Coping with deindustrialization in the global North and South

ABSTRACT

Deindustrialization is central to the renewed concern with the social and spatial inequalities and political-economic discontent evident in so-called left behind places in the global North since the 2008 global financial crisis. Yet coping with deindustrialization and its impacts is now a more internationalized concern, extending geographically across the global South. Urban and regional studies remain fragmented and compartmentalized in conceptual, theoretical and geographical terms, constraining attempts to develop and deepen understanding, explanation and policy formulation for deindustrialization internationally. Seeking to foster engagement, dialogue and mutual learning, this paper outlines a geographical political economy approach to economic evolution and focus on geographically differentiated pathways and institutions, suggests areas for cross-national policy learning and identifies future research directions. While rooted in and coming from a particular geographical and temporal setting, geographical political economy makes a substantive contribution to explaining and responding to deindustrialization in the global North and South.

Chinese Abstract

自2008年全球金融危机以来, 北半球一些所谓“落后”地区显现的社会和空间不平等以及令人不满的政治经济再度引发关注。其中, 去工业化是引发这些关注的重点。然而, 如今对去工业化及其影响的关注因延伸至南半球而变得更加国际化。已有的城市和区域研究在概念、理论和地理名词等方面仍然处于破碎分隔状态, 限制了从国际层面发展和加深对去工业化的理解、解释和政策制定等方面的努力。为促进融合、对话和相互学习, 本文阐述了一种用于理解经济演化的地缘政治经济方法, 关注了由于地缘因素形成的不同路径和制度, 建议了可供国家之间相互学习政策的领域, 并提出了未来的研究方向。尽管根植和来源于一个特定的地理和时间背景, 地缘政治经济可以为解释和回应南北半球的去工业化作出重要贡献。

KEYWORDS:

• Cities
• regions
• de-industrialization
• geographical political economy
• global North
• global South

This article is referred to by:

Reframing deindustrialization

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Jung Won Son for the invitations to contribute to the ‘Aging Tigers’ Conference, Seoul National University, and the Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements Policy Forum in Seoul in June 2019. The comments and discussion with participants at these events have shaped the arguments in this paper. Thanks also to the reviewers and editors of the journal for their engagement and advice. This paper draws upon research undertaken as part of two projects. First is ‘Structural Transformation, Adaptability and City Economic Evolution’ funded under the UK Economic and Social Research Council’s Urban Transformations programme (Ref. No. ES/N0006135/1). This research was led by Ron Martin (Cambridge University) in collaboration with David Bailey (Aston University), Emil Evenhuis (Cambridge University), Ben Gardiner (Cambridge Econometrics), Peter Sunley (Southampton University) and Peter Tyler (Cambridge University). Further details are available at: www.cityevolutions.org.uk. Second is ‘Manufacturing Renaissance in Industrial Regions? Investigating the Potential of Advanced Manufacturing for Sectoral and Spatial Rebalancing’ funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (Ref. No. ES/P003923/1). This research is led by Peter Sunley (Southampton University) in collaboration with Emil Evenhuis (Southampton University), Richard Harris (Durham University), Ron Martin (Cambridge University) and John Moffat (Durham University). Further details are available at: www.manufacturing-regions.org.uk

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Economic and Social Research Council: [Grant Number ES/N006135/1,ES/P003923/1].