Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:32:07.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Yankees of Europe? A New View on Technology and Productivity in German Manufacturing in the Early Twentieth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2016

Marcel P. Timmer ,
Joost Veenstra  and
Pieter J. Woltjer
Marcel P. Timmer
Affiliation:
Marcel P. Timmer is Professor, University of Groningen, Nettelbosje 2, 9747 AE Groningen, The Netherlands. E-mail: m.p.timmer@rug.nl
Joost Veenstra
Affiliation:
Joost Veenstra is Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Groningen, Nettelbosje 2, 9747 AE Groningen, The Netherlands. E-mail: j.veenstra@rug.nl.
Pieter J. Woltjer
Affiliation:
Pieter J. Woltjer is Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Wageningen, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands. E-mail: pieter.woltjer@wur.nl.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Labor productivity in German manufacturing lagged persistently behind the United States in the early twentieth century. Traditionally, this is attributed to dichotomous technology paths across the Atlantic. However, various industry case studies suggest rapid diffusion of U.S. technologies in Germany. We develop a novel decomposition framework based on Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to reconcile these findings. We conclude that by 1936 inefficient assimilation of modern production techniques—and not the use of different techniques—accounted for most of the U.S./German labor-productivity gap. Our findings call for a reappraisal of the drivers behind cross-country differences in manufacturing performance.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , September 2016 , pp. 874 - 908
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We thank Herman de Jong for providing us with his copies of the unpublished archival records of the German production census of 1936 and Tamás Vonyó for suggesting the title of the article. We are indebted to Paul Rhode, whose help has guided us to substantially improve the article. Furthermore, we thank Jochen Streb, Stephen Broadberry, Jan Luiten van Zanden, two anonymous referees and the participants of the 2012 World Economic History Conference, the 2014 Economic History Society Annual Conference, and the Wirtschaftsgeschichte Forschungsseminar at the University of Mannheim for useful comments and suggestions. We are responsible for all errors. This research was supported by a grant of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO; grant no. 360-53-102).

References

REFERENCES

Abramovitz, M. “Resource and Output Trends in the United States Since 1870.” American Economic Review 46, no. 2 1956: 5–23 Google Scholar
Allen, Robert C. “Technology and the Great Divergence: Global Economic Development since 1820.” Explorations in Economic History 49, no. 1 2012: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, Kenneth J. “Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention.” In The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, 609–26. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Anthony B., and Stiglitz, Joseph E.. “A New View of Technological Change.” Economic Journal 79, no. 315 1969: 573–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basu, Susanto, and Weil, David N.. “Appropriate Technology and Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 113, no. 4 1998: 1025–54.Google Scholar
Berthold, Rudolf, ed. Produktivkräfte in Deutschland 1917/18 bis 1945. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar
Board of Trade. Final Report on the Fourth Census of Production of the United Kingdom. London: H.M. Stationery Office, 1930.Google Scholar
Braun, Hans-Joachim. “The National Association of German-American Technologists and Technology Transfer between Germany and the United States.” In History of Technology, edited by Smith, Norman, 15–35. Mansell Publishing Limited, 1984.Google Scholar
Broadberry, Stephen N. “Technological Leadership and Productivity Leadership in Manufacturing since the Industrial Revolution: Implications for the Convergence Debate.” Economic Journal 104, no. 423 1994: 291–302.Google Scholar
Broadberry, Stephen N. The Productivity Race: British Manufacturing in International Perspective, 1850–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, Stephen N., and Burhop, Carsten. “Comparative Productivity in British and German Manufacturing Before World War II: Reconciling Direct Benchmark Estimates and Time Series Projections.” Journal of Economic History 67, no. 2 2007: 315–49.Google Scholar
Broadberry, Stephen N., and Fremdling, Rainer. “Comparative Productivity in British and German Industry 1907–37.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 52, no. 4 1990: 403–21.Google Scholar
Chandler, Alfred. Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Chandler, Alfred. “Organizational Capabilities and the Economic History of the Industrial Enterprise.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 6, no. 3 1992: 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crafts, Nicholas F.R. “Steam as a General Purpose Technology: A Growth Accounting Perspective.” Economic Journal 114, no. 495 2004: 338–51.Google Scholar
David, Paul A. Technical Choice, Innovation and Economic Growth. Essays on American and British Experience in the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
de Jong, Herman. Catching Up Twice: The Nature of Dutch Industrial Growth During the Twentieth Century in a Comparative Perspective. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Jong, Herman, and Woltjer, Pieter J.. “Depression Dynamics: A New Estimate of the Anglo-American Manufacturing Productivity Gap in the Interwar Period.” Economic History Review 64, no. 2 2011: 472–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devine, Warren D. “From Shafts to Wires: Historical Perspective on Electrification.” Journal of Economic History 43, no. 2 1983: 347–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabricant, Solomon. The Output of Manufacturing Industries, 1899–1937. New York: National Bureau Economic Analysis, 1940.Google Scholar
Fabricant, Solomon. Employment in manufacturing, 1899–1939. New York: National Bureau Economic Analysis, 1942.Google Scholar
Färe, Rolf, Grosskopf, Shawna, and Lovell, Knox C.A.. Production Frontiers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Feinstein, Charles H. National Income, Expenditure and Output of the United Kingdom, 1855–1965. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.Google Scholar
Field, Alexander J. “On the Unimportance of Machinery.” Explorations in Economic History 22, no. 4 1985: 378–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, Alexander J. “The Most Technologically Progressive Decade of the Century.” American Economic Review 93, no. 4 2003: 1399–413.Google Scholar
Fremdling, Rainer, de Jong, Herman, and Timmer, Marcel P.. “British and German Manufacturing Productivity Compared: A New Benchmark for 1935/36 Based on Double Deflated Value Added.” Journal of Economic History 67, no. 2 2007: 350–78.Google Scholar
Gerschenkron, Alexander. Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective: A Book of Essays. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Habakkuk, John. American and British Technology in the Nineteenth Century. The Search for Labour-saving Inventions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Hannah, Leslie. “Logistics, Market Size, and Giant Plants in the Early Twentieth Century: A Global View.” Journal of Economic History 68, no. 1 2008: 46–79.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Walther G. Das Wachstum der Deutschen Wirtschaft seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts. Berlin, 1965.Google Scholar
Inklaar, Robert, de Jong, Herman, and Gouma, Reitze. “Did Technology Shocks Drive the Great Depression? Explaining Cyclical Productivity Movements in U.S. Manufacturing, 1919–1939.” Journal of Economic History 71, no. 4 2011: 827–58.Google Scholar
Jerome, Harry. Mechanization in Industry. Vol. 27. National Bureau of Economic Research, 1934.Google Scholar
Keck, Otto. “The National System for Technical Innovation in Germany.” In National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis, edited by Nelson, Richard R., 115–27. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Kendrick, John W. Productivity Trends in the United States. Princeton: National Bureau Economic Research, 1961.Google Scholar
Kindleberger, Charles P. Economic Response: Comparative Studies in Trade, Finance, and Growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Kinghorn, R. Janice, and Nye, John V.. “The Scale of Production in Western Economic Development.” Journal of Economic History 56, no. 1 1996: 90–112.Google Scholar
Kumar, Subodh, and Russell, Robert R.. “Technological Change, Technological Catch-up, and Capital Deepening: Relative Contributions to Growth and Convergence.” American Economic Review 92, no. 3 2002: 527–48.Google Scholar
Los, Bart, and Timmer, Marcel P.. “The ‘Appropriate Technology’ Explanation of Productivity Growth Differentials: An Empirical Approach.” Journal of Development Economics 77, no. 2 2005: 517–31.Google Scholar
Nolan, Mary. Visions of Modernity. American Business and the Modernization of Germany. Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Radkau, Joachim. Technik in Deutschland. Vom 18. Jahrhundert bis Heute. 1989.Google Scholar
Richter, Ralf. “Technology and Knowledge Transfer in the Machine Tool Industry - The United States and Germany, 1870–1930.” Essays in Economic and Business History 26 2008: 173–88.Google Scholar
Richter, Ralf, and Streb, Jochen. “Catching-Up and Falling Behind: Knowledge Spillover from American to German Machine Toolmakers.” Journal of Economic History 71, no. 4 2011: 1006–31.Google Scholar
Ristuccia, Cristiano A., and Tooze, Adam. “Machine Tools and Mass Production in the Armaments Boom: Germany and the United States, 1929–44.” Economic History Review 66, no. 4 2013: 953–74.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Nathan. Exploring the Black Box. Technology, Economics, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Rostas, Laszlo. Comparative Productivity in British and American Industry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1948.Google Scholar
Rothbarth, Erwin. “Causes of the Superior Efficiency of U.S.A. Industry as Compared with British Industry.” Economic Journal 56, no. 223 1946: 383–90.Google Scholar
Schurr, Sam H., Burwell, Calvin C., Devine, Warren D., et al. Electricity in the American Economy: Agent of Technological Progress. Seattle: Praeger, 1990.Google Scholar
Solow, Robert M. “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 70, no. 1 1956: 65–94.Google Scholar
Temin, Peter. “Labour Scarcity in America.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 1, no. 2 1971: 251–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veenstra, Joost, and de Jong, Herman J.. “A Tale of Two Tails: Establishment Size and Labor Productivity in United States and German Manufacturing at the Start of the Twentieth Century.” Australian Economic History Review 56, no. 2 2016. Available online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aehr.12100/abstract.Google Scholar
Woltjer, Pieter. “Taking Over: A New Appraisal of the Anglo-American Productivity Gap and the Nature of American Economic Leadership ca. 1910.” Scandinavian Economic History Review 63, no. 3 2015: 280–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar