Deindustrialisation

10 Key excerpts on "Deindustrialisation"

• 

  eBook - ePub

  A United Kingdom?

  Economic, Social and Political Geographies

  • John Mohan(Author)
  • 2014(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  The focus of the chapter is on the absolute and relative decline of manufacturing, but this decline has of course prompted efforts to modernise manufacturing. It is worth considering whether the measures taken to achieve this were the only ones available, whether they were inevitable or not, and whether they have succeeded. This raises numerous questions about the social and economic costs and benefits of economic change (Turner, 1995a). The chapter begins by briefly putting Deindustrialisation, and the explanations for it, in context. Key dimensions of Deindustrialisation are then discussed: the geography of recession, in the early 1980s and 1990s; the impacts of nationalised industry policies and of privatisation; and the urban–rural shift. There follows a discussion of new forms of production organisation within manufacturing, concentrating on the impacts of foreign direct investment and assessing whether contemporary changes indeed signify a novel departure or whether they merely represent efforts to preserve old modes of accumulation. Throughout, attention is paid to the contrasting methodological standpoints of the authors whose work is reviewed.

  4.2 DEINDUSTRIALISATION IN CONTEXT

  Since at least the 1960s there has been a steady decline in the relative and absolute contribution to the British economy of manufacturing, regardless of whether this is measured in terms of output, investment, exports or employment. However, the weak performance of the industrial economy has been a source of concern for over 100 years. In this sense Deindustrialisation is simply a new name for an old problem (Martin and Rowthorn, 1986).

  The post-war ‘long boom’ to some extent shielded the UK from the regional industrial problems of the inter-war years, and helped disguise the poor competitive performance of manufacturing. However, even before that boom ended in the 1970s, Deindustrialisation was already under way. Key dimensions of this include: a cessation of productivity growth; a decline in output; a trade deficit in manufactured goods from 1983; declining profitability; and reductions in employment. Manufacturing employment peaked at 8.7 million in 1966; it is now around 4 million. In terms of relative shares, industry (manufacturing; energy and water supply; construction) accounted for 48 per cent of British civilian employment in 1955, which made the UK one of the most highly industrialised states in history (Hall, 1991); by contrast, by 1996 that share was approximately 23 per cent and today there are now more than two service sector employees for every worker in industry. Only in the West and East Midlands does industry’s share of employment exceed 30 per cent, but the figure for London is 11.6 per cent, while manufacturing alone now accounts for under 10 per cent of employment in London and Surrey. Only in Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Mid-Glamorgan are over 30 per cent of the workforce now in manufacturing (Figure 4.1

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The SAGE Handbook of Economic Geography

  • Andrew Leyshon, Roger Lee, Linda McDowell, Peter Sunley, Andrew Leyshon, Roger Lee, Linda McDowell, Peter Sunley, SAGE Publications Ltd(Authors)
  • 2011(Publication Date)
  • SAGE Publications Ltd

    (Publisher)

  17 Geographies of Economic Decline Ray Hudson INTRODUCTION In this chapter I want to focus upon the ways in which economic geographers – and others – sought to come to terms with uneven develop-ment, geographies of economic decline and the de-industrialization that blighted both national and, more specifically, many regional economies from the later 1960s and to review the sorts of explanations that they constructed in the 1970s and 1980s. Such changes were integrally linked to changes in geographies of production and the emergence of new spatial divisions of labour, at varying spatial scales (see Chapter 5). Thus the empirical context for the chapter is the industrial decline in many of the former ‘workshops of the world’ of industrial capitalism – such as the ‘old’ industrial regions and city-regions/conurba-tions (for convenience, referred to as ‘regions’ in what follows) of the mid-West and north east of the USA, north east England, south Wales and central Scotland in the UK, Nord-Pas de Calais in France, the Ruhr in Germany, Wallonia in Belgium and so on – the list is a long one – as one facet of changing interna-tional and intra-national divisions of labour. Such changes in the economic well-being of regions posed two sorts of problems. First, they posed challenges for policy makers, charged with responsibilities to regenerate these regions and secure their economic future. Such policy makers struggled to find solutions to the problems posed by industrial decline, not least because of a failure to understand the reasons for rapid shifts in the economic health of regions and the processes underlying these changes.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Turkeys Economy from different perspectives after 1980

  The past, present and the future

  • Ebru Gül Yilmaz, Neyir Tekeli(Authors)
  • 2020(Publication Date)
  • Peter Lang Group

    (Publisher)

  In general, deindustrialization can be discussed under two different economic settings formed under two different economic policies: structural change and globalization. However, Hegyi-Keri (2016) argues that structural change is often identified with deindustrialization. Deindustrialization is a narrower term and often what is meant by it is either decreases in the number of people employed in the industry (Kiss, 2010; Cheshire 1991) or a decline in industrial production. Before the 1990s, particularly the industrial policies and national of the devel- oping countries could affect the speed and extent of deindustrialization arising from structural change. However, national policies started to be considered as international competition, preventing interventions when globalization became deeper. As a result of globalization in Turkey, as with many other countries, it was observed that production industry’s share in GDP declined and production sector composition changed with regards to technology. Yet the term “deindustrialization” definitively fell into current language with the publication of Bluestone and Harrison’s (1982) famous and seminal book entitled The Deindustrialization of America. Defining “deindustrialization” as the “widespread and systematic disinvestment in a nation’s basic productive capacity” (1982:6), the authors expressed great concern about the wave of plant closings that swept through the northern USA during the 1970s and the ongoing erosion of America’s industrial base, a phenomenon supposedly caused in part by a “globalization gambit” linking international capital flows and industrial invest- ment decisions with both local and personal troubles (Leif van Neuss, 2016). Verley (1997:420) also employs the term “deindustrialization” to describe the economic decline of some European proto-industrial regions, notably in France and Britain, which failed their transition to modern industry at times of the industrial revolution.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  A Violent World

  Modern Threats to Economic Stability

  • Jean-Hervé Lorenzi, Mickaël Berrebi(Authors)
  • 2016(Publication Date)
  • Palgrave Macmillan

    (Publisher)

  The Impact of Deindustrialization 75 industry in the developed countries being transferred to the emerging nations. This movement, specific to the late twentieth century, is not restricted to a drastic reduction in the OECD countries’ share of industry and the loss of millions of unskilled jobs in these same countries. It has led to deindustrialization, in the sense of a loss of substance in overall industry in this part of the world. The loss is fundamental. It has caused the West to lose the ‘leadership’ role it enjoyed for the past two centuries, a West that is now convinced that the future will be less favourable to it. The movement in itself appears to be inevitable, although not neces- sarily in this configuration, one that contains the seeds of an imbalance in the world economy that we have experienced and that we continue to experience. In fact, deindustrialization is nothing more than a short-term victory of consumption or finance, as was the case in Great Britain in the early twentieth century when it made the choice to sacrifice its industry in favour of creating a financial centre in London. The results are known and have created difficulties, not of production but of creation, for the countries in question. This is the fourth characteristic of the gestating world economy; this fourth restriction may be the hardest to bear. It appears to lie at the heart of the difficulty that the West has had in recovering, especially in the labour market in the United States, and in overcoming the fact that growth, even if solid, has hardly anywhere resulted in a genuine rebalancing of the job market. That is why new hope is incarnated in the word ‘reindustrialization’ that is now appearing all over the place – and in the United States in partic- ular – in the explicit hope of rediscovering a taste for development and production capacity.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Industrial Location

  Principles, Practice and Policy

  • James W. Harrington, Barney Warf(Authors)
  • 2002(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  A popular, but erroneous, interpretation of deindustrialization is that it is a result of the growth of services. It is true that in the post-World War II era, when employment in manufacturing in many western nations began to decline, employment in services grew significantly. However, there is no convincing logic to the position that the growth of services is responsible for deindustrialization. The rising demand for services, however, does not explain the declining demand for manufactured products. Why, for example, should the increase in employment in a law firm or hospital lead to a decline in employment in a steel mill or rubber factory? If anything, because services consume some manufactured goods, the growth of services should increase employment in industry. Indeed, the loss of manufacturing has decreased employment in many services, particularly those “tied” to industry (e.g., shipping). Geographically, the highly uneven pattern of employment growth of services and manufacturing reflects relatively few connections between these two sectors. In some places, such as Pittsburgh or London, the decline in the steel industry was replaced by a growth of business services; in others, such as Detroit or Manchester, U.K., the decline in automobile production was not compensated by the growth of services, leading to steady decline. In cities such as Los Angeles or Tokyo, both services and manufacturing increased in employment simultaneously in the 1970s, creating a booming local economy.

  Figure 7.7 Location of U.S. manufacturing employment, 1960

  Figure 7.8 Location of U.S. manufacturing employment, 1970

  Figure 7.9 Location of U.S. manufacturing employment, 1980

  Figure 7.10

  Location of U.S. manufacturing employment, 1990

  It is important to note that the deindustrialization occurred differentially in terms of output and employment. In terms of output, manufacturing has remained roughly 22 percent of the GNP of western nations since the 1950s. In terms of employment, however, manufacturing has accounted for a steadily decreasing share of total employment; in the U.S., it dropped from roughly 45 percent of total jobs in 1950 to about 18 percent by 1990. The fact that western manufacturing firms can generate a constant or even rising output with fewer workers is a reflection of rising rates of industrial productivity.

  The Geographies of Deindustrialization

  Like all economic processes, deindustrialization occurs unevenly over space. It is useful to interpret the geography of deindustrialization at three distinct spatial scales. First, at the intra-metropolitan scale,

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The Future of the Metropolis

  Berlin London Paris New York. Economic Aspects

  • Hans-Jürgen Ewers, John B. Goddard, Horst Matzerath(Authors)
  • 2019(Publication Date)
  • De Gruyter

    (Publisher)

  7. The Changing Spatial Structure of Economic Activity and Metropolitan Decline in the United Kingdom David Keeble 7.1. Introduction Since the early 1970s the industrialised countries of the European Community have experienced deepening economic recession, involving to lesser or greater degree a process of de-industrialisation and relative manufacturing decline, and steeply rising unemployment. Service industries of all kinds have come to account for an ever-increasing volume and share of national employment, while notwithstanding recession, rapid techno-logical change, especially in micro-electronics, has led to the creation of entirely new products and industries, notably in the so-called information technology sector. Spatially, however, the incidence and impact of these trends has been far from even. Most remarkable has been the substantial absolute decline of manufacturing industry and resident population suffered by the big 19th-century industrial cities of Table 1 : The Urban-Rural Manufacturing Shift in the European Community Total Manufacturing Employment 1973 Change 1973-81 •000s '000s % Highly Urbanised Regions (21) 11 414 -2 0 4 4 -1 7 . 9 Urbanised Regions (23) 10 188 -9 8 8 - 9.7 Less Urbanised Regions (32) 7 318 -5 4 8 - 7.5 Rural Regions (29) 3 838 -5 7 - 1.5 Total E E C 9 Regions (105) 32 758 -3 6 3 7 -1 1 . 1 Source: Unpublished, adjusted, regional Labour Force Survey data from Eurostat. The Future of the Metropolis © 1986 Walter de Gruyter & Co. • Berlin • New York 172 David Keeble northern Europe, following a trend established in the 1960s. In contrast, many small towns and rural areas have recorded population and industrial growth, sometimes reversing most strikingly decades of rural depopulation and job loss.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - ePub

  Historical Geography: Progress and Prospect

  • Michael Pacione(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Routledge

    (Publisher)

  The remainder of this paper takes a similarly catholic approach to the concept of industrial revolution and the study of industrial change. Although ‘proto-industrialisation’ is beyond the scope of this essay, discussion will range over the whole of the period 1780 to 1940, on the assumption that significant structural changes in the economy occurred throughout this period, and that readjustments of the late-nineteenth century and economic restructuring during the inter-war years were just as important as the accelerated growth and structural change which occurred during the classic period of industrial revolution. Moreover, examples will not be narrowly confined to economic issues, but will range widely over the whole spectrum of economy and society that was touched by industrial change. Although examples are drawn mainly from Britain, comparisons with North America are made where appropriate. European and other literature on industrial change is beyond the scope of this essay.

  THE GEOGRAPHICAL STUDY OF INDUSTRIAL CHANGE

  The study of industrial change since 1780 is necessarily interdisciplinary in nature and should not be constricted by artificial boundaries. Geographical study thus interacts with the work of social, economic and political historians, and no areas of research are the exclusive preserve of particular disciplines. However, it is possible to identify four research areas where geographers have and should have contributed; where geographers have engaged in lively debate with other scholars; or where work — which may originate from many disciplines — clearly falls within a geographical tradition.

  First, there are studies of specific industries or groups of industries, which focus on such themes as the organisational and business history of the firm, technological developments affecting operations, changes in working conditions and in employment practices affecting the labour force, and the origins and impact of changing locational decisions. Second, a group of studies focuses on the regional structure of industrial change, ranging over such issues as the extent to which industrialisation destroyed traditional regional economies, the degree to which regional diversity existed within a mature industrial economy, and the emergence of the ‘regional problem’ of depressed industrial areas. Third, there are studies which focus on various mechanisms of industrial change and particularly on the significance for industrial development of interaction and exchange over space. The role of transport and communications in industrial change, the development of telecommunications, demographic change and labour migration, the flow of capital and ideas between enterprises and areas and changing patterns of demand are all fruitful areas in which geographers may work. Fourth, a wide range of studies examine the impact of industrial change on the wider economy and society, focussing on such themes such as the development of urban structures, changing class relations, employment and unemployment, and the effects of industrial change on the social, political, and cultural experiences of the labour force. Although not exhaustive, this classification covers the main traditions of geographical research on industrial change. The significance of selected research in each field will be discussed below.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  The New Brazilian Economy

  Dynamic Transitions into the Future

  • Elias C. Grivoyannis(Author)
  • 2016(Publication Date)
  • Palgrave Macmillan

    (Publisher)

  Kupfer (2012) observes that, for some authors, deindustrialization only happens when there is a persistent absolute reduction of industrial/manu- facturing employment and/or output. However, other economists argue that the phenomenon occurs when there is a structural relative diminu- tion in terms of the proportion of industrial employment and/or output. Once again, the decision of choosing the variables could be biased, as the absolute variables tend to be adopted by economists against the deindus- trialization hypothesis, while the relative ones are expected to be cho- sen by the supporters of the mentioned postulate. Consequently, a third DEINDUSTRIALIZATION IN BRAZIL? 67 significant contrast takes into account absolute versus relative indicators to be investigated. Considering that the three distinctions can be combined, it is easy to end up with “a conversation of the deaf ”. For instance, if somebody is examining absolute industrial employment performance and the other is discussing relative manufacturing output, they can easily reach different (even opposite) findings. In order to mitigate this problem, this chapter reviews both employment and output, both industrial and manufacturing, both absolute and relative data, aiming to deliver a less biased outcome for this quite polarized controversy. Thus, the main goal is to provide a comprehensive picture rather than utilize a limited number of indicators, thereby avoiding the “blind men and an elephant” metaphor. Another discussion concerns why deindustrialization happens. According to Squeff (2012), who presented an extensive review of the literature, there are eight key reasons: 1. Economic development process: secular change regarding the secto- rial composition of value added and employment; 2. Productivity differences: the industry’s productivity tends to grow faster than the rest of the economy, resulting in the decrease of man- ufactured products’ relative prices; 3.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Slow Growth and the Service Economy

  • Pascal Petit(Author)
  • 2013(Publication Date)
  • Bloomsbury Academic

    (Publisher)

  The next two chapters will be an attempt to clarify these points. Firstly, however, this analysis of the diverse forms of deindustrialization will be concluded with an examination of the opportunities for industrial policies to solve the problems. VI Renaissance or decline of industrial policies? The slowing down of the growth process in the industrial economies is not the only effect of the decline of manufacturing industry as an engine of growth. It also undermines the foundations of past economic development through its effects on the formation of demand and the organization of production. These changes, which affect for example the distribution of purchasing powers and the opportunities for using economies of scale to create large productivity gains, cannot easily be reversed. The concern expressed, particularly in the United States (cf. Kuttner, 1983 and Thurow, 1984), about the decline of the middle income class and the argument that there are physical limits to the scale of production (cf. Gold, 1981, Giarini and Louberge, 1978) reflect anxieties of this nature. In this context, the use of limited or ad hoc industrial policies in an attempt to halt the relative decline of manufacturing industry can be of only limited effectiveness in stimulating economic growth. Everything depends in fact on what is understood by industrial policy. Stagnation and de-industrialization 1 1 A problem of definition The most widely accepted definition of industrial policy, found for example in the work of the various OECD working parties on the question, includes the whole range of microeconomic structural adjust-ments, i.e. all interventions made in favour of expanding or declining economic activities. This definition stresses the microeconomic nature of the measures taken and the conjunctural conditions under which decisions are taken.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book
• 

  eBook - PDF

  Human Geography

  People, Place, and Culture

  • Erin H. Fouberg, Alexander B. Nash, Alexander B. Murphy, Harm J. de Blij(Authors)
  • 2015(Publication Date)
  • Wiley

    (Publisher)

  The term often refers to manufacturing plants and businesses that benefit from close proximity because they share pools of skilled labour and technological and financial amenities. Deagglomeration The process of industrial deconcentration in response to technological advances and/or increasing costs due to congestion and competition. Primary industrial regions Western and central Europe; eastern North America; Russia and Ukraine; and eastern Asia, each of which consists of one or more core areas of industrial development with subsidiary clusters. 13.3 How Do Location Theories Explain Historical Patterns of Industrialization? 381 These leading steel-producing countries accounted for over 80 percent of the world’s steel production in 2010. Data from World Steel Association website, www.worldsteel.org/media-centre/press-releases/2013/World-Steel-Figures-2013.html. TABLE 13.2 Major Steel-Producing Countries, 2012 Country Metric Tonnes Country Metric Tonnes 1 China 716.5 6 South Korea 69.1 2 Japan 107.2 7 Germany 42.7 3 United States 88.7 8 Turkey 35.9 4 India 77.6 9 Brazil 34.5 5 Russia 70.4 10 Ukraine 33.0 FIGURE 13.12 Major industrial regions of Europe. Western and central Europe was one of the primary industrial regions before 1950, and the major industrial regions of Europe are shown here. 0° 10° 40° 50° 60° S W E D E N N O R W A Y F I N L A N D PORTUGAL SLOVENIA CROATIA BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA MACE- DONIA SERBIA MONTENEGRO ALBANIA I T A LY GREECE BULGARIA ROMANIA SLOVAKIA MOLDOVA I C E L A N D Glasgow Newcastle Manchester Leeds London NETHERLANDS BELGIUM Brussels Paris LUX. Düsseldorf G E R M A N Y B erlin Ham burg Frankfurt Strasbourg F R A N C E Lyon Zürich SWITZERLAND M ilan Turin G enoa Venice AUSTRIA Vienna Prague C ZECH REP.

  Sign up to read

  Learn more about book