"A Common Thread" is an analysis of the relocation of the New England textile industry to the states of the Piedmont South between 1880 and 1934. Competition from textile mills operating in the South became a serious challenge for New England textile manufacturers as early as the 1890s. as they watched their profits turn into losses while output and sales of southern goods continued apace during the 1893 depression, owners of northern textile corporations felt unfairly constrained by state legislation that established age and hours standards for mill employees, and by actual and potential labor militancy in their mills. Several New England textile manufacturers, therefore, opened southern subsidiary factories as a way to effectively meet southern competition. In 1896, the Dwight Manufacturing Company of Chicopee, Massachusetts was one of the first New England cotton textile companies to open a southern branch mill. Within a thirty-year period, many of the largest textile corporations in Massachusetts would move part or all of their operations to North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama where textile production took place in mills that cost less to fuel, was done by workers whose wages were lower than those paid in New England, and occurred in a region where textile unions and state regulations were virtually non-existent.;Through the lens of the Dwight Manufacturing Company, "A Common Thread" examines this process of regional transfer within the U.S. textile industry. The specific goals of the study are to explain (1) why and how Massachusetts cotton manufacturing companies pursued relocation to the South as a key strategy for economic survival, (2) why and how southern states attracted northern textile capital, and (3) how textile mill owners, the state, manufacturers' associations, labor unions, and reform groups shaped the North-to-South movement of cotton mill money, machinery, and jobs. "A Common Thread" provides a historic reference point for and helps inform on-going discussions and debates about capital mobility and corporate responsibility as the industrial relocation from region to region that occurred during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries continues from nation to nation within the context of economic globalization.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The object of this thesis is to determine the consequences of trade liberalisation on the Kenyan economy. This is done by simulating the effects of tariff reduction, devaluation of domestic currency and export subsidies. In addition, the effects of quantitative controls and markup pricing are simulated. The structure of the economy is modelled through the specification of alternative closure rules. Policy changes are simulated using a computable general equilibrium model (CGE). A nine sector model based on a Social Accounting Matrix is constructed using the TV-approach to modelling introduced by Drud, Grais and Pyatt (1986). We depart from neoclassical models, and therefore other CGE models of Kenya, by assuming product differentiation between domestic goods and imports and between gross output sales to domestic and export markets. Our model is essentially Keynesian but for comparative purposes, neoclassical closures are specified in some simulations. In general, the basic argument for or against trade liberalisation concerns its contribution to economic growth. The neoclassicals argue that by improving efficient allocation of resources, liberalisation stimulates higher economic growth. The structuralists, on the other hand, argue that because of structural rigidities in LDC economies and because of unfavourable international conditions, liberalisation will have minimal effect on economic growth. CGE models are useful in sorting out these arguments. It should be noted however that the assumptions underlying these models often reflect the modeller's view about the structure of the economy. The usefulness of CGE models for policy purposes will therefore depend on how realistic they reflect the structure of the economy being modelled. The results of our model show that the gains from trade liberalisation, in terms of the growth of real GDP, are low. This applies to both neoclassical and Keynesian closures. However, it is shown that changes in returns to factors, consumption levels and aggregate price levels, depending on the closure adopted, are significant. This is also true for the policy effects on exports, imports and on the prices and quantities at the sectoral level. These results reinforce the view that for policy purposes it is important that the model being used reflects the structure of the economy under consideration. It also means that it will not make sense to have tailor made policy recommendations for all LDCs.