More Machines, Better Machines…or Better Workers?
How much of the rapid growth in output per man-hour in nineteenth-century cotton weaving arose from technical change and how much arose from price-driven substitution of capital for labor? Using an engineering production function, I find that factor price changes account for little of the growth in output per man-hour. However, much of the growth and most of the apparent labor-saving bias arose not from inventions, but from improved labor quality—better workers spent less time monitoring the looms. Labor quality played a critical role in the persistent association between economic growth and capital deepening in this important sector.
Volume (Year): 72 (2012)
Issue (Month): 01 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://journals.cambridge.org/jid_JEH
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:72:y:2012:i:01:p:44-74_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Keith Waters)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.