Industrial Organization and Technological Change: The Decline of the British Cotton Industry

Business History Review

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 1983, Pages 195-236

  Lazonick, William ^a  

^a HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84971941972     PISSN: 00076805     EISSN: 2044768X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3114355     Document Type: Article

References (256)

1. See e, g. the bibliographical survey in D.H. Aldcroft and H.W. Richardson, The British Economy 1870-1939 (London, 1969, pp. 305-313;
2. see also D. McCloskey and L. Sandberg, “From Damnation to Redemption: Judgements on the late Victorian Entrepreneur,” Explorations in Economic History, Ser. 2, Vol. 9, No. 1, (Fall 1971) pp. 89-108.
3. For a systematic theoretical analysis of how these three views of the economy fundamentally differ, see S. Marglin, Growth, Distribution and Prices (Cambridge, Mass., 1964).
4. P. Deane and W. Cole, British Economic Growth 1688 - 1959 (Cambridge, England, 1964), p. 32;
5. G. Jones, Increasing Return (Cambridge, England, 1933), p. 277.
6. See W. Lazonick and W. Mass, “The Performance of the British Cotton Industry, 1870 - 1913,” Research in Econotnic History, Vol. 9, (1984).
7. R. Robson, The Cotton Industry in Britain (London, 1957), p. 355;
8. A. Ormerod, “The Prospects of the British Cotton Industry,” Yorkshire Bulletin of Economic and Social Research, Vol. 15, No. 1, (May 1963), p. 6.
9. W. Mass, “The Adoption of the Automatic Loom,” paper presented to the Cliometrics Conference, Chicago, May 1980.
10. Table I; Robson, Cotton Industry, p. 356.
11. See also United Textile Factory Workers’ Association, Plan for Cotton (Ashton, 1957), p. 15.
12. A. Marshall, The Principles of Economics (London, 1925), eighth edition, ch. VIII-XIII.
13. M. Edwards, The Growth of the British Cotton Trade 1780-1815 (Manchester, 1967);
14. A.J. Taylor, “Concentration and Specialization in the Lancashire Cotton Industry, 1825 - 1850,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., Vol. I, No. 2 and 3, (1949), pp. 114-122;
15. V.A.C. Gatrell, “Labour, Power, and the Size of Firms in Lancashire Cotton in the Second Quarter of the Nineteenth Century,” Economic History Review, 2nd series, Vol. XXX, No. 1, (February 1977), pp. 95-139;
16. R. Lloyd-Jones and A.A. LeRoux, “The Size of Firms in the Cotton Industry: Manchester 1815-1841” Economic History Revie, 2nd ser. Vol. XXXIII, No. 1, (February 1980), pp. 72-82;
17. S.D. Chapman, “British Marketing Enterprise; The Changing Role of Merchants, Manufacturers, and Financiers, 1700-1860,” Business History Review, Vol. LIII, No. 2, (Summer 1979), pp. 205-233;
18. S.D. Chapman, “Financial Restraints on the Growth of Firms in the Cotton Industry, 1790-1850,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser. Vol. XXXIII, No. 1, (February 1980), pp. 50-69;
19. J. Jewkes and S. Jewkes, “A Hundred Years of Change in the Structure of the Cotton Industry,” Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. IX, (October 1966) pp. 115-134;
20. D.A. Farnie, The English Cotton Industry and the World Market 1815-1896, (Oxford, 1979).
21. Taylor “Concentration, ’ p. 119;
22. J. Jewkes, “The Localisation of the Cotton Industry,” Economic History, Vol. II, No. 5, (January 1930), pp. 92-93;
23. D. Bytheil, The Handloom Weavers (Cambridge, England, 1969), pp. 89-92.
24. J.R.T. Hughes, Fluctuations in Trade, Industry and Finance, 2850-1860 (Oxford, 1960), pp. 97-99;
25. Farnie, English Cotton, pp. 86-90.
26. Farnie, English Cotton, p. 256.
27. T. Ashton, “The Growth of Textile Businesses in the Oldham District 1884—1924,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. LXXXIX, (1926), p. 573.
28. Farnie, English Cotton, p. 219.
29. R. Robson, “Structure of the Cotton Industry: A Study in Specialization and Integration” (Ph D. Thesis, University of London, 1950), p. 190;
30. Robson, Cotton Industry, p. 87-88;
31. S. Barkin, “The Regional Significance of the Integration Movement in the Southern Textile Industry,” Southern Economic Journal, Vol. XV, No. 4, (April 1949) pp. 395-411;
32. Fabian Research Group, Cotton-A Working Policy (London, 1945), p. 3;
33. Committee on Industry and Trade, Survey of the Textile Industries, (London, 1928), pp. 20-22;
34. Henry Clay, Report on the Position of the English Cotton Industry, Confidential Report for Securities Management Trust, Ltd. October 20, 1931, pp. 30-39;
35. Economic Advisory Council, Committee on the Cotton Industry, Report, pp. 13-14, in Parliamentary Papers, 1929-30, XII;
36. Great Britain, Board of Trade Working Party Reports: Cotton (London, 1946), p. 46 Association of Cotton Textile Merchants of New York, Twenty-five years (New York, 1944).
37. M. Copeland, The Cotton Manufacturing Industry of the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1912), pp. 365 - 70;
38. Robson, Cotton Industry, p. 149.
39. A. Marshall, Industry and Trade (London, 1919), pp. 600-601.
40. Clay, Report, pp. 26A, 26B.
41. E. Hopwood, The Lancashire Weavers’ Story (Manchester, 1969,), p. 15;
42. Clay, Report, p. 26A.
43. W. Mills, Sir Charles W. Macara, Bart. (Manchester, 1917) p. 50;
44. A. Muir, The Kenyon Tradition (Cambridge, England, 1964);
45. B. Ellinger and H. Ellinger, “Japanese Competition in the Cotton Trade’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol XCIIE, pt. II, (1930) p. 209.
46. Political and Economic Planning, Industries Group, Report on the British Cotton Industry (London, 1934), p. 21;
47. M., Kirby, “The Lancashire cotton industry in the Interwar years: a study in organizational change,” Business History, Vol. XVI, No. 2, (July 1974), pp. 145-159;
48. Committee on Industry and Trade, Survey, pp. 33-34;
49. J. Pennington, “Competition and specialisation in the cotton trade,” Journal of the National Federation of Textile Works Managers’ Associations. VI, (1926-1927), p. 216.
50. Committee on Industry and Trade, Survey, p. 37;
51. G. Daniels and J. Jewkes, “The Post-war Depression in the Lancashire Cotton Industry,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Vol. XCI, (1928) pp. 169-177;
52. see also United Textile Factory Workers Association, Inquiry into the Cotton Industry (Blackburn, 1923), p. 15;
53. O. Jones, “The Agitation for Control of the Lancashire Cotton Industry,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 2, No. 4, (July 1924) pp. 447-452.
54. Committee on Industry and Trade, Survey, pp. 36-38.
55. J. Ryan, “Machinery Replacement in the Cotton Trade,” Economic Journal, Vol. 40, (December 1930) p. 7;
56. See W. Lazonick, “Factor Costs and the Diffusion of Ring-spinning in Britain prior to World War 1,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. XCVI, No. 1, (February 1981).
57. J. Kershaw, “Uses of Paper-tubes in the Textile Trade,” Journal of the British Association of Managers of Textile Works (Lancashire Section), Vol. IV, (1912-1913), p. 86.
58. B. Robinson, “Business Methods in the Cotton Trade,” Journal of the British Association of Managers of Textile Works (Lancashire Section), Vol. IX, (1918-1919) p. 96.
59. Textile Manufacturer, June 15, 1979, p. 179;
60. J. Nasmith, The Student's Cotton Spinning (Manchester, 1896) 3rd ed., p. 532;
61. W. Walsh, “Fifty-years Progress in Ring-spinning Machines,” Textile Manufacturer, Dec. 1925, p. 96.
62. Copeland, Cotton Manufacturing, p. 74;
63. Lazonick, “Factor costs,” p. 14.
64. Copeland, Cotton Manufacturing, p. 72n;
65. T. Thornley, The Middle Processes of Cotton Mills (London, 1923), p. 127.
66. Thornley, Middle Processes, p. 110;
67. R. Peake, Cotton: From the Raw Material to the Finished Product (London, 1926), pp. 79 - 80;
68. Great Britain, Board of Trade, An Industrial Survey of the Lancashire Area (London, 1932), p. 135;
69. E. Gray, The Weaver's Wage (Manchester, 1937), p. 63.
70. Peake, Cotton, pp. 79-80;
71. Political and Economic Planning, Report, p. 95;
72. E. Snowden, “Cotton Yarn Preparation Developments,” in Cotton Board, Cotton and Rayon Machinery and Processing Development (Manchester, 1945), p. 92.
73. F. Holt, “High-speed Winding and Warping,” Journal of the National Federation of Textile Managers’ Associations, Vol. IX, (1929-1930) pp. 104-105.
74. J. Worrall, The Cotton Spinners’ and Manufacturers’ Directory for Lancashire (Oldham, 1913);
75. Great Britain, Board of Trade, Working Party, p. 37.
76. C. Brooks, Cotton (New York, 1898), pp. 282 - 284;
77. Copeland, Cotton Manufacturing, pp. 180-184.
78. See Lazonick and Mass, “Performance.”
79. Brooks, Cotton, p. 209.
80. W. Lazonick “Production Relations, Labor Productivity and Choice of Technique, U.S. and British Cotton Spinning, “Journal of Economic History, Vol. 41, No. 3, (September, 1981,) pp. 491-516;
81. United States Productivity Team Report, The British Cotton Industry (British Productivity Council: London, 1952), p. 12.
82. Great Britain, Ministry of Production, Report of the Cotton Textile Mission to the U.S.A.(London, 1944), p. 26.
83. Ormerod, “Prospects,” p. 12.
84. Textile Manufacturer, 15 March 1903, p. 89;
85. Ormerod, “Prospects,” pp. 12-13.
86. Copeland, Cotton Manufacturing, p. 74;
87. W. Turner, “Universal Winding,” Journal of the British Association of Managers of Textile Works (Lancashire Section) Vol. II, (1910-1911), pp. 122 - 132;
88. Robson, Cotton Industry, p. xvii.
89. L. Tippett, A Portrait of the Lancashire Textile Industry (London, 1969), pp. 66 - 67;
90. Productivity Team Report, Cotton Weaving (London, 1950), p. 12;
91. U.S. Productivity Team Report, British Cotton (London, 1950), p. 17.
92. A. Chandler, The Visible Hand (Cambridge, Mass., 1977). Gray, Weaver's, p. 30.
93. W. Reekie, “The Marketing of Cotton Goods Abroad,” Journal of the National Federation of Textile Works Managers’ Associations, Vol. VI, (1926-1927) pp. 174-175;
94. Great Britain, Ministry of Production, Report, pp. 30-31.
95. Ormerod, “Prospects,”pp. 11-12.
96. J. Jewkes, “Is British Industry Inefficient?” Manchester School, XIV (January 1946), 1-16.
97. A. Fowler, “Trade Unions and Technical Change: The Automatic Loom Strike, 1908,” Bulletin of the North West Labour History, Society, 1980;
98. W. Mass, “Technological Change and Industrial Relations in the Cotton Textile Industry: The Diffusion of Automatic Weaving in Britain and the United States”(Ph.D. dissertation, Boston College, 1983).
99. Marshall, Industry and Trade, p. 601.
100. J. Jewkes, “Is British Industry Inefficient?” Manchester School, Vol. XIV. No. 1, (January 1946) pp. 1-16.
101. The Association of Vertical Specialization with Economic Progress is Made in George Stigler, “Division of Labor is Limited by the Extent of the Market,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 59, No. 3, (January 1951); reprinted in Stigler, The Organization of Industry (Homewood, 1968).
102. For a comprehensive analysis see B. Vitkovitch, “The UK. Cotton Industry, 1937 - 54,”Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol. III, No. 3, (July 1955), pp. 241-265.
103. S. Pollard, The Development of the British Economy 1914-1967 (London, 1969) 2nd ed., p. 422;
104. Ormerod, “Prospects,” p. 6.
105. H. W. Macrosty, The Trust Movement in British Industry (London, 1907), pp. 124 - 141;
106. G. Carter, The Tendency Towards Industrial Combination (London, 1913), pp. 309-315.
107. F. Merttens, “Productivity, Protection and Integration of Industry,” Transactions of the Manchester Statistical Society, 1903-1904;
108. W.H. Guthrie, “The Cotton Mill of the Future,” Textile Manufacturer, 15 August 1905, p. 255.
109. Jones, Increasing Return, p. 277.
110. P. Fitzgerald, Industrial Combination in England, (London, 1927), pp. 9-10;
111. Committee on Industry and Trade, Survey, p. 34;
112. G. Daniels and H. Campion, “The Cotton Industry and Trade,” in British Association, Britain in Depression (London, 1935), p. 340;
113. C. Macara, The New Industrial Era (Manchester, 1923), p. 90;
114. Jones, “Agitation,” p. 450.
115. Committee on Industry and Trade, Survey, pp. 35-36;
116. Daniels and Campion, “Cotton industry,” p. 341.
117. M. Kirby, “Lancashire Cotton,” p. 148;
118. H. Clay, The Problem of Industrial Relations (London, 1929), pp. 138-139;
119. H. Clay, The Post-War Unemployment Problem (London, 1929), p. 163;
120. Committee on Industry and Trade, Final Report (London, 1929), p. 46;
121. A. Lucas, “The Bankers’Industrial Development Company,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. XI, No. 3, (April 1933), pp. 272-273.
122. Industrial Combination, p. 8; “The cotton trade is one of the few sections of industry in which English firms have little to fear from foreign competition.”
123. Clay, Post-War Unemployment, p. 49;
124. Economic Advisory Council, Report, p. 20;
125. R. Streat, “The Cotton Industry in Contraction; Problems and Policies of the Interwar Years”, District Bank Review, No. 127, September 1958, p. 7;
126. A. Lucas, Industrial Reconstruction and the Control of Competition: The British Experiments (London, 1937), p. 155;
127. J. Wisselink, “The Present Condition of the English Cotton Industry,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. VIII, No. 2 (Janaury 1930) p. 158.
128. On the rationalization movement in general, see L. Hannah, The Rise of the Corporate Economy: The British Experience (Baltimore, 1976), ch. 3.
129. Streat, “Cotton Industry,” p. 7;
130. “Combinations in the Cotton Trade, “Journal of the National Federation of Textile Works’ Managers’ Associations, Vol. XII (1932-1933) pp. 5-9;
131. D. Macgregor, J. Ryan et. al., “Problems of Rationalisation: a Discussion,” Economic Journal, Vol. XL, (September 1930), pp. 360-361;
132. see also A. Chandler, “The Growth of the Transnational Industrial Firm in the United States and the United Kingdom: a Comparative Analysis,” Economic History Review, 2nd series Vol. XXXIII, No. 3, (August, 1980);
133. Hannah, Rise, pp. 147-148.
134. In discussion of paper by Daniels and Jewkes, “Post-war depression,” p. 200.
135. Macgregor, Ryan et. al., “Problems,” p. 361
136. Hannah, Rise, p. 84;
137. Kirby, “Lancashire Cotton,” pp, 149-151.
138. Wisselink, “Present Condition,” p. 159.
139. Economist, October 8, 1932, p. 635;
140. Hannah, Rise, pp. 84-85;
141. Lucas, Industrial, pp. 156-159;
142. Kirby, “Lancashire Cotton,” p. 152.
143. Pollard, Development, p. 122.
144. See e.g. G.W. Furness, “The Cotton and Rayon Textile Industry,” in D. Burn (ed.), The Structure of British Industry (Cambridge, England, 1958), pp. 187-188; and
145. Kirby, “Lancashire Cotton,” p. 151
146. Federation of Master Cotton Spinners’ Associations, Cotton Spinning Industry Bill (1935): The Industry's Case for the Bill (Manchester, 1935), p. 2.
147. Robson, Cotton Industry, pp. 229, 230, 340.
148. J. Ryan, “Combination in the Cotton Trade,” Journal of the National Federation of Textile Works Managers’ Associations, Vol. VIII. (1928-1929) p. 24.
149. See also H.A. Marquand, The Dynamics of Industrial Combinations (London, 1931), pp. 108-110.
150. Robson, Cotton Industry, pp. 120-121.
151. C. Miles, Lancashire Textiles: A Case Study of Industrial Change (Cambridge, England, 1968), pp. 38-39.
152. See also D.C. Shaw, “Productivity in the Cotton Spinning Industry,” The Manchester School, Vol. XVIII, No. 1, (June 1950).
153. Miles, Lancashire, pp. 26 - 27, 40;
154. Robson, Cotton Industry, p. 219.
155. See also Ormerod, “Prospects,” pp. 8-9.
156. Productivity Team Report, Cotton Weaving, p. 16.
157. Miles, Lancashire, p. 26.
158. Lucas, Industrial Reconstruction, p. 159;
159. Clay, Report, p. 68;
160. Vitkovitch, “U.K. Cotton,” p. 262;
161. Ormerod, “Prospects,” p. 14;
162. UTFWA, Plan, p. 16.
163. See also, F. Vibert, “Economic Problems of the Cotton Industry,” Oxford Economic Papers, N.S., Vol. 18, No. 3, (Nov. 1966).
164. Miles, Lancashire, pp. 44, 73, 120-121.
165. C. Miles, “Protection of the British Cotton Industry,” in W. Corden and G. Fels, Public Assistance to Industry (Boulder, 1976), pp. 203-204.
166. G. Bennett, “The Present Position of the Cotton Industry in Great Britain,” (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Manchester, 1933), ch. III.
167. Miles, Lancashire, p. 44.
168. F. Fishwick and R. Cornu, A Study of the Evolution of Concentration in the United Kingdom Textile Industry (Commission of European Communities, October 1975), pp. 27 - 29;
169. Tippett, Portrait, p. 161.
170. Miles, Lancashire. pp. 65, 85, 87.
171. Robson, Cotton Industry, p. 345;
172. Miles, Lancashire, pp. 13, 85.
173. D.C. Coleman, “Courtaulds and the Beginning of Rayon,” In B. Supple (ed.), Essays in British Business Experience (London, 1974);
174. Coleman, Courtaulds; Knight, Private Enterprise and Public Intervention: The Courtaulds, Volume III (Oxford, 1980), espec. pp. 270 - 281;
175. Miles, Lancashire, pp. 91 - 93;
176. Fishwick and Cornu, Evolution of Concentration, pp. 37-39, 76, 78-79, 188-191.
177. Fishwick and Cornu, Evolution of Concentration, pp. 30, 37 - 39, 179 - 220;
178. W. Reader, Imperial Chemical Industries: Volume II (Oxford, 1975);
179. D. Channon, The Strategy and Structure of British Enterprise (Boston, 1973), pp. 173 - 178.
180. Textile Council, Cotton and Allied Textiles (Manchester, 1969), Vol. I, ch. 2; United Kingdom, Board of Trade, Census of Production, Summary Tables (London, 1970), p. 131/109.
181. Fishwick and Cornu, Evolution of Concentration, p. 21.
182. For an elaboration of this theme, see B. Elbaum and W. Lazonick, “The Decline of the British Economy: An Institutional Perspective,” Harvard Institute of Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 878, January, 1982.
183. R. Coase, “The Nature of the Firm,” Economica, N.S. IV, (November 1937); reprinted In G. Stigler and K. Boulding (eds.), Readings in Price Theory (Chicago, 1952).
184. R. Coase, “Industrial Organization; A Proposal for Research,” In V. Fuchs (ed.), Economic Research: Retrospect and Prospect (New York, 1972), Vol. III.
185. Ormerod, “Prospects,” pp. 10-11.
186. See also U.S. Productivity Team, British Cotton, p. 6;
187. Miles, Lancashire, p. 56;
188. Furness, “Cotton,” pp. 214-217.
189. Chandler, The Visible Hand, Parts II-IV.
190. A. Burnett-Hurst, “Lancashire and the Indian Market,”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. XCV, Part III. (1932), pp. 399-400.
191. see also Pennington, “Competition,” pp. 213-228.
192. see also Robson, Cotton Industry, pp. 215-216;
193. Daniels and Campion, “Cotton Industry,” p. 342.
194. Miles. Lancashire, p. 68.
195. A.M. Alfred, “U.K. Textiles — A Growth Industry,” Transactions of the Manchester Statistical Society. 1965-66, p. 9.
196. Barkin., “Regional Significance”; J. Markham, “Integration in the Textile Industry,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 28, No., 1, (1950);
197. W. Kessler, “Chapters in Business History,” and
198. W. Crook, “Corporate Concentration in the Textile Industry,” both in Textiles —A Dynamic Industry (Colgate University Textile Study Project, 1951);
199. The Merger Movement in the Textile Industry (Washington, 1955);
200. W. Simpson, Some Aspects of America's Textile Industry (Columbia, South Carolina, 1966), ch. 6;
201. Alfred, “U.K. Textiles,” p. 21;
202. A. Chandler, Strategy and Structure (Cambridge, Mass., 1962); Chandler, Visible Hand, Part V.
203. Chandler, “Growth of the Transnational”;
204. see also L. Hannah, “Managerial Innovation and the Rise of the Large-scale Company in Interwar Britain,” Economic History Review, Vol XXVII, No. 2, (May 1974), pp. 252-270;
205. P. Mathias, “Conflicts of Function in the Rise of Big Business: The British Experience,” In H. Williamson (ed.), Evolution of International Management Structures (Newark, Delaware, 1975).
206. Miles, Lancashire, pp. 22-23, 91.
207. Streat, “Cotton industry,” p. 7.
208. Fabian Research Group, Cotton, p. 13n.
209. Miles, Lancashire, p. 74.
210. See e.g. E. Helm, “The Middleman in Commerce,” Transactions of the Manchester Statistical Society, 1900-1901, p. 57;
211. W. Whittam, Report on England's Cotton Industry (Washington, 1907), p. 13;
212. “Problems between spinners and manufacturers, “Journal of the British Association of Managers of Textile Works (Lancashire Section) Vol. III, (1911-1912), pp. 127-136;
213. “The Most Essential Improvement Required in the Cotton Trade,” Journal of the National Federation of Textile Works Managers’ Associations, Vol. V. (1925-1926) pp. 94-96;
214. Bolton and District Managers and Over-lookers’ Association, Report of Delegates on American Tour (Bolton, 1920), p. 39; Streat, “Cotton industry,” p. 3.
215. F. Jones, “The Cotton Spinning Industry in the Oldham District from 1896 to 1914,” (unpublished M. A, Thesis, University of Manchester, 1959).
216. “Combinations,” Journal of the National Federation of Textile Works Managers’ Associations, Vol. XII; 1932-1933, p. 9.
217. See e.g. B. Elbaum and F. Wilkinson, “Industrial Relations and Uneven Development: A Comparative Study of the British and American Steel Industries,” Cambridge Journal of Economics, Vol. 3, No, 3, (September 1979) pp. 275-303;
218. M. Kirby, The British Coalmining Industry (Hamden, 1977);
219. S. Pollard and P. Robertson, The British Shipbuilding Industry 1870-1914 (Cambridge, Mass., 1979).
220. See T. Veblen, Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution (Ann Arbor, 1968), Ch. IV.
221. For discussions of early start hypotheses, see C. Kindleberger, “Obsolescence and Technical Change,” Bulletin of the Oxford Institute of Statistics, August 1961, pp. 281-297;
222. E. Ames and N. Rosenberg, “Changing Technological Leadership and Industrial Growth,” In N. Rosenberg (ed), The Economics of Technological Change (Harmondsworth, 1971), pp. 413-439.
223. A. Levine, Industrial Retardation in Britain, 1880-1914 (London, 1967), ch. 6.
224. M. Frankel, “Obsolescence and Technological Change in a Maturing Economy,” American Economic Review, Vol. XLV, No. 3, (June 1955), pp. 296-297.
225. But see the data in Jones, Increasing Return, p. 277.
226. J. Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development (New York, 1961), p. 60n.
227. See McCloskey and Sandberg, “From Damnation.” See also the collection of essays In D. McCloskey (ed.). Essays on a Mature Economy: Britain after 1840 (London, 1971) and
228. C. Harley, “Skilled Labour and the Choice of Technique in Edwardian Industry,” Explorations in Economic History, Vol. II, No. 4, (Summer 1974), pp. 391-414.
229. see Lazonick, “Factor Costs.”
230. McCloskey and Sandberg, “From Damnation,” pp. 91-94.
231. See e.g. P. Payne, British Entrepreneurship in the Nineteenth Century (London, 1974), pp. 48 - 51:
232. A. Musson, The Growth of British Industry (New York, 1978), p. 163.
233. For a critique, see C. Kindleberger, Economic Response (Cambridge, Mass., 1978), ch. 7.
234. McCloskey and Sandberg, “From damnation,” p. 108.
235. In McCloskey (ed.), Essays, p. 241.
236. D. McCloskey, Economic Maturity and Entrepreneurial Decline: British Iron and Steel 1870-1913 (Cambridge, Mass., 1973).
237. For a much earlier statement of the neoclassical approach, see F. Jervis, “The Handicap of Britain's Early Start,” Manchester School, Vol. XV, No. 1, (January, 1947), p. 212:
238. McCloskey, Economic Maturity, pp. vii-viii;
239. D. McCloskey, “Does the past have useful economics“Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XIV, No. 2, (June 1976), p. 452.
240. See D. Landes, The Unbound Prometheus (Cambridge, England, 1967), p. 354;
241. D. Landes, “Factor Costs and Demand: Determinants of Economic Growth,” Business History, Vol. II, (January 1965), p. 26.
242. In McCloskey (ed.), Essays. pp. 272-277.
243. See also E. Dahmen, Entrepreneurial Activity and the Development of Swedish Industry 1913-1934 (Homewood, 1970).
244. On the conceptual distinction, see J. Schumpeter, “The Analysis of Economic Change,” Review of Economic Statistics, Vol. XVII, No. 4, (May 1935 1, pp. 2-10, and
245. “The Creative Response in Economic History, “Journal of Economic History, Vol. 7, No. 2 (November, 1947), pp. 149-159.
246. both reprinted In R. Clemence (ed.), Essays of J.A. Schumpeter (Cambridge, Mass., 1951), pp. 1-19 and 216-226;
247. G. Evans, “The Entrepreneur and Economic Theory: A Historical and Analytical Approach,” American Economic Review, Vol. XXXIX, No. 3, (May 1949), pp. 336-355;
248. G. Evans, “Business Entrepreneurs: Their Major Functions and Related Tenets, “Journal of Economic History, Vol. XIX, No. 2 (June 1959), pp. 250-270;
249. A. Cole, Business Enterprise in its Social Setting (Cambridge, Mass., 1971);
250. A. Chandler and F. Redlich, “Recent Developments in American Business Administration and Their Conceptualization,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archie, No. 86, (1961), pp. 103-130;
251. H. Hartmann, “Managers and Entrepreneurs: A Useful Distinction?” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 3, (1958-59), pp. 429-451;
252. W. Baumol, “Entrepreneur in Economic Theory,” American Economic Review, Vol. LVIII, No. 2, (May 1968), pp. 64-71;
253. J. Soltow, “The Entrepreneur in Economic History,” American Economic Review, Vol. LVIII, No. 2. (May 1968), pp. 84-92.
254. P. Payne, “Industrial Entrepreneurship and management in Great Britain,” In P. Mathias and M. Postan (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, Vol, VII, Part I, (Cambridge, England, 1978). pp. 180 - 181, 208 - 209
255. N. Leff, “Entrepreneurship and Economic Development: The Problem Revisited,” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XVII, (March 1979), pp. 47, 50 - 51.
256. A recent discussion of British entrepreneurial activity that well reflects this confusion can be found in the opening chapter of M.W. Kirby, The Decline of British Economic Power since 1870 (London. 1981).