Is geographical political economy the only/right framework for understanding and explaining deindustrialization in the regions of the Global North and South?

In his recent article, Andy Pike (2020a) rightly asks for the need for theorizing on deindustrialization not only in the Global North, but in the Global South, as well. He also rightly points at fragmentation and compartmentalization in urban and regional studies, hindering sound analyses of these processes and proposes geographical political economy to economic evolution as an integrated framework. With some limitations, that framework might be useful to get an overall picture of the reasons behind deindustrialization in the Global North and South. However, it helps much less in doing sound empirical research on context-specific, place-sensitive cases of deindustrialization and related restructuring processes for three main reasons. First, it does not consider enough other potentially useful perspectives and approaches, secondly, it lacks powerful mid-range theories and concepts and thirdly, it is too much rooted in the UK and North America.