The Making of the
Modern World
Wednesday 22 October 2014, 9-10am
THE INDUSTRIAL
REVOLUTION:
CONSEQUENCES
Tutor: Giorgio Riello
g.riello@warwick.ac.uk
Concept 2: Industrious Revolu4on Jan de Vries, The Industrious Revolu1on (Cambridge, 2008). The ‘industrious revolu=on’ formula=on is important because: •  it emphasises labour rather than technology as the key element of industrial produc=on •  it extends the chronologies of the IR backwards in =me •  it connects consump=on and produc=on. The Industrial Revolu4on: Different Explana4ons Exp. 1. Un4l the 1970s (in par4cular c. 1955-­‐75): Economic Growth -­‐ key sectors (esp. coJon tex=les) -­‐ Factory produc=on -­‐  Use of new technologies Exp. 2. From the mid 1970s to the mid 1990s: Manufactures -­‐  a wider range of sectors -­‐  the con=nuity with pre-­‐industrial manufacturing (manufactures) -­‐  consump=on -­‐  two new concepts:
-­‐ proto-­‐industrialisa=on -­‐  industrious revolu=on David Cannadine, “The Present and the Past in the English Industrial Revolu4on 1800-­‐1900”, Past and Present, 108 (1984), pp. 131-­‐72. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: -­‐  the IR in a more global perspec=ve, -­‐  new concept of ‘divergence’ Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: The
Global Re-interpretation of the IR
This has been brought about by: a. The industrial decline of Britain and most of Europe (the places of the first IR) b. The industrializa4on of Asia, exp. China and India. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s:
The industrial decline of Britain and most of Europe Industry accounted for 40% of the Bri=sh economy in 1900 but only 20% in 1990. The Industrial ci=es of the Midlands and the North of England declined in the early 1990s … but they revived in the late 1990s thanks to financial and consumer services and outsourcing within a global economy Historians asked: -­‐ What part was played in the history of industrializa=on by Britain’s connec=ons with the wider world -­‐ the rela=onship between the IR and Western dominion over the world Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s:
The industrialisa4on of Asia (China and India) Was this an achievement con=ngent upon a prior superiority in economy, mind or culture, or was it mere accident? ‘why did Europe industrialise and grow rich and Asia did not? And this ques=on indirectly asks ‘why is Asia industrialising now?’ de-­‐Europeanise of de-­‐Anglicise the IR Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s:
(a) The Lost Opportunities of China
• Chris Bayly, The Birth of the Modern World (Cambridge, 2004) ‘it was European ships and commercial companies, not Asian and African producers of slaves, spices, calicoes or porcelains which were able to capture the greatest ‘value added’ as world trade expanded in the eighteenth century’ and adds that ‘Europe connected, subjugated and made tributary other peoples’
“industrious revolu=ons”’. Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s: (b) Global Luxury and Consump4on •  Importance of Asian luxuries and exo=c American foodstuffs •  These were s=mula to European consumer goods industries See: Maxine Berg, ‘In Pursuit of Luxury: Global History and Bri=sh Consumer Goods in the Eighteenth Century’ Past and Present 182 (Feb. 2004 ), pp. 85-­‐142 Maxine Berg, Luxury and Pleasure in Eighteenth-­‐Century Britain (2005), chap. 2 Exp. 3. Since the mid 1990s:
(c) The ‘Great Divergence’
Europe moved from a common path of economic development to a new, higher level. Europe industrialised while China, but also India and other places around the world did not. Europe experienced a ‘Great Divergence’ thanks to: -­‐ abundant supplies of coal -­‐ presence of colonial markets. Kenneth Pomeranz, The Great Divergence: China, Europe and the Making of the Modern World Economy (2000). 7. Why was Britain first? •  Britain had a very low share of the popula=on in Britain occupied in agriculture; France by contrast remained a very agricultural society. •  As late as 1840 the output per worker in France was only 60% of that of England: Britain was much more produc=ve •  And finally that popula=on growth was gradual in France, while in England it rose rapidly. 7. Why was Britain first? 1.  Compara4ve advantage in exportable commodi4es -­‐ Britain was successfully expor=ng part of its industrial produc=on (60% of Bri=sh coJon output was exported compared to 10% in France) 2. Interna4onal specializa4on -­‐ colonial markets were par=cularly important and were dominated by Britain 3. War and economic protec4on -­‐ Britain did not bear the burden of physical destruc=on -­‐ but the country was heavily taxed to pay for the army and navy -­‐ it was successful at the end of the Napoleonic wars. 8. The First Industrial Revolu=on and the Second Industrial Revolu=on Technological achievement in the First Industrial Revolu=on according to Landes: 1.  The subs1tu1on of human energy with machines -­‐ rapid, regular, precise and =reless. 2. The subs1tu1on of animate with inanimate sources of power -­‐ steam power for animal, wind and water power 3. The use of new and more abundant raw materials -­‐ subs=tu=on of mineral for vegetable or animal substances -­‐ change from a wood to a coal fuel economy Table 1. GDP per Capita in some of the major industrial countries, 1820-­‐1913 (in 1985 US $)
United Kingdom
France
Germany
Italy
United States
Canada
Japan
1820
1,405
1,052
937
960
1,048
588
1870
2,610
1,571
1,300
1,210
2,247
1,347
620
1890
3,279
1,941
1,727
1,355
3,106
1,662
813
1913
4,024
2,734
2,606
2,087
4,854
3,560
1,114
8. The First Industrial Revolu=on and the Second Industrial Revolu=on •  new materials -­‐ steel, chemicals – Germany leads •  new energy -­‐ steam turbine, gas, petroleum, electricity – Germany leads •  mechanisa4on – machine tools, interchangeable parts – U.S. leads 8. The First Industrial Revolu=on and the Second Industrial Revolu=on •  interchangebility of parts, … the ways in which products were composed an assembled •  ‘scien=fic management’ of produc=ve lines •  In the Second Industrial Revolu=on, the Americans then by the Germans took the lead 9. Britain Falling Behind Table 2. The world Manufacturing Produc4on, 1870-­‐1911 (in %) In % 1870 1881-­‐188 1896-­‐190 1906-­‐191 1913 5 0 0 Great 31,8 26,6 19,5 14,7 14,0 Britain France 10,3 8,6 7,1 6,4 6,4 Germany 13,2 13,9 16,6 15,9 15,7 Italy 2,4 2,4 2,7 3,1 2,7 Belgium 2,9 2,5 2,2 2,0 2,1 Russia 3,7 3,4 5,0 5,0 5,5 US 23,3 28,6 30,1 35,3 35,8 Japan -­‐ -­‐ 0,6 1,0 1,2 Others 12,4 14,0 16,2 16,6 16,6 World 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 9. Britain Falling Behind Why did Britain fall behind Germany and the US in the period 1870-­‐1914? •  The markets of empire •  Compe==ve advantage in low produc=vity industry 10. The Modernisa=on of the Germany Economy 1. The State was proac=ve 2. High levels of investments – support of banks 3. Welfare state – worker’s housing, social insurance, pensions, etc. The result was: •  1891-­‐1911 – the German popula=on increased from 49 million to 65 million. •  Output increased from £23 per person to £37 per person a year •  Trade increased by 200% Conclusion Was the IR the beginning of modernity?