economic historian H.  J.  Habakkuk published a comparative study of labor-saving inventions used in early nineteenth-century America and Britain.

               .  . .

                        Most nineteenth-century observers agreed that it was the dearness and the inelasticity of American labor that induced entrepreneurs to replace labor with machines.  In the language of economics, scarcity of labor led Americans to use techniques that were capital intensive.  In times of economic expansion, when the supply of unskilled labor was especially low and the supply of capital high, the relative abundance of skilled labor made it reasonable to seek capital-intensive, labor saving methods of production.

               .  . .

                        Habakkuk's work remains a provocative and controversial attempt to interpret early American technological history by the application of economic theory to historical events and data.  Whatever Habakkuk's shortcomings, he shares with Schmookler the distinction of directing attention to one of the main ways economic forces may generate technological novelties in modern times.  Habakkuk and schmookler can be criticized for laying too great a stress upon the economic basis of innovation.  Rather than dismiss their work for this defect, however, it might be possible to incorporate their insights and conclusions into a more inclusive theory of technological change.

                                                                                    Basalla [1988, 116-119]

ç  Prior Page of Text     Next Page of Text è
(C) 2005-2014 Wayne M. Angel.  All rights reserved.