Search

This research aims to identify the nature of deindustrialisation on Indonesia’s economy. To test the negative deindustrialisation, this research performed a descriptive analysis on value-added, export-import, and productivity data of manufacturing sector. To test the premature deindustrialisation, this research conducted a regression analysis to create a simulation of value of GDRP per capita at the top of industrialization taken place on Indonesia’s economy. Descriptive analysis shows that deindustrialization in Indonesia prevails with downward trend of value-added, trade performance, and productivity of manufacturing sector. Subsector analysis also shows that manufacturing subsectors having high value added experienced negative trend in all mentioned indicators. The result of premature deindustrialization model regression shows that the peak of industrialization in Indonesia achieved at lower level income per capita compared to several thresholds of premature deindustrialization. Those results show that negative and premature deindustrialisation prevailed in Indonesia’s economy. The consequence of these research’s results is to promote the politics of reindustrialization. There are several recommendations for policy makers to enhance performance of manufacturing sector. From demand-side, it is important to expand market of manufacturing product internationally and domestically. From supply side, the policy makers should increase the investments and insentives for businesses.

India was a major player in the world export market for textiles in the early 18th century, but by the middle of the 19th century it had lost all of its export market and much of its domestic market, primarily to Britain. The ensuing deindustrialization was greatest c1750–c1860. We ask how much of India’s deindustrialization was due to local supply-side forces—such as political fragmentation and a rising incidence of drought, and how much to world price shocks. An open, three-sector neo-Ricardian model organizes our thinking and a new relative price database implements the empirical analysis. We find local supply side forces were important from as early as 1700. We then assess the size of Indian deindustrialization in comparison with other parts of the periphery.

odern judgements on the effects of the Act of Union on the Manufacturing sector of Irish industry are influenced by two widely held propositions. The first is that the pre-Famine economy experienced deindustrialization. The second is that Irish manufacturing industries were unable to withstand competition from British producers. MacDonagh states that the creation of a free trade area within the British Isles 'perhaps ultimately determined the ruin of the Irish economy'.2 O'Malley argues that the introduction of free trade with Britain and the inability to impose tariffs was significant for Ireland's industrial decline.3 0 Grada is more sceptical about the impact of the Union, characterizing it as a lubricant rather than a prime mover of deindustrialization: 'industrial decline and rising food exports had a common origin: the dramatic industrial expansion taking place in Britain. The abolition of separate British and Irish customs duties and the assimilation of the two currencies could only accentuate trends that were evident earlier.'4 Similarly, Mokyr emphasizes the impact of a prosperous and industrializing Britain, rather than the freeing of trade, on Irish manufacturing industry: 'the industrial revolution in Britain and-to a much lesser extent-in Ulster, had a devastating effect on the incomes of the hundreds of thousands of rural and semi-urban spinners, weavers, and other workers who made their living in part from domestic nonagricultural activities.'5 Both are doubtful that protective tariffs could have rescued the situation.6 An alternative view is presented by Johnson and Kennedy. They accept that Ireland experienced a decline in industrial occupations in the pre-Famine period but argue that it may have been due to labour-saving technical change.7 Cullen heavily qualifies the view that deindustrialization

Brazilian entrepreneurs have warned about the increasing lack of competitiveness of national companies that are losing ground to imports. Imports went from 11 percent to 22 percent of GDP from 2003 to 2011. The presidents of Confederacao Nacional da Industria (CNI), Robson Braga de Andrade; of the Federacao das Industrias do Estado de Sao Paulo (FIESP), Paulo Skaf; of Associacao Brasileira de Maquinas e Equipamentos, Abimaq, Luiz Aubert Neto; of Companhia Siderurgica Nacional, Benjamim Steinbruch; and of Valisere, Ivo Rosset, have warned about the urgent need for the government to take steps to reverse the deindustrialization. On July 8 and August 3, 2011, thousands of metalworkers from CUT (Central Unica dos Trabalhadores [Workers’ Central Union]) and Forca Sindical closed the local track of Via Anchieta, at the ABC Region (Santo Andre, Sao Bernardo e Sao Caetano), and went to the streets of Mogi das Cruzes to protest.1

(1990). Reply to Grazia letto-Gillies' ‘Was deindustrialization in the UK inevitable? Some comments on the Rowthorn-Wells analysis’ and Paul Auerbach's review of Rowthorn-Wells in International Review of Applied Economics. International Review of Applied Economics: Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 224-235.

Why and how did cottage industry become metamorphized into modern factory industry? According to Mendels [64] there were five links between the first and second stages of industrialization.