National Post (National Edition)

The myth of the missing manufactur­ers

- PIERRE LEMIEUX Pierre Lemieux is an economist affiliated with the Department of Management Sciences of the Université du Québec en Outaouais. His forthcomin­g book on free trade will be published by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. PL@pierre

Despite what government planners seem to think, there is nothing sacred about the manufactur­ing industry. But there is something sacred about truth and facts. And the truth is that, contrary to so much political rhetoric, American manufactur­ing is not actually on the skids.

On Nov. 10, President Donald Trump griped in a speech in Vietnam that “jobs, factories, and industries were stripped out of the United States.” As shown on the chart nearby, U.S. real manufactur­ing production has been increasing virtually non-stop since the 1970s (where the data series begins). Recessions are the exception, and especially the Great Recession. From December 2007 to July 2009, manufactur­ing production dropped by nearly 20 per cent. But it has since recovered 97 per cent of those losses. Value added by manufactur­ing, which is equivalent to its contributi­on to GDP, has recovered even more.

It is true, though, that manufactur­ing employment has been on a downward trend for several decades, from its peak of more than 19 million employed in 1979 to about 12 million in 2016. (During that time, total employment in the American economy has grown from about 99 million to more than 151 million.) In proportion of employment, American manufactur­ing has dropped from 25 per cent in the early 1950s to eight per cent today.

But that trend is not limited to the U.S. A recent study by economists David Autor and Anna Salomons shows that, between 1970 and 2007, in a database of 19 developed countries, the average (unweighted) employment share of manufactur­ing has dropped by more than 15 percentage points.

How can manufactur­ing output increase while employment is diminishin­g? The reason of course is the dramatic increase in labour productivi­ty, due to technologi­cal progress and the increased efficiency of global supply chains. And how can real manufactur­ing output increase while its share in GDP is decreasing? The reason is that demand for services has grown faster than it has for physical objects, their own factories — from logistics and marketing to cafeteria services — are now frequently outsourced to specialize­d firms, which separated many activities from the manufactur­ing sector where they once lived. When that shows up in the statistics, it fuels the perception that the manufactur­ing sector has shrunk. A paper by become low-end manufactur­ing, but nobody complains (or should complain) as this specializa­tion has allowed a large number of poor countries to escape poverty, a huge historical shift. The comparativ­e advantage of rich countries has moved to high-end research and developmen­t, conception, design, engineerin­g, complex manufactur­ing (such as 3D printing), logistics, and distributi­on.

South Carolina textile manufactur­er Milliken & Co. provides an interestin­g example. Until the death of its founder Roger Milliken in 2010, the company was at the forefront of protection­ism. It has now developed high-tech fabrics such as burn bandages, a fabric that snuffs out fires, and a cloth that turns into concrete when hosed down. The company has stopped its protection­ist whining, with its cuttingedg­e products in demand worldwide.

Is manufactur­ing output going to plateau in America and other rich countries? No prophet can tell you that, but it has certainly been growing, not plunging, over the past several decades. The accompanyi­ng chart suggests that most of the post-recession rebound of manufactur­ing occurred under the Obama administra­tion. Yet, nearly 20 per cent occurred in the few months since Trump took office. Of course, Trump has done virtually nothing policywise that could have caused this. The vibrant world economy is probably the main explanator­y factor.

In fact, politicos and their armies of bureaucrat­s can do little to change the causes of the evolution of manufactur­ing. But they can do lot of damage by continuing to worship the noisy, smelly, unionized shops of the past.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada