Rethinking deindustrialization, and the reindustrialization policy in Serbia

Abstract

The paper explores deindustrialization as the main development problem in Serbia and examines the possibilities for a new industrial policy and its implementation. The aim of the paper is to reexamine the process of deindustrialization in Serbia (its causes and consequences), and to give useful suggestions related to Serbia's existing strategy of longterm industrial development until 2020 and to new industrial policies. Addressing the deindustrialization process is an issue of developmental and economic policy. A reindustrialization strategy or a new industrial policy could be one answer, and this has to be addressed if the share of industry in the GDP is to increase. Both qualitative and datagiven approaches have been applied to the analysis of deindustrialization and to the question of how to improve the conceptual framework for reindustrialization in Serbia. Also, some recommendations to the ongoing national reindustrialization strategy, or the "smart specialization strategies" are made.

Spatio-temporal variability of annual PM2.5 concentrations and population exposure assessment in Serbia for the period 2001-2016

“…The road transport sector contributed with 6%, while the share of industry was 9% in the total PM2.5 emissions in 2018 in Serbia (Jovanović, 2019). The relatively small share of industry in the emissions can be explained by the sharp decline in industrial production since the 1990s in Serbia (Hadžić & Zeković, 2019), but on the local level, in the larger industrial centers, it significantly contributes to PM emissions (PM10 and PM2.5) (e.g., Stevanović, Jovašević-Stojanović, & Jović Stošić, 2016 The analysis of temporal variability showed a negative trend of annual PM2.5 for most of the Serbian territory in the period 2001-2016 ( Figure 4). The highest statistically significant negative trend values are obtained for eastern and western parts of the country (in some areas in the east they reach up to -0.37 μg/m 3 per year, p ≤ .05).…”