IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jechis/v57y1997i04p879-906_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Rising Share of British Industrial Exports in Industrial Output, 1700–1851

Author

Listed:
  • Esteban, Javier Cuenca

Abstract

Ongoing research on British overseas trade does not support supply-side explanations of British industrialization. Contrary to widely publicized views, the share of British industrial exports in alternative measures of industrial output rose almost continuously throughout the period 1723 to 1851. This finding rests on the official values of British domestic exports, and it is confirmed by new annual estimates of Britain's domestic export, and it is confirmed by new annual estimates of Britain's domestic export values at current an constant prices form 1772 to 1821. Further research on prices, and on Britain's strikingly underutilized trade records, may lead to a more balanced perception of supply and demand forces during the Industrial Revolution.

Suggested Citation

  • Esteban, Javier Cuenca, 1997. "The Rising Share of British Industrial Exports in Industrial Output, 1700–1851," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(4), pages 879-906, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:57:y:1997:i:04:p:879-906_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022050700019574/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:tcd:wpaper:tep9 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kevin H. O'Rourke, Leandro Prados de la Escosura and Guilllaume Daudin, 2008. "Trade and Empire, 1700-1870," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp249, IIIS.
    3. Kevin O'Rourke, 2005. "The worldwide economic impact of the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars," Trinity Economics Papers 200059, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    4. Thomas, Ryland & Hills, Sally & Dimsdale, Nicholas, 2010. "The UK recession in context — what do three centuries of data tell us?," Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin, Bank of England, vol. 50(4), pages 277-291.
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6149 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Indrajit Ray, 2009. "Identifying the woes of the cotton textile industry in Bengal: tales of the nineteenth century," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 62(4), pages 857-892, November.
    7. Gavin Wright, 2020. "Slavery and Anglo‐American capitalism revisited," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 73(2), pages 353-383, May.
    8. Stokey, Nancy L., 2001. "A quantitative model of the British industrial revolution, 1780-1850," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 55-109, December.
    9. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/6149 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. O'Brien, Patrick, 2007. "The triumph and denouement of the British fiscal state: taxation for the wars against Revolutionary and Napoleonic France, 1793-1815," Economic History Working Papers 22319, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    11. Francis, Joseph A., 2014. "Resolving the Halperín Paradox: The Terms of Trade and Argentina’s Expansion in the Long Nineteenth Century," MPRA Paper 57915, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Kevin H. O'Rourke, 2006. "War and Welfare: Britain, France and the United States 1807-14," Trinity Economics Papers tep2008, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    13. Jordan Roulleau-Pasdeloup, 2016. "What Made Great Britain so Great? From the Fiscal-Military State to the First Industrial Revolution," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 16.02, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    14. Baomin Dong & Jiong Gong & Kaixiang Peng & Zhongxiu Zhao, 2015. "Little Divergence: Evidence from Cotton Textiles in Japan and China 1868–1930," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 776-796, November.
    15. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/6149 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Peter Maw, 2010. "Yorkshire and Lancashire ascendant: England's textile exports to New York and Philadelphia, 1750–1805," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 63(3), pages 734-768, August.
    17. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/6149 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:57:y:1997:i:04:p:879-906_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jeh .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.