Advertisement

Over-commitment in Britain before 1930

  • Derek H. Aldcroft
  • Harry W. Richardson

Abstract

The ‘early start’ thesis and the proposition that it handicapped Britain’s industrial progress in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries has received a fair amount of attention over the last decade.1The usual approach to the early start problem is to discuss obstacles to new technological developments within mature industries in the economy (i.e. an intra-industry approach), particularly to examine how far the existence of original durable equipment in the staple industries (textiles, iron and steel, shipbuilding, and so on) slowed down the introduction of new techniques into these industries or other sectors linked directly with them. The objective in this article is to analyse the extent to which the early start proved a handicap when it became necessary to transfer resources to new industries based on major innovations of the late nineteenth century (an inter-industry approach). It is argued, therefore, that the extensive de-velopment of an old industrial structure with a high concentrationof employment within a few long-established industries may make adjustments to new technology in other industries more difficult. At first sight there might appear no problem at all; classical analysis would indicate a fairly smooth transfer of labour and capital from old sectors to new at a rate determined by differences in the respective returns on capital and prices offered to factors of production.

Keywords

Industrial Structure Early Start Resource Mobility Basic Industry Concentrate Growth 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Renferences

  1. 2.
    W. A. Lewis, ‘International Competition in Manufactures’, American Economic Review, Proceedings, xlvii (1957)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L. A. Seltzer, ‘The Mobility of Capital’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, xlvi (1932) 497–507.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. H. Lenfant, ‘Great Britain’s Capital Formation, 1865–1914’, Economica, XVIII (1951) 160.Google Scholar
  4. 1.
    C. H. Feinstein, ‘Income and Investment in the United Kingdom, 1856–1914’, Economic Journal, Lxx1(1961) 374.Google Scholar
  5. 1.
    A. R. Hall, ‘A Note on the English Capital Market as a Source of Funds for Home Investment before 1914’, Economics, xxiv (1957) 59–66;Google Scholar
  6. see also the com¬ments by A. K. Cairncross and Hall’s reply, Economica, xxv (1958).Google Scholar
  7. 2.
    S. B. Saul, ‘The Motor Industry in Britain before 1914’, Business History, v(1962–3) 22–44.Google Scholar
  8. 1.
    Quoted from M. W. Watkins, ‘The Aviation Industry’, journal of Political Economy, xxxiic (1931) 68.Google Scholar
  9. 2.
    For example, A. K. Cairncross, ‘The Place of Capital in Economic Progress’, in L. H. Dupriez (ed.), Economic Progress (Louvain, 1955 ) pp. 235–48.Google Scholar
  10. 2.
    In Britain there was no organised co-operation between finance and industry as in Germany; see W. F. Bruck, Social and Economic History of Germany from William 17 to Hitler, 1888–1938 (1938) ch. ii.Google Scholar
  11. 1.
    A. L. Bowley, Wages and Income in the United Kingdom since 1860 (1937) p. 60.Google Scholar
  12. 2.
    R. A. Lehfeldt, ‘The Rate of Interest on British and Foreign Investment’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, rxxvi (1912–13) 205; ixxvu (1913–14) 433.Google Scholar
  13. 8.
    For this analysis see T. Scitovsky, ‘Growth—balanced or unbalanced?’ in M. Abramowitz (ed.), The Allocation of Economic Resources: Essays in Honor of B. F. Haley (1959) pp. 207–12.Google Scholar
  14. 1.
    For classic examples in one of the most important industries see D. L. Burn, Economic History of Steelmaking, 1867–1939 (1940) chs iv and x.Google Scholar
  15. 2.
    S. J. Chapman, Work and Wages, pt 1, Foreign Competition (1904) PP. 136–7.Google Scholar
  16. 4.
    L. F. Haber, The Chemical Industry during the Nineteenth Century (1958) p. 163.Google Scholar
  17. 1.
    E. Crammond, ‘The Economic Relations of the British and German Empires’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, ixxvii(1913–14) 794.Google Scholar
  18. 1.
    For a detailed discussion of this see P. E. Hart, ‘The Restriction of Road Haulage’, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, vs (1959) 116–38.Google Scholar
  19. 2.
    See the price statistics in D. C. Hague, The Economics of Man-Made Fibres (1957) PP. 36–7.Google Scholar
  20. 2.
    This latter defect was remedied by the new patent law of 1907. See G. Schuster, ‘The Patents and Designs Act, 1907’, Economic journal, iiix (1909) 538–51Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Harry W. Richardson 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • Derek H. Aldcroft
    • 1
  • Harry W. Richardson
    • 2
  1. 1.University of LeicesterUK
  2. 2.Centre for Research in the Social SciencesUniversity of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations