DOCSLIB.ORG

Mind Over Matter: Access to Knowledge and the British Industrial Revolution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mind Over Matter: Access to Knowledge and the British Industrial Revolution MIND OVER MATTER: ACCESS TO KNOWLEDGE AND THE BRITISH INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION James Dowey Department of Economic History London School of Economics and Political Science A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 2017 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. This thesis consists of 80,873 words. 2 Acknowledgements Thank you to Max-Stephan Schulze for your faith in this thesis and your invaluable insights and enthusiasm throughout. Thank you to Nick Crafts and Joel Mokyr for kindly examining this thesis and for your extremely helpful suggestions for improvements and extensions. Thank you to LSE for providing me with a scholarship to write this thesis. Thank you to Paul Atherton, Christopher Baxendale, Adrian Beamish, Anthony Bolton, Sean Bottomley, Paul Caruana-Galizia, Chris Colvin, Philip Epstein, Jonathan Haskel, Ed Hopkins, Tim Leunig, Robin Geffen, Stephen Gibbons, Gay Meeks, Alessandro Nuvolari, Stuart Sayer, Stephen Shapin, Luca Serino, Peter Sims, Chris Taylor, Louise Thomas, Oliver Volckart, Patrick Wallis, Caroline Wilcher, Tom Wilcher, Nico Wolf and David Wykes. Without your help and encouragement this would have been a lonely process and a much worse thesis. Thank you and lots of love always Mum, Dad and Shelley. This is dedicated to the three of you. James Dowey London January 2017 3 Abstract This thesis argues that the British Industrial Revolution, which marked the beginning of sustained modern economic growth, was facilitated by the blossoming in eighteenth and early nineteenth century Britain of the world’s first infrastructure for commercial R&D, composed of a network of ‘Knowledge Access Institutions’ (KAIs): scientific societies, ‘mechanics institutes’, public libraries, masonic lodges and other organisations. This infrastructure lowered the cost of access to knowledge for scientists, inventors and entrepreneurs, raising the productivity of R&D and encouraging a sustained increase in R&D effort. This contributed to the acceleration in technological innovation that lay behind the transition to modern economic growth. First, I define the concept of KAIs and explain how they affected the rate of economic growth. Second, I present detailed data on the KAI infrastructure and estimate its effect on the rate of technological innovation during the British Industrial Revolution, using newly constructed spatial datasets on British patents between 1700 and 1852 and exhibits at the Great Exhibition of 1851. Third, I argue that KAIs were largely exogenous to industrialisation, rooted instead in the intellectual developments of the Scientific Revolution and European Enlightenment. Fourth, I show that the prevalence of Knowledge Access Institutions was correlated with the emergence of modern economic growth across countries in the late nineteenth century and that the cost of access to knowledge was a binding constraint to economic progress shared by many countries during this period. Finally, based on the case of late nineteenth century US manufacturing, I investigate the extent to which the emergence of modern economic growth depended on the incentives to innovate rather than the capabilities lent by access to knowledge and other factors. The thesis suggests that the sharp fall in the cost of access to knowledge that we are currently experiencing may give rise to an acceleration in the rate of technological innovation in the coming decades and that policymakers should direct some effort towards mitigating the potentially harmful effects of rapid technological change. 4 Contents List of Tables and Figures ......................................................................................................... 6 Introduction. Access to Knowledge and the British Industrial Revolution ............................... 9 Chapter 1. The Debate: Capabilities versus Incentives ........................................................... 25 Chapter 2. Knowledge Access Institutions and the British Industrial Revolution .................. 34 Chapter 3. Did Knowledge Access Institutions Facilitate Modern Economic Growth? An Empirical Investigation ............................................................................................................ 96 Chapter 4. Why did Britain Build its Knowledge Access Institutions? ‘The Enlightenment Subsidy’ ................................................................................................................................. 145 Chapter 5. The Railway Transport Revolution and Access to Knowledge in the Late Nineteenth Century………………………………………………….………………….......194 Chapter 6. The Demand for Technology and the Emergence of Modern Economic Growth ................................................................................................................................................ 224 Conclusion. Access to Knowledge in the Twenty-First Century ........................................... 249 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 252 5 Figures Page 2.1: Core KAIs in Great Britain, 1700-1851 45 2.2: Core KAIs per 100,000 Capita by British region, 176, 1801 & 1851 45 2.3: Core KAIs: Histogram of lectures per year across KAIs, 1851 46 2.4: Core KAIs: histogram of library books across KAIs in 1851 46 2.5: Masonic Lodges in Great Britain, 1700-1853, London and Provincial 47 2.6: Masonic Lodges per 100,000 Capita by British Region, 1761, 1801 & 1851 48 2.7: Pub. and Priv. Libraries in GB, Yr of Foundation/First Mention, 1700-1850 51 2.8: Pub. and Priv. Libraries in GB per 100K Cap, Yr of Foundation/1st Mention, 1700 1850 51 2.9: Public Libraries by 100,000 Capita British Region, 1761, 1801, 1851 52 2.10: Real price of books 1650-1850 53 2.11: Booksellers in Great Britain, 1500-1850, London Edinburgh and Provincial 54 2.12: Booksellers per 100,000 Capita by British Region, 1761, 1801, 1851 54 2.13: KAIs Per Capita 1761 55 2.14: KAIs Per Capita 1801 56 2.15: KAIs Per Capita 1851 57 2.16: Core KAIs per Capita versus Peripheral KAIs per Capita, 1851 (z-scores) 65 2.17: Mechanism of the Effect of KAIs on Economic Growth 75 2.18: Papers read at the Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow, 1841-42 80 2.19: Two consecutive papers read at the Royal Phil Soc of Glasgow 1841 82 2.20: Royal Society Article Citations by Books, Journals and Other 84 2.21: Royal Society Article Citations by Language 84 2.22: Royal Society Fellowships, Average Age at Election and Death, 1660-2013 85 2.23: Number of Freemasons who were Fellows of Royal Society 88 2.24: % of Fellows of the Royal Society elected during previous 10 years who were Freemasons 88 2.25: Share of joint patents whose co-patentees live in different counties (London patents excluded) 89 2.26: Letter from Erasmus Darwin to Matthew Boulton, 1783/03/04 90 3.1: Partial correlation across countries in 2006 of resident patent filings and R&D spen 102 3.2: English Patent Applications by British Residents, by Year 1617-1852 104 3.3: The distribution of continuous-weighted Woodcroft Reference Index 104 3.4: Patents per Capita by County (centred decade) 107 3.5: High and Low Quality Patents 1750-1800 109 3.6: High and Low Quality Patents 1800-1830 109 3.7: Log relative innovation density 1750-1800 and 1810-1830. 111 3.8: Log Patents per Capita versus Log Core KAIs per Capita in 1851, by County 117 3.9: Change in log of Learned Societies vs change in log of patents, 1817 to 51, by English reg. dis. 117 3.10: Core KAI membership per capita and Exhibits at the Great Exhibition in 1851. 123 3.11: Scatterplot of log of KAI members in 1851 against log of 1851 Great Exhibition exhibitors 124 3.12: Scatterplot of log of KAI members per cap 1851 against log of 1851 exhibitors per cap 124 3.13: Locations of the Great Exhibition 1851 Local Committees 127 3.14: US Agricultural Societies, Absolute and Per 100,000 Capita, 1776-1876 135 3.15: US Agricultural Societies Founded in Each Year, 1785-1876 135 3.16: Decennial % Growth in US Agricultural Value Added Per Gainful Worker 136 3.17: US Agricultural Society Members per 10,000 Rural Population in 1870 137 6 3.18: US Agricultural Patents, 1790-1873 138 4.1: KAIs versus Secondary Sector Employment Ratio by British Registration District 168 4.2: KAI members per Working Population versus Secondary Sector Employment Ratio 169 4.3: KAIs versus Population Density by British Registration District 169 4.4: KAI Members per Working Age Population versus Population Density 169 4.5: Congregations founded in England that would eventually become formally Unitarian 183 4.6: English Dissent in 1729, by English hundreds 185 4.7: Kaplan-Meier survival rates for learned society adoption, by regional dissenting status in 1729 186 4.8: Predicted survival curves for learned society adoption, by regional dissenting status in 1729 188 4.9: The Five Mile Act 1665 189 4.9: Land Area of England Covered by the Five-Mile Act of 1665 190 5.1: Core KAIs per Million Population 1876 196 5.2: (Log) Core KAIs per Capita 1870 vs (Log) GDP per capita 1913 196 5.3: GDP Growth 1870-1913 vs KAI per Capita 1870,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: a Brief History of Corporate Citizenship and Corporate Social Responsibility
    Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: A Brief History of Corporate Citizenship and Corporate Social Responsibility Stephen Jordan with B.J. Parker BCLC’s mission is to promote better business and society relations and improve long-term social and economic conditions by: • Communicating the U.S. private sector’s unique and valuable contributions • Cultivating strategies and practices that achieve positive results • Coordinating public-private partnerships and coalitions 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE: DEFINING CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP AND CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY . .1 CHAPTER TWO: THE ORIGINS OF CAPITALISM AND CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP . .6 CHAPTER THREE: THE RISE OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION AND PATERNALISM . 9 CHAPTER FOUR: THE GILDED AGE AND PERSONAL PHILANTHROPY . .12 CHAPTER FIVE: THE FIRST ETHICAL CORPORATIONS . 15 CHAPTER SIX: THE COMMUNITY CHEST MOVEMENT, THE GREAT DEPRESSION, AND WORLD WAR II . 20 CHAPTER SEVEN: THE 1950s - 1970s . .26 CHAPTER EIGHT: 1980 AND THE DAWN OF THE MODERN CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP MOVEMENT . 31 CHAPTER NINE: THE VIEW FROM OUTSIDE . .35 CHAPTER TEN: THE CONTINUING EVOLUTION OF CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP . 41 CHAPTER ELEVEN: DIFFERENT WAYS THE HISTORY OF CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP COULD BE TOLD . 46 Cover photos (clockwise): Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford, Indra Nooyi (courtesy of PepsiCo), Thomas J. Watson (courtesy of IBM), Robert Wood Johnson II, Bill and Melinda Gates (Wikipedia Commons User Kjetil Ree). About the Authors Stephen Jordan is the founder and executive director of the Business Civic Leadership Center (BCLC), the corporate citizenship affiliate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He is married and has two children. B.J. Parker is a professional writer and editor with more than 10 years’ experience writing business education materials for leading educational publishers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited
    This PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited Volume Author/Editor: Josh Lerner and Scott Stern, editors Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-47303-1; 978-0-226-47303-1 (cloth) Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/lern11-1 Conference Date: September 30 - October 2, 2010 Publication Date: March 2012 Chapter Title: The Rate and Direction of Invention in the British Industrial Revolution: Incentives and Institutions Chapter Authors: Ralf R. Meisenzahl, Joel Mokyr Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c12364 Chapter pages in book: (p. 443 - 479) 9 The Rate and Direction of Invention in the British Industrial Revolution Incentives and Institutions Ralf R. Meisenzahl and Joel Mokyr 9.1 Introduction The Industrial Revolution was the fi rst period in which technological progress and innovation became major factors in economic growth. There is by now general agreement that during the seventy years or so traditionally associated with the Industrial Revolution, there was little economic growth as traditionally measured in Britain, but that in large part this was to be expected.1 The sectors in which technological progress occurred grew at a rapid rate, but they were small in 1760, and thus their effect on growth was limited at fi rst (Mokyr 1998, 12– 14). Yet progress took place in a wide range of industries and activities, not just in cotton and steam. A full description of the range of activities in which innovation took place or was at least attempted cannot be provided here, but inventions in some pivotal industries such as iron and mechanical engineering had backward linkages in many more traditional industries.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    Curriculum Vitae DAVID J. TEECE Thomas W. Tusher Professor in Global Business Faculty Director, Tusher Center for The Management of Intellectual Capital Haas Business and Public Policy Group Direct: 510.285.3221 [email protected] EDUCATION Ph.D. (Economics) University of Pennsylvania, 1975 M.A. University of Pennsylvania, 1973 M.Comm. (Honors I) University of Canterbury, 1971 B.A. University of Canterbury, 1970 PRESENT POSITIONS Professor of Business Administration, Walter A. Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley, 1982–present; Holder, Thomas W. Tusher Chair in Global Business, 2007–present. Faculty advisor to the Vice Chancellor for Research, full semester, 2016. Faculty Director, Tusher Center for the Management of Intellectual Capital, 2015 – present Chairman & Principal Executive Officer, Berkeley Research Group, 2010-present Honorary Professor, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland, 2011–present Honorary Professor of Economics/Business, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia, 2011– present Board of Directors, Independent Institute, Oakland, CA, 2013-present Chairman, Board of Trustees, University of Canterbury Foundation, USA, 2014-present Member, Academic Advisory Counsel, European Business School, Weisbaden, Germany, 2016-present Member, International Advisory Committee, Research Center for Technological Innovation of Tsinghua University, 2017-present Member, EXPEC AR International Advisory Council, 2017-Present PREVIOUS POSITIONS Director, Institute for Business Innovation, University of California, Berkeley, 1984–2014 Honorable Professor, China Zhongnan University of Law and Economics, China, 2007– 2014 Holder, Mitsubishi Bank Chair in International Business and Finance, 1989–2007 Director, Institute of Management, Innovation and Organization (IMIO), University of California, Berkeley, 1994–2008 Director, Cnter for Research in Management (CRM), University of California, Berkeley, 1983–1994 Visiting Fellow, St.
    [Show full text]
  • Cause Change Effect
    Day 2 & 3 Cause and Effect of the Industrial Revolution Using the article “ Industrial Revolution and Technology” complete the cause and effect chart. CAUSE CHANGE EFFECT Farming & Food production methods Deforestation led to shortages of wood for lumber & fuel Switch from wood charcoal to coal product Steam power used to operate looms and other equipment Steam powered and faster ways of transportation emerged such as canals & improved roads Day 3 & 4 Industrial Revolution Timeline 1721: Cromford Mill was the first factory with the first water powered cotton spinning mill. 1733: Flying Shuttle made weaving faster, invented by John Kay. 1760: Industrial Revolution begins in England 1767: Spinning Jenny, a machine that can spin thread more quickly was invented James 1769: Water Frame, improved the Spinning Hargreaves. Jenny, ran on water instead of human labor. 1783: Henry Cort patented the puddling process which allowed wrought iron to be produced in large quantities. 1784: Steam Powered Loom that turned thread into cloth is invented by Edmund Cartwright. 1792-3: Eli Whitney invents the cotton gin, changing the textile sector. Now cotton fiber was separated from seeds through machine. 1831: Electric Generator led to improvements to create the first generator to support a factory. Invented by Michael Faraday. 1837: Telegraph made transmission of messages easier. Invented by William Fothergill & Charles Wheatstone. 1856: Bessemer Converter was the first process of manufacturing steel that wasn’t expensive. Day 3 & 4 Sources Brodsky Schur, J. (2016, September 23). Eli Whitney's Patent for the Cotton Gin. Retrieved June 22, 2021, from http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/cotton-gin-patent Karpiel, F., Krull, K., & Wiggins, G.
    [Show full text]
  • Photo by Chris Crisman
    50PHOTO MAR | APRBY 2008CHRIS THE PENNSYLVANIA CRISMAN GAZETTE ALL BUSINESS David Teece describes himself as a “practicing business intellectual.” That’s not an oxymoron. By Samuel Hughes a sense, it all began with a note from In the late Ed Mansfield. At the time, David Teece G’73 Gr’75 was a graduate student at Penn, having come to Philadelphia from New Zealand to study international economics and industrial organization. That turned out to be the bailiwick of Mansfield, the economics pro- fessor who was internationally recognized for his systematic studies of industry. He had gotten his hands on a paper Teece had written on foreign direct investments, and apparently liked what he saw. “I got this note in my box, saying would I have lunch with Ed Mansfield,” recalls Teece, sitting in the lounge off the Faculty Club during a recent visit to campus. “No other faculty member had ever asked me to have lunch. He said that he was interested in my undergrad thesis and was interested in being my advisor.” Mansfield, Teece recalls, was something of a loner in the economics department, which was then dominated by such legends as Dr. Lawrence Klein Hon’06, now emeritus pro- fessor of economics, who would soon win a Nobel Prize for his work in developing the Wharton Econometric Forecasting Model. As Mansfield saw it, some of the theories that then held sway among economists didn’t always hold water in the fast-changing field of industrial research. “Ed openly displayed almost a disdain for modern economic theory because of the field’s infatuation with static analysis, and its abject failure to embrace the study of technology and technological change,” wrote THE PENNSYLVANIA GAZETTE MAR | APR 2008 51 ALL Teece in a 2005 article in the Journal of mer economics professor at Yale.
    [Show full text]
  • Audit Report to the Readers of University of Canterbury and Group’S Financial Statements for the Year Ended 31 December 2007
    Audit Report To the readers of University of Canterbury and Group’s financial statements for the year ended 31 December 2007 The Auditor-General is the auditor of the misstatements that were not corrected, we Independence University of Canterbury (the University) and would have referred to them in our opinion. When carrying out the audit we followed the group. The Auditor-General has appointed The audit involved performing procedures independence requirements of the Auditor- me, Julian Tan, using the staff and resources to test the information presented in the General, which incorporate the independence of Audit New Zealand to carry out the audit financial statements and statement of service requirements of the Institute of Chartered of the financial statements and statement performance. We assessed the results of those Accountants of New Zealand. of service performance of the University and procedures in forming our opinion. In addition to the annual audit of the group, on his behalf, for the year ended 31 Audit procedures generally include: University and its subsidiaries, we perform December 2007. • determining whether significant financial an annual audit of the Vice-Chancellor’s and management controls are working and declaration on the performance-based Unqualified opinion can be relied on to produce complete and research fund external research income In our opinion: accurate data; and other audit-related assignments. These • the financial statements of the University assignments are compatible with those • verifying samples of transactions and independence requirements. and group on pages 49 to 79: account balances; – comply with generally accepted Other than the audit and these assignments, • performing analyses to identify anomalies in we have no relationship with or interests in accounting practice in New Zealand; the reported data; and the University or any of its subsidiaries.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA the Wharton School Mgmt 925 Dr
    UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA The Wharton School Mgmt 925 Dr. Harbir Singh Spring, 2018 3456 SHDH 898-6752 [email protected] Seminar on Corporate Strategy _________________________________________________________________________ Course Description This course explores current research on corporate strategy. Over the past two decades, research in the area of corporate strategy has evolved considerably. The fundamental focus of the field has been on sources of competitive advantage at the level of the firm, and the process of building and maintaining competitive advantage. In this class, we explore current research articles that best represent the development of rent-generating resources at the level of the firm. Topics addressed include the concept of strategy, research on the evolution of firm capabilities, competitive interaction, top management teams and strategy formation, and changes in firm scope through acquisitions, divestitures and alliances. Pedagogy and Evaluation This course is taught through a set of readings. A wide range of issues relating to effective research in corporate strategy are discussed. The readings are a mix of theoretical and empirical articles. The intent is to provide multiple theoretical lenses on the topics we address in the course. Using the half-semester format, sessions 1 through 6 of the syllabus below will constitute 1 the course. I have added optional readings after session 6 as indications of topics on corporate scope that could be explored further. Many of these, and higher level readings, will be covered in Mgmt 926 which is offered every other year. You will be required to write a three-page critique of a selected article from the readings assigned for each day.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Metallurgy
    History of Metallurgy by Rochelle Forrester Copyright © 2019 Rochelle Forrester All Rights Reserved The moral right of the author has been asserted Anyone may reproduce all or any part of this paper without the permission of the author so long as a full acknowledgement of the source of the reproduced material is made. Second Edition Published 30 September 2019 Preface This paper was written in order to examine the order of discovery of significant developments in the history of metallurgy. It is part of my efforts to put the study of social and cultural history and social change on a scientific basis capable of rational analysis and understanding. This has resulted in a hard copy book How Change Happens: A Theory of Philosophy of History, Social Change and Cultural ​ Evolution and a website How Change Happens Rochelle Forrester’s Social Change, Cultural ​ ​ Evolution and Philosophy of History website. There are also philosophy of history papers such as The ​ ​ Course of History, The Scientific Study of History, Guttman Scale Analysis and its use to explain ​ ​ ​ ​ Cultural Evolution and Social Change and Philosophy of History and papers on Academia.edu, ​ ​ ​ Figshare, Humanities Commons, Mendeley, Open Science Framework, Orcid, Phil Papers, SocArXiv, ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Social Science Research Network, Vixra and Zenodo websites. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ This paper is part of a series on the History of Science and Technology. Other papers in the series are The Invention of Stone Tools Fire The Neolithic Revolution The Invention of Pottery ​ History
    [Show full text]
  • An Industrial Revolution in Iron—Technology, Organisation and Markets, 1760–1870
    CHAPTER FOUR AN INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN IRON—TECHNOLOGY, ORGANISATION AND MARKETS, 1760–1870 Baltic iron had come to dominate the British market because of the incapacity of Britain’s own forge sector. British ironmasters lacked the energy resources to keep pace with the heightening demand for mal- leable iron on their domestic market. Some ironmasters sought to over- come this de ciency by organisational means. They hoped to raid the abundant energy reserves of British North America by transferring the preliminary stages of the production chain to the colonies. An Atlantic iron trade, with smelting out-sourced to the charcoal-rich plantations, would be a reproof to the ‘Ignorance & wrong reasonings’ of those Swedish ministers who maintained ‘that England can not be without their Iron’.1 That hope was, as we have seen, thwarted. The alternative to organisational re-jigging was technological transfor- mation. Technological revolution there was, as every textbook on British economic history makes clear. Smelting with coke and the development of coal- red re\ ning methods, most notably Henry Cort’s puddling technique, freed the British iron industry from its dependence upon vegetable fuel in spectacular fashion. Yet technological change could not be conjured up at will. The development of effective coal-based tech- nologies was a drawn-out, tortuous business. Some elements of the ‘coal technology package’ were present by the rst decade of the eighteenth century, but it was not until the 1790s that the iron industry turned fully to a mineral fuel platform. Indeed, it was not until the Napoleonic era that the combination of coke smelting, puddling furnaces, rolling mills, and steam power became the industry standard.
    [Show full text]
  • What Role for Strategic Management Expertise?
    PANEL II: TOPICS IN ANTITRUST TO WHICH PROFESSOR BRODLEY CONTRIBUTED ANTITRUST – WHAT ROLE FOR STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT EXPERTISE? FELIX OBERHOLZER-GEE & DENNIS A. YAO∗ INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1457 I. WHAT IS STRATEGY? ........................................................................ 1458 II. HOW DOES STRATEGY DIFFER FROM ECONOMICS? .......................... 1461 III. ANTITRUST LAW AND ECONOMICS (AND STRATEGY) ....................... 1464 IV. THE (NON) INFLUENCE OF STRATEGY SCHOLARSHIP ON ANTITRUST LAW – A ROUGH CUT .................................................... 1469 V. WHY HAS STRATEGY HAD LITTLE INFLUENCE IN THE AREA OF ANTITRUST? ...................................................................................... 1475 INTRODUCTION The purpose of antitrust law is to promote competition and protect consumers from anticompetitive business practices. Enforcing antitrust rules thus requires an understanding of what constitutes an anticompetitive business practice; an understanding influenced by both legal precedent and broader knowledge of markets, companies, and competition. This Essay traces the influence of two academic fields – economics and strategic management – on antitrust law. Both fields are natural candidates to influence courts, government competition authorities, and legal scholars, but, as we will document, strategic management appears to have had little influence to date. We begin with a brief description of strategic management
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling a Paradigm Shift: from Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation
    Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation Carliss Baldwin* and Eric von Hippel** November 2009, Revised August 2010 MIT Sloan School of Management Working Paper # 4764-09 Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper No. 10-038 SSRN download url: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1502864 *Harvard Business School ([email protected]) **MIT Sloan School of Management ([email protected]) ABSTRACT In this paper we assess the economic viability of innovation by producers relative to two increasingly important alternative models: innovations by single user individuals or firms, and open collaborative innovation. We analyze the design costs and architectures and communication costs associated with each model. We conclude that both innovation by individual users and open collaborative innovation increasingly compete with and may displace producer innovation in many parts of the economy. We explain why this represents a paradigm shift with respect to innovation research, policymaking, and practice. We discuss important implications and offer suggestions for further research. 1 Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1502864 Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation 1. Introduction and Overview Ever since Schumpeter (1934) promulgated his theory of innovation, entrepreneurship, and economic development, economists, policymakers, and business managers have assumed that the dominant mode of innovation is a “producers’ model.” That is, it has been assumed that most important designs for innovations would originate from producers and be supplied to consumers via goods and services that were for sale. This view seemed reasonable on the face of it – producer-innovators generally profit from many users, each purchasing and using a single, producer-developed design.
    [Show full text]
  • The Contributions of Warfare with Revolutionary and Napoleonic France to the Consolidation and Progress of the British Industrial Revolution
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by LSE Research Online Economic History Working Papers No: 264/2017 The Contributions of Warfare with Revolutionary and Napoleonic France to the Consolidation and Progress of the British Industrial Revolution Revised Version of Working Paper 150 Patrick O’Brien London School of Economics St Anthony’s College, Oxford Economic History Department, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, London, UK. T: +44 (0) 20 7955 7084. F: +44 (0) 20 7955 7730 LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC HISTORY WORKING PAPERS NO. 264 – JUNE 2017 The Contributions of Warfare with Revolutionary and Napoleonic France to the Consolidation and Progress of the British Industrial Revolution Patrick Karl O’Brien London School of Economics St Anthony’s College, Oxford “Great Britain is under weightier obligation to no mortal man than to this very villain. For whereby the occurrences whereof he is the author, her greatness prosperity, and wealth, have attained their present elevation.” A Prussian General’s reference to Napoleon at the Congress of Vienna, 18151 Abstract This revised and reconfigured essay surveys a range of printed secondary sources going back to publications of the day (as well as includes research in primary sources) in order to revive a traditional and unresolved debate on economic connexions between the French and Industrial Revolutions. It argues that the costs flowing from the reallocation of labour, capital
    [Show full text]