With colleagues from the German Council on Foreign Relations, the author John Austin was facilitating an MSC side event of elected officials and leaders representing 20 democracies – all trading notes on how to bring new economic opportunity and optimism to residents of our countries feeling left-behind and ignored.

This representative survey conducted by Das Progressive Zentrum, in collaboration with the Progressive Policy Institute and Georgetown University’s Center for German and European Studies, provides new insights into public attitudes toward public investments and green transformation agendas in Germany and the U.S.

Germany is an unequal country both socially and spatially: inequality between north and south, east and west, urban and rural areas and between economically dynamic regions and those affected by structural change remains significant. The regions differ greatly in their structure. These differences have a significant influence on migration flows, income levels and people’s fundamental living conditions and opportunities.

Deutschland ist sozial und räumlich ein ungleiches Land: Ungleichheit zwischen Nord und Süd, Ost und West, Stadt und Land und zwischen wirtschaftlich dynamischen Regionen und solchen, die vom Strukturwandel betroffen sind, weiterhin deutlich. Die starken Unterschiede in ihrer Struktur beeinflussen maßgeblich die Wanderungsbewegungen, Einkommensverhältnisse und die grundsätzlichen Lebens- und Chancenbedingungen der Menschen.

Residents of regions in long-term economic decline are understandably angry and upset about diminished prospects for themselves and their families and the degraded condition of their communities. In order to turn residents’ outlook from frustration, resentment and distrust of leaders and institutions to hope, optimism and confidence in democracy leaders must listen, understand and appreciate residents’ real worries and frustrations then take small steps to deliver better living conditions and rebuild trust.

A modern industrial policy can promote a just democracy. Under the mantle of “Bidenomics”, the US administration has launched a new industrial policy aimed not only at boosting economic growth and competing with China, but also at strengthening American democracy.

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump offer their voters very different visions for the future of America’s industrial development. Under the motto “foreign policy for the middle class,” the Biden administration expanded protective tariffs against China, thereby scoring points in the industrial heart of the country. With the “Inflation Reduction Act,” Biden made a U-turn on climate policy in the U.S., while continuing the protectionist economic policy of his predecessor. However, a second term for Trump would have even more serious consequences for Germany and Europe.

Kamala Harris und Donald Trump bieten ihren Wählerinnen und Wählern sehr unterschiedliche Zukunftsvisionen für die industrielle Entwicklung Amerikas an. Unter dem Motto „Außenpolitik für die Mittelschicht“ weitete die Biden-Administration Schutzzölle gegenüber China aus und punktete damit im ­industriellen Herz des Landes. Durch das Investitionspaket des „Inflation Reduction Act“ vollzog Biden in den USA eine klimapolitische Kehrtwende, verbunden mit der Fortsetzung protektionistischer Wirtschaftspolitik seines Vorgängers. Eine zweite Amtszeit Trumps hätte jedoch noch schwerwiegendere ­Folgen für Standorte in Deutschland und Europa.

Why should use the term “industrial heartlands” rather “rust belt” when we speak about former industrial regions in the US and Germany? In this paper, authors John Austin and Jürgen Hein discuss why the language we use matters and why without careful communication, anti-democratic and populist sentiments may be fuelled.

The industrial heartlands have become central to the political and policy future of advanced economies. There is a political battle over who can speak for the communities of the industrial heartlands; and who can offer a new prosperity for areas that have been marked by the social, economic and cultural effects of deindustrialisation. Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine, rising prices for energy and housing and general inflation have triggered material uncertainties, alongside challenges over immigration, integration and trade with China, and the need for action on climate change.

How can we, economically and socially, revitalize former industrial heartland regions while promoting a green transition? In this report, John Austin reflects on the experiences of the tour, which took participants to several iconic mining and steel regions: Charleroi, in Belgium’s Wallonia region; the Saarland linking Germany and France; and Saxony in Germany’s former East.

In his new paper, John Austin delves into the global rise of nationalist and anti-democratic sentiments, particularly in economically declining industrial heartland communities in Europe and the United States. Based on the learnings from the Industrial Heartlands and Democracy Study Tour in November 2023, the paper outlines the reasons behind people’s dissatisfaction and anger. Factors such as economic decline, geographic inequality, social alienation, and political disillusionment emphasize the urgent need for leaders to understand the underlying emotions and experiences driving these anti-democratic sentiments.