Indirect, Embodied Transfer
Bookmark this page

1815 – 1830 exports 1 quarter to 1 third of total output – 1830 to 1870 exports rose to 60% total production British ironmasters maintained and perhaps strengthened the strong intl. Competitive position they has established n the early part of the century however only maintain this export position by diverting her incremental deliveries after 1850 to less developed Russia and India as opposed to Belgium France and Germany – shift to lower stages of production bar to pig.

Continental charcoal could expand despite inevitable LR demise due to high tariff barriers and transport costs – however led to developed mineral fuel system even when natural endowment less favourable than Britain’s – modern iron industry develops relatively short time Germany after sharp increase demand mass-produced iron (railways) – Britain helped her foreign competitors by delivering vast amounts cheaper coke pig iron – then worked up and rolled in foundries abroad

From 1840s onwards Britain increasingly began to lose her absolute advantage in the 2^nd stage of iron production

Export statistics show increasing dependency on export markets 1820 to 1870 – bar iron diverted from core to periphery – 3 important consumers: United States, France and Germany

British competition in Gerany not attributed to tarrifs – see Zolverein low tariff policy and transport costs not large – supply side old way Germany ironmasters hold orders as customers preferred bar iron with charcoal  bar iron made with new technique in Great Britain did not yet replace the traditionally produced iron – only allow substitution competition with big price differences.

Since the early 1840s British iron produced with modern techniques had forced German ironmasters to switch the new methods of retire from production – pressure from abroad intensified through the erection of modern puddling and rolling mills in midst German coalfields – brand new iron industry

Tariff distinction between bar iron and pig iron incited German ironmasters to turn to the 2^nd stage of iron production (no tariff pig iron until 1844) – where they owned comp. Ad  - in puddling and rolling mills quickly imported modern technology directly – modern technology of first stage of production developed more slowly – 1840s and 1850s pronounced partition of iron production among domestic and foreign regions – Germans bar iron and rails – Belgians and scots pig iron as input (Ruhr Model)

French ironmasters comparative disadvantage in foreign trade for 1820s to 1850s – foreign trade never gained very high proportion cf. with production

Other Notes in this Category

1. Adaptations of the Traditional Sector
2. Conclusions
3. Definitions and Historiography
4. Direct Transfer
5. Economic Growth in france and britain, 1830-1910 –a review of the evidence
6. Grantham: survey of cliometric contributions to french economic history
7. Growth Rates, Data and Methods
8. Indirect, Embodied Transfer
9. Kindelberger’s review of keyder and o’brien
10. Pioneer industrialiser
11. Post 1750 Growth Coke-Smelting Sector
12. Richard roehl – french industrialisation: a reconstruction
13. Structural Change
14. Technological Transfer: failure, partial adaptations, success
15. The Innovations of the coke blast furnace, of puddling and rolling
16. The modern technology breakthrough ‘right down the line’
17. Tom Kemp – industrialization in nineteenth century europe

Didn't find this useful?

• Visit Coursework.Info for over 14,000 GCSE, A-Level and University Essays