Arup Banerji – författare

The end of the MFA was followed by rising apparel exports, falling prices, and a reallocation of production and employment between countries. There were also significant changes within countries. The first main finding of this report is that export and employment patterns after the MFA/ATC did not necessarily match predictions. While many predicted that production would shift to low-wage countries, this book shows that only 13% of variation in export changes post-MFA can be explained by the differences in wage levels. Second, changes in exports are usually, but not always, good indicators of what happens to wages and employment within countries. This is especially important for policy because it shows that simply using exports as a metric of 'success' in terms of helping the poor is not sufficient. Third, the Book identifies the specific ways that changes in the global apparel market affected earnings. The Book shows that wage premiums change in predictable ways: rising (in most cases) in countries that were proactive in adapting to the MFA phase-out and expanded their market shares, and falling in countries that failed to respond in a timely fashion to the changing environment.The book shows that promoting 'upgrading' (defined as shifting to higher-value goods, shifting up the value chain, or 'modernizing' production techniques) seems to be necessary for sustainable competitiveness in the apparel sector but does not necessarily help the poor. Policies that support upgrading need to be complemented with targeted workforce development to make sure that the most vulnerable workers are not left behind. Having a vision for the evolution of the apparel sector that incorporates developing worker skills seems crucial. Otherwise, less-skilled workers could miss out on opportunities to gain valuable work experience in manufacturing.

The history of the Soviet Union has been charted in several studies over the decades. These depictions while combining accuracy, elegance, readability and imaginativeness, have failed to draw attention to the political and academic environment within which these histories were composed. Writing History in the Soviet Union: Making the Past Work is aimed at understanding this environment. The book seeks to identify the significant hallmarks of the production of Soviet history by Soviet as well as Western historians. It traces how the Russian Revolution of 1917 triggered a shift in official policy towards historians and the publication of history textbooks for schools. In 1985, the Soviet past was again summoned for polemical revision as part and parcel of an attitude of openness (glasnost') and in this, literary figures joined their energies to those of historians. The Communist regime sought to equate the history of the country with that of the Communist Party itself in 1938 and 1962 and this imposed a blanket of conformity on history writing in the Soviet Union. The book also surveys the rich abundance of writing the Russian Revolution generated as well as the divergent approaches to the history of the period. The conditions for research in Soviet archives are described as an aspect of official monitoring of history writing. Another instance of this is the manner by which history textbooks have, through the years, been withdrawn from schools and others officially nursed into circulation. This intervention, occasioned in the present circumstance by statements by President Putin himself, in the manner in which history is taught in Russian schools, continues to this day. In other words, over the years, the regime has always worked to make the past work.Please note: Taylor & Francis does not sell or distribute the Hardback in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh & Sri Lanka

The history of the Soviet Union has been charted in several studies over the decades. These depictions while combining accuracy, elegance, readability and imaginativeness, have failed to draw attention to the political and academic environment within which these histories were composed. Writing History in the Soviet Union: Making the Past Work is aimed at understanding this environment. The book seeks to identify the significant hallmarks of the production of Soviet history by Soviet as well as Western historians. It traces how the Russian Revolution of 1917 triggered a shift in official policy towards historians and the publication of history textbooks for schools. In 1985, the Soviet past was again summoned for polemical revision as part and parcel of an attitude of openness (glasnost') and in this, literary figures joined their energies to those of historians. The Communist regime sought to equate the history of the country with that of the Communist Party itself in 1938 and 1962 and this imposed a blanket of conformity on history writing in the Soviet Union. The book also surveys the rich abundance of writing the Russian Revolution generated as well as the divergent approaches to the history of the period. The conditions for research in Soviet archives are described as an aspect of official monitoring of history writing. Another instance of this is the manner by which history textbooks have, through the years, been withdrawn from schools and others officially nursed into circulation. This intervention, occasioned in the present circumstance by statements by President Putin himself, in the manner in which history is taught in Russian schools, continues to this day. In other words, over the years, the regime has always worked to make the past work.Please note: Taylor & Francis does not sell or distribute the Hardback in India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh & Sri Lanka