'The Holy Land of Industrialism': rethinking the Industrial Revolution

Abstract

Various explanations of Britain�s economic technological leadership between 1760 and 1850 have been proposed for many decades and have dealt with many aspects of British society: politics, natural resources, and its Empire. One of the less-discussed hypotheses places the emphasis on the quality of its workforce: the most skilled workers in Britain such as engineers, instrument-makers, and millwrights. These workers were the ones who actually put into practice the innovative blueprints and models of the inventors. On the eve of the Industrial Revolution, Britain�s high-skilled workers were superior to those anywhere else, and this difference was a critical element in its technological performance during the Industrial Revolution. The institution that produced this superior competence was British apprenticeship, which was the chief source of technical human capital in this age.

The Diffusion of Knowledge during the British Industrial Revolution

“…There is a significant consensus among scholars from Joel Mokyr and Nicholas Crafts to David S. Landes to Deirdre McCloskey that the Industrial Revolution constituted the transition of an economy driven by Smithian process (i.e., based on the widening of markets, the division of labor, and the expansion of trade) to one in which growth and development were driven by knowledge. That is, until the Industrial Revolution, economic growth was cyclical and could happen almost anywhere in the world, but the Industrial Revolution elevated technological progress in Britain and changed the entire dynamic of economic history, a “phase transition”, as it were (Mokyr 2021).…”

“…Naturally, this work is closely related to the literature focused on understanding the British Industrial Revolution. There are excellent surveys by Berg (1994), Clark (2014), Crafts (1995, 2011, 2021), and Mokyr (2009, 2021), and two strands within this broad literature are particularly related. One existing set of papers and books looks at the lives of famous inventors (Allen 2009; Meisenzahl and Mokyr 2012).…”

British-French Technology Transfer from the Revolution to Louis Philippe (1791–1844): Evidence from Patent Data

“…Overall, this assessment confirms the conjecture by Crouzet (2003, p. 234), who noted that “The French managed to learn British technology and adapt it to local conditions; […] so that French scientists and engineers made a considerable contribution in this field and France became at mid-century [1850] a center of invention and diffusion for modern technologies.” From a broader perspective, according to Mokyr (2021, p. 241), England and France embodied two different traditions of knowledge generation within the Industrial Enlightenment. The English were more specialized in tacit knowledge, empirical skills, and learning-by-doing, while the French were mainly oriented towards codified knowledge and theoretical understanding.…”

“…However, success in terms of scientific discoveries and inventions does not automatically translate into the adoption and diffusion of innovations. Mokyr (1990) notes that England's technological leadership in this period was not so much in science, but rather in effectively combining scientific knowledge and engineering capabilities. 1 Whether French scientific achievements played a significant role in the assimilation and adaptation of British technologies is thus an interesting question.…”