After decades of off-shoring strategies, companies are often critically re-evaluating their earlier location decisions; in doing so, sometimes they implement the so-called relocation of second degree. Among them, back-shoring (i.e., relocation to the home country) and near-shoring (relocation to the home region) are two of the alternatives attracting growing interest from scholars. This paper aims to shed new light on the variables influencing the choice made between these two alternatives. As requested in the extant literature, a contingency approach is adopted, focusing attention on the footwear industry. Given the exploratory nature of the paper, evidence from 41 back-shoring and near-shoring strategies are analysed, comparing data from Spanish and Italian companies. Collected data are adapted to test hypotheses concerning three sets of variables: firms’ characteristics, motivations for the second degree relocation and its barriers. Collected data show that firm’s size directly influences the chosen alternative since larger companies prefer to near-shore instead of back-shore. When considering motivations, while the “made in” effect does not influence the firm’s choice, availability of skilled contractors and/or government aids induces companies to relocate to the home country instead of the home region. Finally, companies fearing encountering barriers, in terms of skilled contractors’ availability and/or (re-)development of internal manufacturing competences, will prefer the back-shoring rather than the near-shoring option. The study is focused on two countries (Spain and Italy) where the manufacturing sector (and the footwear industry within it) is still relevant to the local economy. Findings cannot be generalized to countries/industries where the local industry has been totally dismantled, without a previous in-depth analysis. The findings obtained offer managers useful insights on the elements that should be carefully evaluated when considering back- and near-shore alternatives. Additionally, valuable insights are provided for policy makers that plan to design industrial policies supporting back-reshoring policy initiatives. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper in the extant literature addressing variables influencing the choice between back- and near-shoring alternatives.

经过数十年的离岸外包战略之后，公司通常会严格地重新评估其先前的选址决策。在这样做时，有时他们实施所谓的二级学位重新安置。其中，背流（即迁移到本国）和近流（迁移到本国）是引起学者们越来越多兴趣的两种选择。本文旨在阐明影响这两种选择之间选择的变量。根据现有文献的要求，采用了权变方法，将注意力集中在制鞋业上。考虑到本文的探索性，将分析41种反向支持和近距离支持策略的证据，并比较西班牙和意大利公司的数据。收集的数据适用于检验关于三组变量的假设：企业特征，第二级重新安置的动机及其障碍。收集的数据表明，公司的规模直接影响所选的替代方案，因为较大的公司更喜欢近岸而不是后岸。在考虑动机时，尽管“制造”效应不会影响公司的选择，但熟练的承包商和/或政府援助的存在会促使公司搬迁至母国而不是母国。最后，担心在熟练承包商的可用性和/或内部制造能力（或重新开发）方面遇到障碍的公司将更喜欢反向支持而不是近距离支持。该研究的重点是两个国家（西班牙和意大利），其中制造业（及其内部的制鞋业）仍与当地经济相关。如果没有先前的深入分析，则不能将调查结果推广到已完全拆除本地行业的国家/行业。所获得的发现为管理人员在考虑后岸和近岸替代方案时应仔细评估的要素提供了有用的见解。此外，为计划制定旨在支持回溯政策举措的工业政策的决策者提供了宝贵的见解。据我们所知，这是现有文献中的第一篇针对影响回溯和近岸替代方案选择的变量的论文。