Local actors are poorly mobilized and have little capacity and impact along the value chain. GVC subcontractors have little ambition and fail to offer services or innovations to different industries. Sophisticated value chains are therefore not integrated, and markets are very short-term. Building Sustainable and Stable Global Value Chains: Case Study of Morocco 4 Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXIII Issue I Version I Year 2023 ( ) B © 2023 Global Journals components essential to final production (Jones and

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTg4NDg=