TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > History > Pioneer industrialiser
Gradual, nonintense rate of growth of industrial output - adequate to ultimate achievement of industrialisation
Evidence for France
Adjust for Per Capita and non-urban protoindustrialisation as well – proto industrialisation rational response to relative resource endowments and factor prices – if take this growth from Marczewski as 1.91% - French growth rate as higher than Britain’s in 18th century
General consensus that revolutionary and Napoleonic wars hiatus and setback for French economic development – wars themselves sno much effect physical capital but affect on itnl. Trade was pronounced. Measured in per capita terms French growth was at a rate essentially indistinguishable from the English and terms industrial output per head – economic development France strong and steady as across the Channel – both countries pattern fo growth and continuing trends of 18th century
FRANCE MEETS THIS CENTRAL CHARACTER GRADUAL, BUT OVER THE LONG RUN, CONTINUOUS GROWTH
High proportion of light, consumer goods industries in the mix of total industrial production
Evidence for France
Hoffman neglects the protoindustrial sector – by its nature much of this is consumer-goods production – revised Hoffman index shows greater emphasis upon consumer goods industries – structure evolves more gradually than Britain – imply French priority in advancement and compatible with Gerschenkronian criterion.
Absence trend toward conc. In industrial organization – tendency small scale to remains
Traditional view that family firm outlive appropriateness - restricted the market by devotion to quality, hand made production – provides presupposition against strong tendencies toward concentration and large-scale organisation - same criticism levelled at England and Habakkuk argues enterprise product of economic environment and not vice versa highly concentrated units of production and organization are a compensating feature of follower countries – appropriate to earliest stage of industrialisation – inherited from the past – becomes a burden from early start of industrialisation – late comers skip over it- the tendency France towards concentration weaker in France and fits closely to Gerschenkronian tendency.
Ability to obtain tech. And capital from native sources
Late comers can skip over stages in the evolution of technology – immediately install best practices available – mix of physical capital therefore be younger – early starters have to create own technology – look at patents Drench did indeed have their own traditions of technological progressiveness – Clough International borrowing of technology did not attain substantial importance until after the beginning of the 19th century.
Temporary and permanent of British nationals to continent important rule diffusion new techniques - BUT conceding that French were indeed borrowing technology from Britain in some of lines Britain making advances in NOT equivalent to saying French total dependence on Britain
Achievement of French scientists in 18th, 19th or even 20th centuries direct industrial application quite impressive – ALSO no evidence to suggest French turning to nonnative source of capital – well established system of capital in France – indeed Cameron’s work show large French capital outside France – was this because of a lack of investment demand no one argues French dependent on foreign sources of capital – sources of capital and tech adequate for Serschenkron
Minor roles played by credit and state budgets in process of (i)
G: One should not expect to find the special institutional form of credit banks playing any significant role in the process of industrialisation under conditions of relative advancement. More gradual incremental development decentralised institutions sufficient – late developers need state banks to channel foreign investment etc.
France: such involvement was insignificant BUT incapacity banking structure to generate credit banks held responsible for having held back the economic development of France. This author disagrees.
By 18th century structure adequate and most appropriate to needs of developing French economy – earliest phases investment capital is domestic and private – primarily retained from earnings or profits then ploughed back into investment 0 see in 18th century Britain and France.
Late comers need capital banks due to large cost of installation of advanced technology – exceed methods of decentralised supply – France gradual process does not need this – process began early on – Cameron sees weakness French banking system – yes, absence of credit banks this shows Gerchenkpornian compliance. Institutional channels were not a significant feature in the industrialisation of either France or England can be interpreted in Gerschenkron’s framework as evidence for relatively low degree of economic backwardness.
Absence government investment: growth without dependence on state budgets (luxury driven royal finances after all) -
Absence virulent forms of industrialisation ideologies
French mercantilism based their policies upon static conception of trade and production difficult to conceive French mercantilism as a policy specifically resorted to in order to promote economic growth. WHATEVER ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRIAL GROWTH DID OCCUR BEFORE 19TH CENTURY DID SO IN ABSENCE OF DECISIVE IDEOLOGICAL IMPULSE
Saint-Simon – Saint Simonism not taking form of appeals for sacrifice and postponement of gains in the levels of current consumption and material standards of living French industrialisation proceeded without any pronounced ideological stimulus – because there was no need for any.
Positive contribution of agriculture and improving productivity so does not prove obstacle to industrialisation
French agric. dominated by peasants not enough capital farms etc. –
Positive role of agric: release labour, supply foodstuffs to growing agric. population, raw materials inputs to industry, capital and entrepreneurship to industry , market demand for output of industries, source foreign exchange earnings – pay importation technology.
Feeding popn. 20 million beginning 18th century to 28 million 19th century – 19th century popn. Growth uncommonly slow: urban % rises 15% in 1700 to more than 20 in 1800 33% 1850 and 50% 1900.
Decreasing proportion of those involved in agriculture - case for ability French agric. to feed growing population – OR sustained by imports – appears to have been self-sufficient
French agriculture grew consistently well to fed urban population and to produce raw materials – not foreign exchange earner, but neither was it a drain – IMPLICATION that productivity has increased – 44% first decade 18th century to the last – productivity per unit of capital also increased – Newell agrees – agricultural productivity land and labour rise.
17-18th France 75% peasantry held and worked below units below minimum required for bare subsistence – problems therefore with volume of demand for industrial products represented by the agricultural sector – BUT difference may have been made up by supplementary income.
But France diverse agriculture and some regions more advanced than others – no surprise agricultural revolutions happened earliest in some regions and slowly in others. Literature concentration peasants, minor regional markets – asserted nothing like a nationally unified market for agricultural production – 18th price levels in differing regions shows convergence and creation of a single market – Louise Tilly agricultural production probably grew at higher rates than population, - fiscal, political and military effects of the Bourbons certainly unintentional effect unprecedented efficiency in tax collection –
Drive tax efficiency drove peasants into the market – needed money to pay taxes
In relative terms French agriculture performed quite respectably – performed more in the manner of an early industrialiser than a late comer
Tendency Material Living Standards to advance more or less in line with economic growth
Living standards must have been improving 18th century as popn. Increased due to declining mortality – which is a result of more consumption. – Hobsbawm argue consumption stays the same but variations around the norm due to increased transport and communications is reason for declining mortality. BUT since middle 18th century agricultural and industrial production increase at a faster rate than population growth. – but what about distribution of income and consumption – Hart and Fourastie general standard of living increasing.
Per capita production inconclusive what about real wages – source controversy in Britain
The achievement of a growth spurt by a late-comer will owing to and reflective of
- emphasis on larger scale
- conc. Upon heavy capital-intensive industry
- technology and capital for which flow through the government and from abroad
- special institutional arrangements
- ideologically inspired national effort
- passive unprogressive agricultural sector
- strong pressures on the consumption levels of the generation that coincides with that effort.
Pressures upon French consumption relatively weak during her industrialisation – logical grounds rather than evidential
French economic progress began very early – origins lie deep in the past – growth proceeded in context of relative economic advancement – French, through Gerschenkronian, framework industrialisation exhibits very well the features likely to be associated with relative advancement and early I.
Historically more sound to look for a half-century or even a whole one for the beginning of the industrial revolution.
France did not undergo a take-off – like a spurt and as Gerschenkron shows only relatively backward economies have growth spurt – spurt over such a long time in France that virtually indiscernible.
Implications: abandonment of the stagnation / retardation thesis pervade 19th century analysis - a reunification of 18th and 19th centuries in French economic history renders them more intelligible.
Proto industrialisation – mistake of past to look at French industrialisation through English institutions, events, relationships and processes Mantoux / English definition Industrial Revolution - iron, cotton, textiles, factories continued by Landes – more to the story in France than cotton textiles and iron.
Peasants attachment to land and land owning relationship / political legal heritage show that easier English mangers to set up factories urban areas, whereas French managers set them up in the countryside – neither is better and definitely see industrial revolution both countries.
France epitomizes paradigm of European industrialisation – average experiences of other continental countries reflect those of France – Britain that departs from the model – Gerschenkron leaves foreign element to one side – international sector critical importance to Britain’s industrialisation – contribution to GNP greater than France’s share England compelled to substitute international demand as a supplement to what was a domestic market too small to sustain an extended drive to industrialisation - role of the foreign sector represents a departure from the classic paradigm.
Demography
Atypically slow growth French population in 18th century onwards – economic growth per capita terms is somewhat phony – unique French demographic sequence is again a manifestation of relative advancement - birth rate was restrained – individuals prized other things more highly than large families – valued traditional ways of doing things – family and village ties and social continuity and stability – over social and geographic mobility characteristics of modern society – over life-styles and fractured families common to urban centres of industrial regions – over social strain and dislocation accompany more rapid rates pf transition.
Example of one nation’s success in achieving modern economic growth in the context a relatively moderate and modest rate of popn. Growth ought to be particular relevance and interest – deserving admiration.
Is French tendency to remain countryside that bad when cf. urban congestion, pollution etc>
World irrevocably changed when one industrialisation takes place – followers have something to imitate and avoid - - 19th century two examples for imitation – Risorgimentoi France and England: “two nations placed at the head of European civilisation” – France and England both progressive but France “presented no such picture of misery as they saw in the state of the English working classes” France “a country that for some years has normally accommodated itself to the good, and which has all the characters of a good social spirit”
Concept of the Industrial Revolution is neither so monolithic nor homogenous as economic historians become accustomed to.
Comments
