|
Teaching aim: Knowledge of the backgrounds, processes and spatial consequences of structural change in industrialized countries, mainly in the old industrialized areas, understanding of political strategies in different regions, recognition of a change in values in the transition into a post-industrial society.
Keywords: De-industrialization, post-industrial society, old industrialized areas, structural change, loss of history, change in values |
Germany is one of the most highly industrialized countries in the world. The products of its many industries play an important part in global markets. Among these number the automobile industry, chemical industry and mechanical engineering. At the end of the 1990s, approximately one third of the labour force was employed in different sectors of the consumer goods industry as well as items of capital expenditure. In contrast, more than 60 percent were employed in the tertiary sector. These numbers illustrate that Germany is on its way to becoming a post-industrial society [1]. However, this does not necessarily mean that the industrial sector is becoming completely insignificant. Recent developments in economy and society show that Germany is in the midst of a fundamental structural change. Regarding its consequences, this transformation is comparable to the switch from an agrarian to an industrial society approximately 100 years ago. In other words: also at the end of the actual transformation process there will be a completely different society. Whether this will be a ‘service society’ or – as some authors suggest – an ‘information society’ cannot be foreseen yet.
In absolute as well as relative terms, the decreasing importance of the traditional industries in western societies can be called a process of de-industrialization. Many factors are responsible for that. There are, for example, the catching up of many countries with industrial development, the decreasing competitiveness of highly industrialized countries due to higher wages and social security costs, the relocation of investments into sectors with higher profit margins and so forth (for further reasons of de-industrialization see below).
Regarding sectoral and regional aspects, the processes of de-industrialization have very diverse consequences. In industrialized countries, those sectors are especially hard struck that were the main promoters of early industrialization. Next to the textile industry, the highly intertwined complexes of mining [2] and the steel industry [3] should be mentioned (the so-called ‘Montanindustrie’). Regions that have been influenced most [4] by these industries are called ‘old industrialized regions’ (Altindustrieräume). They carry the main economic, social and ecological burden of de-industrialization. In western Germany, these are the Ruhr region as well as the Saar region, in eastern Germany especially Thuringia and Saxony experienced strong de-industrialization.
The main characteristics of the industrial structure of these regions are:
These factors present an image of backwardness, blight, poverty and a lacking capability for renewal that does not always reflect reality. As a consequence, private entrepreneurs prefer other regions for new investments. As a rule one can summarise that every industrialization process carried out by new industries favours new regions.
This apparently cyclic process that involves more and more new areas has caused dramatic changes to economic systems, societies and regions [5]. Having such reflections in mind it is understandable that people have always tried to stop or direct these processes. It is also reasonable that the reaction depends on the causes of transformation and their evaluation. Since authors of different sciences have not found one definite answer, yet it is necessary to look at different approaches of solutions.
In regions where the concern over workplaces and the endeavours for continuity and stability were most important, political approaches to obtain existing structures had the highest priority and received broad social acceptance. Mainly by direct and indirect subsidies of traditional industries people tried to keep up the competitiveness of old industrial areas and traditional companies. When that strategy did not seem to work any longer, the number of workplaces in traditional industries was reduced, accompanied by social systems. For a long time, these strategies continued to be typical for areas of coal and steel industry because long-standing coalitions of politicians, entrepreneurs and unions tried to resist a deep and fast structural change.
However, opponents of such a policy do not only reject these measures but also regard them as counter-productive. They argue that structural change is caused mainly by innovations that cannot be stopped. Following their opinion, industrial transition (with all its consequences) takes place in waves or pushes that can be influenced only in limited ways. They are mainly directed by cycles of innovation which again rely on basic innovations (such as the steam engine, micro chips, biochemical technologies etc.) that cause the evolution of new industries. Because of its specific expectations (e.g. regarding infrastructure or education), new approaches cannot continue with the previous waves but prosper in new or previously low industrialized regions. Important is a broad willingness for innovations and the readiness to accept new and frequently changing requirements.
Those who see technical and structural change in the latter view, reject measures to maintain the structure in old industrial regions but demand incentives that promote a far-reaching change: the provision of new infrastructure [6] (e.g. fibre optic cables or high security laboratories), the improvement of qualification systems (e.g. by developing new training courses or the foundation of universities), new forms of co-operation and collective learning (e.g. setting-up of city networks) as well as the restoration of devastated landscapes [7]. Only then – as the speakers of such strategies argue – are preconditions for new developments [8] in the industry or the service sector in old industrialized areas met.
In addition to the measures for maintaining the status quo in old industrial areas of Germany, new approaches have been added within the last years. Often, a complete end of traditional strategies can bee foreseen. In recent times, two additional, completely new developments can be observed that lead to a profound transformation of old industrial areas: the increasing loss of history and the change in values.
On the one hand, traditional industrial landscapes [9] have lost many of their characteristics within a few years: deserted mining buildings and winding shafts were dismantled; disused ironworks, steelworks, coking plants, and former worker colonies were renovated beyond recognition; deserted factory floors were transformed into supermarkets or musical theatres. On the other hand, many people have changed their values of what they regard as important or interesting: the interest in new authentic events and in educational experiences beyond traditional mass tourism is increasing; last but not least a circumstance that is also due to increasing income and more available leisure time.
Within a few years, both aspects have led to a completely new assessment of the historical heritage. Suddenly, those things are worth protecting that used to be regarded as ugly: industrial heritage in old industrialized regions.
Questions that may be asked:
|
[1]
http://www.fundus.org/pdf.asp?ID=7940
[2]
http://www.braunkohle.de
[3]
http://www.saarstahl.com/english/home.html
[4] http://www.mlur.brandenburg.de/a/a_altlas.htm
[5] http://www1.leipzig.de/int/en/tourist/stadtspaz/fotorund/02521.shtml
[6]
http://www.adt-online.de/
[7] http://www.mlur.brandenburg.de/a/a_bodens.htm
[8]
http://www.praxisgeographie.de/downloads/Duisburgerhafen.pdf
[9]
http://www.route-industriekultur.de/index_e.htm
| Top | Contents | VGT Home |