The Dictionary of Human Geography

Comp. by: VPugazhenthi Stage : Revises1 ChapterID: 9781405132879_4_N Date:31/
3/09 Time:15:13:07 Filepath:H:/00_Blackwell/00_3B2/Gregory-9781405132879/appln/
3B2/revises/9781405132879_4_N.3d

standards of the economists’ (Krugman,

1995b, p. 88). In his manifesto, Krugman

(2000, p. 51) identifies ‘a slogan’ for his pro-

ject: ‘Dixit–Stiglitz, icebergs, evolution, and

the computer.’ Dixit–Stiglitz is the ‘clever

model’; icebergs refers to the ‘technical trick’

for introducingtransport costs(and hence

geography), evolution points to the dynamic

character of the models (as opposed to the static

kind characterizing traditionallocation the-

ory), and the computer simulates solutions

for multiple equilibria (Krugman says that his

laptop ‘lets me produce a paper – equations,

simulations and all – in a hotel room over a

weekend. ..’ (Krugman, 1995a, p. 37).

There was a precedent for the New Eco-

nomic Geography in regional science,

which was established in the 1950s to apply

rigour, scientific analysis and statistical

methods to a space economy. Unsurprisingly,

given the attempt to occupy the same terrain,

the two movements have an uncomfortable

relation. Krugman implies that regional scien-

tists have yet to find ‘clever models’, while

regional scientists dismiss Krugman’s work

by claiming that ‘it’s obvious, it’s wrong, and

anyway [it was] said years ago’ (Isserman,

1996). The relationship between the New

Economic Geography andeconomic geog-

raphyas practised inhuman geographyis

also uneasy. There was an initial flush of

interest represented by the publication of a

joint reader,The Oxford handbook of economic

geography (Clark, Gertler and Feldman,

2000), and a new journal, the Journal of

Economic Geography, which started publishing

in January 2005. Both organs promoted

cross-disciplinary exchange. At least as meas-

ured by citation impact scores, the new journal

attracted large numbers of readers from both

economic geography and economics. But

being between the same covers does not

prove intercourse, and Martin’s (1999b,

p. 70) verdict on the New Economic Geog-

raphy, that it produces a ‘dull sense ofde ́ja`vu’,

is still likely to be shared by many economic

geographers. The more than 100-year history

of economic geography is littered with failed

attempts to engage economists. This is turning

out to be another one. tb

Suggested reading

Martin (1999b).

New International Division of Labour

(NIDL) A recasting of the internationaldiv-

ision of labourassociated with the inter-

nationalization of capital and the growth of

newly industrializing countries and regions.

In one sense, the term is unhelpful, for the

uneven developmentofcapitalismensures

that the global division of labour is constantly

changing. As Marx and Engels (2002 [1848])

put it inThe communist manifesto, ‘All that is

solid melts into air.’ In another sense, how-

ever, the phrase has some merit. Particularly

in the heyday of the Bretton Woods system

(1944–73), neithercapitalnor labour moved

extensively across the global stage. National

economies were placed squarely at the heart

of an international trading system. This was

partly in response to a reading of the

Depression years and the Second World War.

The Bretton Woods system was meant to pro-

tect national space economies in the ‘First

World’ against undue economic and political

turbulence (Corbridge, 1994). When the

Bretton Woods system came undone, it gave

way to high unemployment and inflation.

According to Fro ̈bel, Heinrichs and Kreye

(1980), many capitalist firms in the West now

had to face the consequences of the postwar

corporatist settlement – a settlement that had

increased returns to labour, including labour

employed by the state, relative to those

returned to capital. Firms could evaporate,

innovate or emigrate. With the emigration of

capital, they reasoned, came a change in the

international division of labour that was dis-

tinctive – new – when viewed against the

period from 1950 to 1975.

There is no doubt that the rise of newly

industrialized countries such as Taiwan and

South Korea came as a shock in the 1970s

(see asian miracles/tigers). Some versions

ofdependency theorymaintained that the

developmentof the core depended upon the

continued non-industrialization of the periph-

ery. Gunder Frank argued that Taiwan and

South Korea were exceptions to a rule that

still held. They had simply been allowed to

develop by the USA for geopolitical reasons.

Less blinkered theories accepted thatgeopol-

iticswas part of the story, but they also noted

the way in which the state in both countries

had achieved a degree of relative autonomy

from domestic proprietary classes. They had

used this power to effect land reforms and

proactive industrial policies. In the case of

South Korea, industrial policy was fastened

mainly around large-scale domestic capitals,

including leading banks andchaebolsuch as

Samsung. In Taiwan, industrial development

was sponsored by networks of small-scale

firms (Kohli, 2004). What NIDL theorists

have added to this mix – and their work has

Gregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_N Final Proof page 500 31.3.2009 3:13pm Compositor Name: ARaju

NEW INTERNATIONAL DIVISION OF LABOUR (NIDL)