Home    Resource Store    Past Issues    Buyers' Guide    Career Center    Subscriptions    Advertising    E-Newsletter    Contact

http://www.allstatestextile.com
http://www.textileservicesonline.com
http://www.textileworld.com/partners/Sr_Sales_Representative_Bolger_and_OHearn_Inc?override_sig=6d134c277189eb53ad63648042f76d28&override_token=b65bbcb705ed6642a8800553cd8f0acf
http://www.expoproduccion.mx/Content/Exhibitors/24/
http://www.LookChina.com
http://www.textileworld.com/careers/index.html
Textile World Photo Galleries
September/October 2014 Sept/Oct 2014

View Issue  |

Subscribe Now  |

Events

IGATEX™ Pakistan 2014
10/21/2014 - 10/24/2014

Advanced Nonwovens Training Course
10/28/2014 - 10/30/2014

JEC Americas Composites Conferences
10/28/2014 - 10/29/2014

- more events -

- submit your event -

Printer Friendly
Full Site
From The Editor
James M. Borneman, Editor In Chief

2004: A Test For US Textiles

By James M. Borneman, Editor In Chief

T he ability of China, as a nation, to attract investment, build and accommodate new production, supply labor and move goods strikes a chord that should make any US manufacturing business leader shudder — not out of fear, but because of the cold reality of having to justify a US-based bricks-and-mortar presence for any manufacturing industry.

Survive, innovate and prosper — if it were just that easy. This sequence of business strategies seems to prevail in almost every conversation regarding the future of American industry. Experts (read: non-industry participants) believe that old-line manufacturing must come of age, get with the times and seek innovation to compete head-to-head with low-wage markets and prevail in a global economy.

On the surface, who wouldn’t agree? Innovation is, and has been, key to successful manufacturing strategies, as have cost reduction, automation, quality focus, customer-driven programs and value-added manufacturing initiatives.

Few critics of US textiles realize how easy it would be for US textile executives to follow many pundits’ advice and relocate their operations to China. All of the work by US coalition partners to force fair trade initiatives never resonates with free-trade-at-all-cost advocates as an effort by US executives to find an equitable solution to a global economic shift — a shift that threatens the existence of all US manufacturing. For some reason, the effort is maligned as blatant self-interest, preserving something antiquated and standing in the way of a free and global economy.

The US textile industry is sliced by a double-edged sword. Neither is it understood as a high-tech, efficient, strategically important manufacturing base, nor is there a domestic economic policy in place that values core manufacturing assets. How, then, does a textile executive, responsible for profitability, avoid domestic plant closure and manufacturing relocation outside US borders?

Solutions to this question will dominate the decisions of 2004. Much energy will be spent on CAFTA and the 10-year anniversary of NAFTA, but one wonders in 2004 whether the entire strategy of a Free Trade Area of the Americas is completely superseded by China ‘s new dominance in the WTO. Even with an active trade policy shift that would forestall the quota removals set for 2005, would any policy really affect China’s ability to consolidate the world’s manufacturing bases as it broadens its economic prowess into virtually every sector? Even agribusiness is threatened.

This year’s elections will certainly provide the forum to address the changing state of the US economy, and hopefully the need for a domestic economic policy that values manufacturing as a core asset. Innovation, investment, trade policy and the elections will drive the US textile industry in 2004. It won’t be easy, and it will be the true test for US textiles.

January 2004



Advertisement

http://www.staubli.us