PP RMADOL 20 minutes version

Raw Materials and the Division of Labor: The Influence of Raw Materials Variationon Urbanization Mark WHITAKERUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISONSTARE Seminar Presentationmwhitake@ssc.wisc.eduFebruary 14, 2003: 

Raw Materials and the Division of Labor: The Influence of Raw Materials Variation on Urbanization Mark WHITAKER UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON STARE Seminar Presentation mwhitake@ssc.wisc.edu February 14, 2003

Raw Materials and the Division of Labor: 

Raw Materials and the Division of Labor OR, COTTON AND WOOL: DIFFERENCES IN RAW MATERIAL SUBSTRATE EFFECTS AND URBAN INDUSTRIALIZATION OUTCOMES— INTERRELATING URBAN SOCIOLOGY, ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIOLOGY, ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIOLOGY, AND SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

Nothing called abstract---: 

Nothing called abstract--- Urbanization / proletarianization Raw materials Technology Social politics Questioning the whole metanarrative of industrialization as something general, instead of raw material specific  How to analyze their interactions empirically: looking at urbanization, raw materials, technology, social stratification, and political process as environmentally influenced frameworks, consumptive influenced frameworks.

Positionalism: Nomothetic and Ideographic ~ A Terminology for Comparably Generalized Positions/Phenomena/Relationships and Ideographic Case Specificity. For this example:: 

Positionalism: Nomothetic and Ideographic ~ A Terminology for Comparably Generalized Positions/Phenomena/Relationships and Ideographic Case Specificity. For this example: Urbanization Raw Material Substrate Set Raw Material Substrate Raw Material Path Raw Material Regime Substitutability Technological Amenability Geographic Amenability

Organization of the Paper: Two Parts : 

Organization of the Paper: Two Parts Part One: Looking at the Raw Material Substrate Set issues in Textiles, the human choice contexts of raw materials, and looking at why cotton and wool are predominant. Part Two: has two parts itself Matching section, 11 sections on different presumed variables that are separate explanations typically to raw materials variegation, with the aim to show more directly that there are direct social effects upon urbanization and on these specific variables as well Blocking section, 2 other urban contexts in this presentation of textiles outside Britain where the same relationships hold

Overall Interscience Phenomenology, part of two part project : 

Overall Interscience Phenomenology, part of two part project Master’s Thesis: dealing with urbanization and raw materials (complete) Dissertation: dealing with states, urbanization, and raw materials (in progress) This presentation only deals with the urbanization and raw materials issues in environmental sociology.

Raw Material Substrates and Urbanization: 

Raw Material Substrates and Urbanization What leads to urbanizing preferences? - technological amenability - requires a large degree of interactive social organizational manipulation around it - physical characteristics: lack of perishability, large degree of value added manufacturing potential verses the RMS itself, high density transportable What leads to ruralizing preferences? - lesser technological amenability - site specificity - different requirements for space - physical characteristics: perishable, little degree of value added manufacturing capacity, bulky, low density in transportation

Graph One: Raw Materials, Their Induction and Their Creation of Urbanization: 

Graph One: Raw Materials, Their Induction and Their Creation of Urbanization

Part One: Cases--: 

Part One: Cases-- Cotton Manchester Woolen Leeds Worsted Bradford  all are the best cases of purist examples of textiles urban consolidation, for cotton, wool, and worsted in English history.  if variations are anywhere, they are here.

Map of Northern England / Manchester, Leeds, and Bradford: 

Map of Northern England / Manchester, Leeds, and Bradford

Part I Question: Raw Material Substrate Set, Why Cotton and Wool?: 

Part I Question: Raw Material Substrate Set, Why Cotton and Wool? Why are cotton and wool predominant, in a world of many different fiber materials? What characteristics of cotton and wool, socially explain their use—compared to other materials? Exploring the variable of urbanization within different raw material substrates of textiles.

RMSS: World of Textile Fibers,Supply v. Demand in Materials,Supply Sided Gatekeeping: 

RMSS: World of Textile Fibers, Supply v. Demand in Materials, Supply Sided Gatekeeping Animal: goats (angora and cashmere), camels (alpaca, llama, guanaco, vicuna, dromedary and Bactrian camel), yak, and many varieties of sheep. Wool is human bred phenomena. Why? The peculiar properties of wool make it unsubstitutable: Wool pulled into use despite its qualities that detract against supply sided interests, without technological or geographic amenability, an interesting politics of expansion of small scale organizational contexts instead of proletarianization, a cotton phenomenon. Vegetable: flax, kapok, ramie, cotton, (hemp left out of this analysis because of historical considerations of the urban cases), cotton chosen because it is most technologically amenable, fits supply sided interests quite well. Insect: silk (technologically amenable), only one moth has a thread that can be unrolled. (untreated for this analysis)

Chart One: Comparing the Cotton and Wool Trades’ Social Ecology Related to their Physical Properties: Supply Side: 

Chart One: Comparing the Cotton and Wool Trades’ Social Ecology Related to their Physical Properties: Supply Side

Chart Two: Technology is Always around Raw Material Manipulation, so, Raw Material Physical Properties Do Matter in Social Issues of Scale:RMS / Penchant for Urban Location of the Industry : 

Chart Two: Technology is Always around Raw Material Manipulation, so, Raw Material Physical Properties Do Matter in Social Issues of Scale: RMS / Penchant for Urban Location of the Industry

What Are the Urban Outcomes of Particular Raw Material Substrate Use? Unsubstitutable Wool & Technologically Amenable Worsted: Scaled or Distanciated? Chart Three: Power Looms Used in Woolen and WorstedFactories (1835): Diff. Urban Consolidation Evident : 

What Are the Urban Outcomes of Particular Raw Material Substrate Use? Unsubstitutable Wool & Technologically Amenable Worsted: Scaled or Distanciated? Chart Three: Power Looms Used in Woolen and Worsted Factories (1835): Diff. Urban Consolidation Evident

WOOL and Technology:Example of Socially Specific Processes Because of Physical Properties: 

WOOL and Technology: Example of Socially Specific Processes Because of Physical Properties Felting Sorting

COTTON and Technology: Example of Socially Specific Processes Because of Physical Properties: 

COTTON and Technology: Example of Socially Specific Processes Because of Physical Properties Weaving Spinning Beginning in the 1600s

WORSTED and Technology:Example of Social Specific Processes Because of Physical Properties: 

WORSTED and Technology: Example of Social Specific Processes Because of Physical Properties Combing

Part I. Conclusion: Chart Four: Comparing the 1842 State of the Textile Trades Mechanization, by Raw Material Substrate,Think Organizationally : 

Part I. Conclusion: Chart Four: Comparing the 1842 State of the Textile Trades Mechanization, by Raw Material Substrate, Think Organizationally

Part I. Conclusion: Chart Five: Chart of Cotton and Wool Profit Differentials Compared, 1885-1935: 

Part I. Conclusion: Chart Five: Chart of Cotton and Wool Profit Differentials Compared, 1885-1935

Part Two Two Sections: 

Part Two Two Sections Matching and Blocking Section as a sound “natural experimental” proof of raw material substrate effects upon urbanization

Part Two Section One: Matching Section: 

Part Two Section One: Matching Section Section one of the two part proof that there are direct raw material effects on urbanization: Eleven factors

Part Two Section One: Matching Section*conflated instead of separate issue: 

Part Two Section One: Matching Section *conflated instead of separate issue Raw Materials Quantity* Organization of the Industry Crop Tenure Labor* Geography/Climate* Transportation* Capital/Financing* Market Specialization State Influences Fuel* Entrepreneurial Differences*

Chart Six: Summary of the Matching Section for Raw Material Substrates : 

Chart Six: Summary of the Matching Section for Raw Material Substrates

Part Two Section Two: Blocking Section: 

Part Two Section Two: Blocking Section WHAT IF IT'S SOMETHING ONLY TO DO WITH BRITAIN? A blocking section for an unknown 'English' effect, through looking at other states' textile manufactures for raw material substrate effects, in empirical areas where the data in Britain was lacking

Part Two, Section Two: Textiles case: UNITED STATES: 

Part Two, Section Two: Textiles case: UNITED STATES WOOLEN PHILADELPHIA COTTON LOWELL

Chart Seven: Lowell Compared to Philadelphia: Cotton to Wool: 

Chart Seven: Lowell Compared to Philadelphia: Cotton to Wool

A Raw Material Substrate Perspective Can Intuit a Host of Several Urban Ecological Rules about the Organizational Compliment of Urban Space:: 

A Raw Material Substrate Perspective Can Intuit a Host of Several Urban Ecological Rules about the Organizational Compliment of Urban Space: a rule concerning where certain industries spatially 'fall into place,' correlated with different qualities of raw material substrates. inversely, a rule showing what can be expected to be found in certain places when the spatial scales of places are known,

A Raw Material Substrate Perspective Can Intuit a Host of Several Urban Ecological Rules about the Organizational Compliment of Urban Space (continued):: 

A Raw Material Substrate Perspective Can Intuit a Host of Several Urban Ecological Rules about the Organizational Compliment of Urban Space (continued): a predictive rule about urban space based on what organizations will likely be found in certain spaces related to what other spaces have congealed around them. a predictive rule about the characteristics of consumptive scale in certain areas (which is the corollary to organizational scale, mentioned above).

Chart Eight: Density of Textile Population, Philadelphia, 1870: Different Areas of Density, Different Raw Material Substrates: 

Chart Eight: Density of Textile Population, Philadelphia, 1870: Different Areas of Density, Different Raw Material Substrates

Part Two, Section Two: Textiles Case: ITALY: 

Part Two, Section Two: Textiles Case: ITALY POLITICAL PROCESS DISCUSSION AND RAW MATERIAL SUBSTRATE   Disaggregated data (by RMS) on political contention and political organization in textile industries: Silk, Cotton, and Wool Compared

Chart Nine: Strikes by Sector: Silk, Wool, and Cotton in Piedmont (1894-1903) : 

Chart Nine: Strikes by Sector: Silk, Wool, and Cotton in Piedmont (1894-1903)

Conclusion:An Environmental Sociology: 

Conclusion: An Environmental Sociology If raw materials are a socio-political choice amongst available alternatives, it is important to choose those which are the most benign in grossed quantity and to be aware of additional issues that are created out of scale: whether this refers to their penchants for social stratification and social organization or to the degree they foster or abet environmental degradation through human actors (and consumption pressures in tandem).

An Environmental Sociology: 

An Environmental Sociology The Issue of the Discourse of Modernism Analyzed here: The main critiques: Where’s the general and specific effects of raw material variations in this discourse? Arguably, nothing different was happening in the 1700s-1800s, nothing phenomenologically epoch making, only urbanization phenomena at larger scale around particular technological/geographic amenabilities. Cotton and wool in England were chosen because there are many discourses around 'what happened' in the early 1800s in Britain--discourses which pose who were the actors, what did it represent, whether it was something novel, if anything novel, or are there epoch marking shifts in humanity at this point or otherwise. In all of these discourses, human/environmental connectivity has been typically left out (as well as state political alliances which were shown to be more important in this paper for arranging such economies of scale than economic scale in itself—these state influences were left out of this presentation).

An Environmental Sociology: Analyzing the Discourses of Modernism: 

An Environmental Sociology: Analyzing the Discourses of Modernism Farnie mentions three discourses and polemics: 1. Technological determinist discourse, the abstract role of machinery 2. “free-trade” manufacturer/entrepreneurial discourse, economic reductionism instead of political economic analysis 3. Marxist discourse, abstract unionization, abstract proletarianization, cotton as prototype of an abstract ‘industrialism.’ Have seen in all three areas in this paper nothing abstract actually about them: they are intimately and dependently connected to particular raw material substrates, raw material regimes. These 3 issues are raw material substrate reflexive.

More of me on the web:Mark WHITAKER - mwhitake@ssc.wisc.edu: 

More of me on the web: Mark WHITAKER - mwhitake@ssc.wisc.edu LIST: Comparative Urbanization: http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~mrkdwhit/compurb-l/ LIST: Interscience: Empirical Interconnections Across the Sciences http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~mrkdwhit/intersci-l/ MANUSCRIPT: The Bioregional State: Formal Democratic Theory and Formal Institutional Design as Ecologically Sound Development in the Era of Sustainability http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~mrkdwhit/bioregionEC.htm HOMEPAGE: http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~mwhitake/

Raw Materials and the Division of Labor: The Influence of Raw Materials Variationon Urbanization Mark WHITAKERUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISONSTARE Seminar Presentationmwhitake@ssc.wisc.eduFebruary 14, 2003: 

Raw Materials and the Division of Labor: The Influence of Raw Materials Variation on Urbanization Mark WHITAKER UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON STARE Seminar Presentation mwhitake@ssc.wisc.edu February 14, 2003