1/2
This is why, when examining the impact on US manufacturing of external shocks, it is important to separate the manufacturing share of output from the manufacturing share of employment.
When the manufacturing share of employment declines because of a rise in manufacturing productivity, this is a good thing, and is precisely the reason why countries should want to specialize in manufacturing. Even China, whose share of global manufacturing has surged in recent years, has seen a decline in the manufacturing share of employment. This is exactly the definition of productivity growth.
But when the manufacturing share of employment declines because of a decline in the manufacturing share of GDP, this is a very different thing. It means the country is reducing its ability to take advantage of rising productivity in manufacturing. This is clearly not a good thing.
I am always a little shocked when American economists dismiss the importance of manufacturing to the US economy by pointing to the long-term decline in the manufacturing share of employment in the US. This is not evidence that manufacturing doesn't matter. On the contrary, it is evidence that countries that specialize in manufacturing benefit from more rapid productivity growth.
A few comments on the China shock debate, from a more "macro" point of view that sets aside the vicious debate about "identification" --
There was clearly a downturn in manufacturing output around the time of China's WTO entry (it doesn't recover til 06/07)
1/