Workflow
全息宇宙观
icon
Search documents
邓正红软实力发布:2025年全球国家软实力100强 凸显规则重构能力的关键作用
Sou Hu Cai Jing· 2025-10-09 02:49
Core Insights - The 2025 Global Soft Power Index highlights the critical role of rule reconstruction in national competitiveness, with a total soft power value of $179,796.62 million, reflecting a 6.20% increase from 2024 [1][3] Summary by Categories Soft Power Value and Rankings - The total soft power value for the top 100 countries is $179,796.62 million, an increase of $10,489.58 million from 2024, marking a growth rate of 6.20% compared to a decline of 0.84% in 2024 [3][4] - The top three countries by soft power value are the United States ($64,581.95 million), China ($45,140.65 million), and India ($6,160.47 million) [4][9] - The top three countries by soft power index are Singapore (0.6216), China (0.6021), and the United States (0.5532) [5][9] Economic Trends - The global economy is showing slow recovery, with significant disparities among countries; the U.S. economy is growing strongly, while the Eurozone and Japan are struggling [4] - Trade growth is primarily driven by exports from China, the U.S., and India, while European trade growth is below expectations [4][6] - Emerging industries such as green energy and AI are experiencing strong trade growth [4] Theoretical Frameworks - The "Rule Entropy-Material Entropy" dual-variable model emphasizes the dynamic balance between soft and hard power as essential for future economic and technological competition [1][3] - The concept of "asymmetric competition" in soft power transformation is highlighted, particularly in the context of digital trade and international cooperation [6][7] Future Trends - Economic rule rebalancing is expected, with supply chains adopting a dual system of "physical hard connections + digital soft rules" [8] - In technology innovation, competition over standard-setting in quantum computing is anticipated, alongside ethical frameworks in biotechnology [8] - Global governance is undergoing rule reconstruction, with potential formations of "carbon rule clubs" and conflicts in digital tax regulations [8]