Explaining the first Industrial Revolution: two views
- 1 April 2011
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in European Review of Economic History
- Vol. 15 (1), 153-168
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s1361491610000201
Abstract
This review article looks at the recent books on the British Industrial Revolution by Robert Allen and Joel Mokyr. Both writers seek to explain Britain's primacy. This article offers a critical but sympathetic account of the main arguments of the two authors, considering both the economic logic and the empirical validity of their rival claims. In each case, the ideas are promising but the evidence base seems in need of further support. It may be that eventually these explanations for British economic leadership at the turn of the nineteenth century are recognized as complementary rather than competing.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Engels’ pause: Technical change, capital accumulation, and inequality in the british industrial revolutionExplorations in Economic History, 2009
- Lancashire, India, and shifting competitive advantage in cotton textiles, 1700–1850: the neglected role of factor prices1The Economic History Review, 2009
- Book production and the onset of modern economic growthJournal of Economic Growth, 2008
- Technology and Learning by Factory Workers: The Stretch-Out at Lowell, 1842The Journal of Economic History, 2003
- Directed Technical ChangeThe Review of Economic Studies, 2002
- The Politics of Corn Law Repeal and Theories of Commercial PolicyBritish Journal of Political Science, 1989
- NATURAL MONOPOLY AND RAILWAY POLICY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY *Oxford Economic Papers, 1987
- The “horndal effect” in early U.S. manufacturingExplorations in Economic History, 1985
- British Textile Technology Transmission to the United States: The Philadelphia Region Experience, 1770–1820Business History Review, 1973
- Some Evidence on English and American Wage Rates, 1790–1830The Journal of Economic History, 1970