Talk:Deindustrialization

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles	WikiProject Sociology	(Rated Start-Class, Mid-importance)
	Sociology portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.  Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is currently or was the subject of an February 2008 educational assignment. Further details are available here.

Contents 1 Development of the article 2 References 3 Experience of Deindustrialization in OECD economies during the Twentieth Century 4 Possible systematic synthesis/OR by several users 5 Deindustrialization in city-level

[edit] Development of the article

I've made a start on some of what I see as the appropriate headings, but don't quite have the stomach to give it my best shot at the whole thing in one go! Will do it bit by bit (in no particular order of importance). This is probably a better way to go aboout it anyway, allowing others to contribute their ideas as we go along. --Nmcmurdo 20:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

I find the refereneces tag a bit odd - a lot of this stuff is well-referenced! It would be too cumbersome to reference widely accepted facts (such as the fall in manufacturing's enployment share across OECD countries)--Nmcmurdo 00:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Experience of Deindustrialization in OECD economies during the Twentieth Century

I deleted this section pending some clearer explanation of this crucial phenomenon. First of all, using the Twentieth Century as the temporal scope is silly. Mass production manufacturing didn't really become a major economic force until Ford's auto plants, so it isn't reasonable to compare manufacturing output at the start of the twentieth century with manufacturing output at the end of the twentieth century. Most commentators on deindustrialization refer to a phenomenon occurring during the last few decades of the twentieth century. Secondly, the kind of deindustrialization referenced should make use of the distinction between the 4 definitions provided at the start of the article. If OECD economies have, in the last 3 decades of the twentieth century, actually increased their per capita, inflation-adjusted manufacturing output, then just come out and say it and point to the prior definition of "deindustrialization" that matches a per capita, inflation-adjusted growth of manufacturing output.Jim Bowery 17:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible systematic synthesis/OR by several users

It appears Piotrus (talk · contribs) has been using this article for a university experiment/project or something similar. Much of the text from the students he apparently directs sounds like a university essay where they are encouraged to make analysis of data.

For example "Because of its increased production rates in industry, it can be ascertained that deindustrialization has not occurred in Sweden." or "At first glance, these ups and downs could be interpreted as a product of deindustrialization, but after interpreting the available data, we see that Germany is simply evolving while dealing with its difficult past." or "Overall, Italy does not seem to be deindustrializing" etc etc.

Or take Piotrus comment to one of the students: "You may also want to indicate you have used OECD (2008) data for the rest of your analysis." [1]

I'm afraid the article will require careful review of the sources to ascertain what conclusions are actually supported by the sources, and what conclusions are synthesis done by Piotrus students using data from the sources.--Stor stark7 ^Talk 16:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Certainly further rewriting and improvement of the added material is needed. I am looking forward to an expert review of this article one of those days.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deindustrialization in city-level

I understand that there is no decline of industrial production in the U.K. and the U.S. (overall in the country-level), but how about Manchester, Liverpool, Detroit (and also former Soviet cities like Ivanovo)....those once heavily industrialized cities? --Kerry7374 (talk) 06:08, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Not sure that the claim that there is "no decline of industrial production in the U.K. and the U.S." is in any way valid despite the allusions to the contrary in this article. Your question is spot on since the OECD data cannot seem to account for the obvious decline in industrial cities(areas) in many western countries, the massive trade deficits particularly in the U.S., and the overall evacuation of entire manufacturing sectors in both the U.K. and the U.S.

The seemingly insane notion that the U.K and U.S. are increasing the level of manufactured output through productivity in the face of the Asian tigers with their export oriented economies and tremendous trade surpluses is just not credible (or is at least lacking in explanatory adequacy). The numbers and their derivations need to be carefully scrutinized before they are crunched into factual (phony, self-serving??) claims as the current (2008) "economic crisis" has made painfully apparent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.189.202 (talk) 18:27, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

"there is no decline of industrial production in the U.K. and the U.S." <-- That's basically what I got after I read this article (Deindustrialization), this article basically says that deindustrialization doesn’t exist in the U.S. and U.K., and true, we can’t see any sign and trend of deindustrialization from official economic statistics (prior to current economic crisis). What I felt (from place where I live) is pretty contrary to what those “experts” said, and these confuse me a lot. --Kerry7374 (talk) 10:09, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. At least here in the U.S. "the experts" who read the data as though deindustrialization does not exist are now distancing themselves from that position. Even in the mainstream media we are now hearing noise about a "manufacturing renaissance" and calls for an end to the ideology of "Asia makes and the U.S. takes" e.g. http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/12/29/manufacturing-productivity-stimulus-oped-cx_jk_1230kotkin.html?partner=contextstory

I also agree with you about the confusion, again here in the U.S., deindustrialization is not only an economic phenomenon but is also a social and cultural phenomenon as well. The educational system, the media system, corporate system, the "experts" and politicians, as well as individuals have --for at least the past 40 years-- all willingly participated in this process, making it difficult to get at the facts. And moreover --in my view in a kind of Foucaudian compliance-- for the most part (until recently) American economic leaders have been unwilling or unable to accept any analysis that fundamentally challenges the "correctness" of the mainstream view that deindustrialization either is not a problem or does not occur.

Of course, there are those with great concern about deindustrialization here in the U.S. such as Barry Bluestone, and like experts could be more adequately highlighted (IMO) in the main article (Deindustrialization) plus they are well worth investigating for the interested. I recently added some additional sources to the reference list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.189.202 (talk) 16:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)