ما بين التصنيع والصناعة فرق شاسع، فالأول هو المسار التنموي المستدام الذي يغيّر موقع الأمم على مستوى الاقتصادي العالمي. اليوم لم يعد عدد المصانع بمعناها الضيق هو المحرك الأساسي لاقتصادات الدول، فما بين الصناعة والتصنيع يكمن الفارق. هذا الفارق كثيراً ما يُغفل في النقاشات الاقتصادية، لكنه يمثّل جوهر أي مشروع تنموي يسعى لبناء قاعدة صلبة للنمو المستدام.
الصناعة يمكن أن تنشأ بقرار سريع؛ نستورد المعدات، نستقطب المستثمرين، نوفر الطاقة والأراضي، فنحصل على مصانع عاملة ومنتجات سريعة الدخول إلى الأسواق. هذا النموذج قد يحقّق إيرادات ويضيف قيمة على المدى القصير، لكنه يظل هشّاً لأنه يعتمد على الخارج في التقنية والمعرفة والابتكار. في المجمل هو أقرب إلى نشاط تجاري كبير منه إلى مشروع حضاري طويل الأمد.
أما التصنيع فهو مسار أكثر عمقاً وتعقيداً. التصنيع يبدأ بالإنسان، من خلال تعليم نوعي يخرّج مهندسين وفنيين قادرين على التطوير لا التشغيل فقط، وبتمويل ذكي يوازن بين تشجيع المخاطرة وحماية الصناعات الناشئة، وبسياسات تراكمية تبني شبكة من الموردين المحليين، ومراكز بحثية، وثقافة إنتاجية تجعل المجتمع أكثر استعداداً للإبداع والعمل.
التصنيع يقاس بمدى قدرتنا على الإضافة من خلال الأدوات البحثية والتطويرية. بمعنى أدق هو انتقال من دور المستهلك للتقنية إلى المشارك في إنتاجها. من دون هذا التحوّل، تبقى المصانع مجرد جزر معزولة تتوقف قيمتها عند حدود التشغيل والتصدير فقط. أما مع التصنيع، فإن المصنع يصبح جزءاً من منظومة معرفية متكاملة، ترفع الإنتاجية، وتخلق وظائف ذات قيمة عالية، وتزيد القدرة التنافسية للدولة.
هناك تجارب عالمية كبيرة انتهجت مسار الصناعة وامتلكت مصانع لعقود طويلة، لكنها لم تتحوّل إلى قوى صناعية كبرى. والسبب يعود لكونها ظلت عالقة في استيراد التكنولوجيا والاكتفاء بتشغيلها. على سبيل المثال المكسيك لديها قاعدة صناعية ضخمة خصوصاً في السيارات والإلكترونيات، لكن دورها ظل محدوداً كقاعدة للتجميع مرتبطة بالسوق الأمريكية، لم تتحوّل إلى قوة ابتكار تقني. كذلك البرازيل أقامت مصانع كبيرة منذ السبعينيات في مجالات السيارات والصلب والطائرات، لكنها لم تصل إلى مستوى الدول الصناعية الكبرى بسبب ضعف الاستثمار في البحث والتطوير والتعليم التقني.
في المقابل، دول أخرى جعلت من التصنيع خياراً إستراتيجياً، فبنت جامعات متخصصة، ومؤسسات تمويلية قوية، وبرامج بحث وتطوير، حتى أصبح لها دور ومركز عالمي في سلاسل القيمة. لعل أقرب مثال نستطيع أن نستشهد به هي كوريا الجنوبية، حيث بدأت ببرامج تصنيع محلي في ستينيات القرن الماضي، ركّزت على التعليم والتقنية، واليوم يشار إليها كأيقونة في صناعات السيارات، والسفن، والإلكترونيات. إضافة لذلك تايوان تحوّلت من مصانع بسيطة في السبعينيات إلى مركز عالمي لأشباه الموصلات.
ربما السؤال الذي يحير البعض عند قراءة هذه السطور: هل التصنيع يتناقض مع العولمة؟ الحقيقة أن التصنيع ليس خروجاً من العولمة، بل هو حماية ذكية من سلبياتها. هو الذي يحوّل الانفتاح من مصدر تهديد للتبعية إلى فرصة للنمو والتمركز في مواقع أكثر قيمة في السوق العالمية. بمعنى آخر؛ الصناعة تجعلنا مستهلكين للعولمة بينما التصنيع يجعلنا صانعين داخل العولمة.
بالنسبة لنا في المملكة، وفي ظل رؤية 2030، استطعنا أن نستقطب استثمارات عالمية في القطاع الصناعي في خطوات متسارعة ومهمة، ولكن نحتاج اليوم أن نضمن أن تكون هذه المصانع لَبِنَات في مسار تصنيعي متكامل، يصنع المعرفة محلياً، ويضيف قيمة حقيقية، ويحوّل المملكة من مجرد سوق جاذبة للصناعة إلى مركز إقليمي للتصنيع والإبداع. إن الرهان على التصنيع، لا على الصناعة وحدها، هو ما سيحدد موقعنا المستقبلي في الاقتصاد العالمي. فالصناعة قد تمنحنا عوائد سريعة، لكن التصنيع وحده هو الذي يمنحنا القدرة على الاستمرار، ويجعلنا نصعد درجات سلم الإنتاج العالمي بثقة واستقلالية.
تابع قناة عكاظ على الواتساب
What lies between manufacturing and industry is a vast difference. The former is the sustainable developmental path that changes the position of nations on the global economic level. Today, the number of factories in its narrow sense is no longer the primary driver of national economies; the difference lies between industry and manufacturing. This difference is often overlooked in economic discussions, but it represents the essence of any developmental project that seeks to build a solid foundation for sustainable growth.
Industry can be established by a quick decision; we import equipment, attract investors, provide energy and land, and we obtain operational factories and products that quickly enter the markets. This model may achieve revenues and add value in the short term, but it remains fragile because it relies on external technology, knowledge, and innovation. Overall, it is closer to a large commercial activity than to a long-term civilizational project.
On the other hand, manufacturing is a deeper and more complex path. Manufacturing begins with people, through quality education that graduates engineers and technicians capable of development, not just operation, with smart financing that balances encouraging risk and protecting emerging industries, and with cumulative policies that build a network of local suppliers, research centers, and a productive culture that makes society more ready for creativity and work.
Manufacturing is measured by our ability to add through research and development tools. More precisely, it is a transition from being a consumer of technology to being a participant in its production. Without this transformation, factories remain mere isolated islands whose value stops at the limits of operation and export only. However, with manufacturing, the factory becomes part of an integrated knowledge system that raises productivity, creates high-value jobs, and increases the competitiveness of the state.
There are significant global experiences that have followed the path of industry and owned factories for decades, yet they did not transform into major industrial powers. The reason is that they remained stuck in importing technology and merely operating it. For example, Mexico has a massive industrial base, especially in automobiles and electronics, but its role has remained limited as an assembly base linked to the American market, without transforming into a force for technological innovation. Similarly, Brazil established large factories since the 1970s in the fields of automobiles, steel, and aircraft, but it did not reach the level of major industrial countries due to weak investment in research, development, and technical education.
In contrast, other countries have made manufacturing a strategic choice, building specialized universities, strong financial institutions, and research and development programs, thus gaining a global role and center in value chains. Perhaps the closest example we can cite is South Korea, which began local manufacturing programs in the 1960s, focusing on education and technology, and today is referred to as an icon in the automotive, shipbuilding, and electronics industries. Additionally, Taiwan transformed from simple factories in the 1970s to a global center for semiconductors.
Perhaps the question that puzzles some when reading these lines is: Does manufacturing contradict globalization? The truth is that manufacturing is not a departure from globalization; rather, it is a smart protection against its negatives. It transforms openness from a source of dependency threat into an opportunity for growth and positioning in more valuable places in the global market. In other words, industry makes us consumers of globalization, while manufacturing makes us producers within globalization.
For us in the Kingdom, under Vision 2030, we have been able to attract global investments in the industrial sector in rapid and significant steps, but today we need to ensure that these factories are building blocks in an integrated manufacturing path that produces knowledge locally, adds real value, and transforms the Kingdom from merely an attractive market for industry into a regional center for manufacturing and innovation. Betting on manufacturing, not just industry alone, is what will determine our future position in the global economy. Industry may give us quick returns, but only manufacturing grants us the ability to sustain and allows us to confidently and independently ascend the ladder of global production.
Industry can be established by a quick decision; we import equipment, attract investors, provide energy and land, and we obtain operational factories and products that quickly enter the markets. This model may achieve revenues and add value in the short term, but it remains fragile because it relies on external technology, knowledge, and innovation. Overall, it is closer to a large commercial activity than to a long-term civilizational project.
On the other hand, manufacturing is a deeper and more complex path. Manufacturing begins with people, through quality education that graduates engineers and technicians capable of development, not just operation, with smart financing that balances encouraging risk and protecting emerging industries, and with cumulative policies that build a network of local suppliers, research centers, and a productive culture that makes society more ready for creativity and work.
Manufacturing is measured by our ability to add through research and development tools. More precisely, it is a transition from being a consumer of technology to being a participant in its production. Without this transformation, factories remain mere isolated islands whose value stops at the limits of operation and export only. However, with manufacturing, the factory becomes part of an integrated knowledge system that raises productivity, creates high-value jobs, and increases the competitiveness of the state.
There are significant global experiences that have followed the path of industry and owned factories for decades, yet they did not transform into major industrial powers. The reason is that they remained stuck in importing technology and merely operating it. For example, Mexico has a massive industrial base, especially in automobiles and electronics, but its role has remained limited as an assembly base linked to the American market, without transforming into a force for technological innovation. Similarly, Brazil established large factories since the 1970s in the fields of automobiles, steel, and aircraft, but it did not reach the level of major industrial countries due to weak investment in research, development, and technical education.
In contrast, other countries have made manufacturing a strategic choice, building specialized universities, strong financial institutions, and research and development programs, thus gaining a global role and center in value chains. Perhaps the closest example we can cite is South Korea, which began local manufacturing programs in the 1960s, focusing on education and technology, and today is referred to as an icon in the automotive, shipbuilding, and electronics industries. Additionally, Taiwan transformed from simple factories in the 1970s to a global center for semiconductors.
Perhaps the question that puzzles some when reading these lines is: Does manufacturing contradict globalization? The truth is that manufacturing is not a departure from globalization; rather, it is a smart protection against its negatives. It transforms openness from a source of dependency threat into an opportunity for growth and positioning in more valuable places in the global market. In other words, industry makes us consumers of globalization, while manufacturing makes us producers within globalization.
For us in the Kingdom, under Vision 2030, we have been able to attract global investments in the industrial sector in rapid and significant steps, but today we need to ensure that these factories are building blocks in an integrated manufacturing path that produces knowledge locally, adds real value, and transforms the Kingdom from merely an attractive market for industry into a regional center for manufacturing and innovation. Betting on manufacturing, not just industry alone, is what will determine our future position in the global economy. Industry may give us quick returns, but only manufacturing grants us the ability to sustain and allows us to confidently and independently ascend the ladder of global production.


