collected snippets of immediate importance...


Monday, February 7, 2011

britain ascendant, crouzet

(346): 'free trade policy' no sure recipe -- protectionism as absolutely necessary to the survival of most Continental industries (mistake is to carry it to extreme lengths, as did the French)

(349): between 1815 and 1850, the gap between England and the Continent had enormously widened and was formidable

(351): development by 1850 in W. Europe (w/ exception of England) had a 'dualistic' character. pockets of growth, and pockets of backwardness.

(351-352): sort of catching up with Britain by 1914 was result of Britian's slowing down, also

(353): growth was not a problem of 'diffusing innovations'

(355): key--it was not a question of availability of innovations/technology, but a question of incentives. the problem is economic -- the thinness of markets

(356-358): key--constraints on demand side were (1) thinness of home markets (which was a result of agrarian backwardness, citing P. Barioch as explaining agricultural revolution starting in 1820s); and (2) external markets, could not develop a strong export trade because of Britain's dominance

(359): existence of advanced industrial countries is a problem

(360): neither transport nor banking systems are primary barriers

(360-361): imp--on supply side, factor endowments were a problem--resources, capital, labour (derivative of agrarian structure), and socio-cultural framework (which seems related to agrarian structrue)

(364): Continental countries had to look for niches -- they adapted to particular sectors of industry (manufacture of high quality fashionable luxury goods, where mechanization was not forthcoming)

(366): they 'succeeded to the extent that they were different'

(368): imp--lessons?
  1. necessity of widening the market (critically, this depends on transformation of agrarian structure)
  2. successful industrialization is not a slavish imitation of what went before
(379): French backwardness in 'big industry'

(380): origins of differences between English and French agrarian systems go to the heart of the middle ages [what does this mean for a theoretical understanding of why England developed?]

(380): French technical change did happen, in agriculture [how, if peasants had no incentives?]

(381): imp--the retention of a large agricultural population in France was responsible for the slow redistribution of labour towards industry

No comments: