各国市场的动态和产品贸易的全球化
根据米歇尔-奥利斯（Michel Oris）的课程改编[1][2]
地结构与乡村社会： 前工业化时期欧洲农民分析 ● 旧政体的人口制度：平衡状态 ● 十八世纪社会经济结构的演变： 从旧制度到现代性 ● 英国工业革命的起源和原因] ● 工业革命的结构机制 ● 工业革命在欧洲大陆的传播 ● 欧洲以外的工业革命：美国和日本 ● 工业革命的社会成本 ● 第一次全球化周期阶段的历史分析 ● 各国市场的动态和产品贸易的全球化 ● 全球移民体系的形成 ● 货币市场全球化的动态和影响：英国和法国的核心作用 ● 工业革命时期社会结构和社会关系的变革 ● 第三世界的起源和殖民化的影响 ● 第三世界的失败与障碍 ● 不断变化的工作方法： 十九世纪末至二十世纪中叶不断演变的生产关系 ● 西方经济的黄金时代： 辉煌三十年（1945-1973 年） ● 变化中的世界经济：1973-2007 年 ● 福利国家的挑战 ● 围绕殖民化：对发展的担忧和希望 ● 断裂的时代：国际经济的挑战与机遇 ● 全球化与 "第三世界 "的发展模式
十八世纪末至二十世纪初是世界经济史上的一个关键时期，其特点是各国互动和参与国际贸易的方式发生了重大转变。这个时代的特征是从孤立和地方微观经济向以复杂的相互联系和战略互补为特征的全球化经济过渡。这一时代的形成得益于运输和通信领域的革命性进步，这些进步扩大了市场，降低了成本，改变了全球的贸易关系和生产结构。
十九世纪始于拿破仑战争的残余，欧洲各国摆脱了长期的冲突状态，转而采取保护主义政策来重建和保护其刚刚起步的经济。然而，随着时间的推移，工业化和技术创新（尤其是在英国）开创了自由贸易和商业主导的时代，为现代全球化奠定了基础。
在此期间，危机和繁荣的循环挑战着现有的经济模式，迫使各国进行调整和应对。19 世纪末，美洲廉价谷物的涌入引发了农业危机，促使欧洲国家质疑其对进口的依赖，并在耕作方式上进行创新。与此同时，在工业繁荣期，新的强国崛起，利用先进的技术与工业革命的先驱们相抗衡。
在 20 世纪之交，英国面对其工业基础设施的相对过时，选择了维持自由贸易，依靠其帝国和在世界贸易中的核心作用来驾驭这些不断变化的水域。与此同时，法国和德国等国受益于庞大的国内市场，采取了有针对性的保护主义，以促进国内增长。其他国家，如瑞士和丹麦，则奉行李嘉图式的专业化，在日益多元化和一体化的全球经济中找到了自己的位置。
运输革命和市场扩张
18 世纪，基础设施的改善，尤其是道路的改善，促进了远距离贸易。铺设路面的道路取代了过去的土路，大大降低了运输成本和时间。这使得当地市场得以发展和连接，形成了广泛的贸易网络。
运河的发展是向前迈出的一大步，它连接了河流，在生产中心和市场之间开辟了直接的水路。这些大型项目需要大量投资，通常由股份公司提供资金，让众多投资者参与其中。这种融资方式为 19 世纪的基础设施投资（如铁路）奠定了基础。随着 19 世纪铁路的出现，运输革命宣告完成。
火车速度快、装载量大、可靠性高，大大降低了运输成本，开辟了新的市场，促进了地区专业化。其结果是规模经济的增加以及国内和国际产品市场的形成。这些变化深刻地改变了社会的经济结构，促进了国际贸易，加快了工业化进程，并影响了殖民帝国的发展。
高效的运输网络还促进了思想和创新的传播，在全球经济史上发挥了关键作用。1761 年在英国开通的布里奇沃特运河降低了曼彻斯特的煤炭成本，改变了当地的工业。1825 年开通的斯托克顿至达林顿铁路开创了铁路客货运输时代，为铁路网的广泛使用拉开了序幕，从而重塑了全球经济。
19 世纪 30 年代的第一条铁路线作为原型运行，让银行家们相信了这项新技术的潜力。铁路与蒸汽机的结合促进了这种运输方式的快速发展。铁路最初是为运输煤炭而设计的，煤炭是新兴工业的必需品，但很快就被改造成了客运工具。
铁路通过利物浦和曼彻斯特铁路将曼彻斯特和利物浦等工业中心连接起来，提高了原材料和成品的运输效率。1825 年开通的斯托克顿至达林顿铁路线虽然最初是为运煤而设计的，但很快就开始利用货运列车上的车厢运送乘客。铁路的成功使许多城镇建造了具有纪念意义的车站，成为进步和创新的象征。例如，1852 年在伦敦修建的国王十字车站不仅改变了城市面貌，还推动了周边城市的发展。
除经济影响外，铁路还对文化产生了重大影响，缩短了人们的距离感，并影响了社会实践。更快捷的旅程带来了新的休闲方式，例如城市居民的海滨一日游，1841 年布莱顿铁路服务就是一个例证。正是这些创新和调整巩固了铁路作为工业革命支柱和现代大众交通基础设施先驱的地位。
十九世纪五十年代，英国和比利时出现了重要的经济动脉--大铁路线，十九世纪六十年代，法国也出现了大铁路线，它们主要从巴黎向外辐射。欧洲铁路网建成后，平均时速达到了惊人的 40 公里/小时，确保了整个欧洲大陆的运输性能和可靠性。技术创新使重型货物（如钢筋）的长距离运输变得前所未有的容易。这一进步使工业摆脱了地域限制，例如在瑞士可以使用圣埃蒂安生产的铸铁制造金属板。
铁路网广泛的物流能力为跨国生产链和地区专业化铺平了道路。1914 年标志着欧洲铁路网的全盛时期，而此时第一次世界大战刚刚开始，地缘政治和经济格局正在重新定义。战后，尽管铁路网进行了重建和现代化改造，但由于高速公路的兴起，铁路的地位开始下降，这标志着以汽车和公路运输为主的新一轮运输革命。
这个时代的一个显著例子是巴黎东站（Gare de l'Est），它于 1849 年落成，是通往法国东部和其他地区的线路的起点。1883 年修建的连接巴黎和伊斯坦布尔的东方快车线路是欧洲铁路网成熟的又一见证，它提供了跨越多个国家和文化的豪华服务，象征着欧洲的互联互通。铁路网不仅改变了物流和贸易，还塑造了欧洲各国的社会、文化甚至政治生活，将遥远的地区联系在一起，促进了前所未有的交流和融合。
拓展视野：改善交通网络
19 世纪交通的进步，尤其是铁路的发展，大大扩展了在一定时间内可以到达的地区。这种流动性的革命使工人能够住在离工作地点更远的地方，而又不影响他们每天到达工作地点的能力。事实上，通勤列车开始服务于城市周边地区，从而导致了郊区住宅的出现。例如，在英国，1863 年伦敦大都会铁路等线路的开通，使工人们能够在市中心工作的同时，居住在新区（如 Metroland）。这种从住宅区向郊区的迁移有助于改变城市结构，将住宅区与工业区分隔开来，并有可能提高工人的生活质量，因为他们现在可以逃离城市工业中心的污染和拥挤。
.JPG)
The advent of steamships in the 19th century marked a turning point in maritime navigation. The steam engine made sail propulsion obsolete, allowing ships to sail independently of the whims of winds and currents. Initially equipped with side-mounted paddlewheels, steamships had to adapt to cope with the tumultuous waters of the Atlantic. The introduction of paddlewheels under the hull, or propellers, improved the stability and efficiency of the ships, reducing the duration of transatlantic crossings from thirty to fifteen days.
These regular, faster crossings enabled the establishment of a reliable transatlantic transport network, paving the way for smoother international trade. The replacement of wood by steel plates in shipbuilding also contributed to the creation of larger, stronger and lighter ships.
The first successful crossing of the Atlantic by a steamship, the SS Savannah, took place in 1819, although much of the journey was made under sail. This success paved the way for other innovations, such as the Great Eastern, which in 1859 achieved the feat of laying the first transatlantic telegraph cable, linking Europe and New York. This technical feat had far-reaching implications, enabling instant communication between continents and unifying the world's financial markets, with direct repercussions for the Wall Street and City of London stock exchanges. This connection ushered in the era of global communication and laid the foundations for the globalised economy.
This historical map from the 19th century shows the submarine telegraph lines between America and Europe. It shows the various submarine cable routes across the Atlantic. It is interesting to note the presence of "The Great Atlantic Cable", which was probably the first transatlantic cable laid in 1858. The map also shows the contours of the North American and European coasts, with a longitude scale at the bottom, indicating the distances between the various points. Land areas are coloured differently to distinguish territories, and annotations can be seen that might provide additional information about the cable or relevant geographical features. This type of map was essential for planning and demonstrating the technological achievements of the time, particularly in the fields of communication and international trade. The ability to transmit information rapidly between continents ushered in a new era of economic globalisation and communication. This had a considerable impact on the financial markets, as mentioned above, enabling almost instantaneous exchanges of information and greatly influencing economic and political decisions on a global scale.
From 1850 onwards, the globalisation of trade was propelled by the advent of steamship and rail transport. These means of transport made it possible to move goods over long distances reliably and economically. As a result, the world economy developed, characterised by the increasing integration of national economies into a global trading system.
The influx of Asian rice into Europe is an example of how food products have become items of international trade, changing local eating habits and industries. Similarly, raw materials mined in the colonies could now be transported to the metropolises for processing, fuelling the burgeoning industries of the Industrial Revolution.
The role of the railways in economic integration was decisive. They linked remote regions to industrial centres and ports, facilitating the export of manufactured goods and the import of raw materials. For example, the construction of the Trans-Siberian railway in Russia opened up the far east to exports and facilitated the integration of this vast region into the Russian national economy.
The steamship had a similar impact worldwide, shortening journey times between continents. Shorter transit times not only made international trade more efficient, but also meant that perishable goods could be kept fresh over longer distances.
Finally, the introduction of regular shipping services, such as those operated by the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company (P&O), has transformed international trade, offering reliable and regular links between Europe, Asia and beyond. The ability to predict deliveries and synchronise supply chains profoundly changed the way trade was conducted, making the late 19th century a key period in the formation of the global economy we know today.
Uniform markets and local responses
Standardising prices worldwide
.png){kind=spacer}
The graph entitled "Real cost of ocean transport (1910 = 100)" illustrates the evolution of the cost of maritime transport over a period extending from 1750 to 1910. It shows a significant reduction in costs over time, with 1910 used as the reference point where the index is set at 100. In 1750, the cost was significantly higher than in 1910, reflecting the relative high cost of transporting goods by sea at that time. Throughout the 18th and early 19th centuries, although improvements were made, costs remained high, as evidenced by the 1830 index which, although slightly lower than in 1750, was still well above the base of 100. However, there was a marked transition between 1830 and 1870, when costs fell significantly below the base index. This marked fall corresponds to the era of the Industrial Revolution, characterised by major advances such as improved navigation techniques, increased ship capacity and the introduction of steamships. By 1910, the cost of ocean transport had reached its lowest level for the period under review, underlining the considerable impact of technological innovation in reducing the cost and efficiency of maritime transport. This downward trend has fuelled an increase in international trade and played a key role in global economic integration, allowing goods to move more fluidly across the oceans and having a profound impact on the global economy.
Improvements in transport infrastructure during the 18th and 19th centuries profoundly transformed the economy, from isolated local micro-economies to a more homogenous and interconnected economic space. The high cost of land transport under the Ancien Régime limited trade to local markets, but with the significant reduction in these costs thanks to new technologies, producers were able to extend their commercial reach.
Lower transport costs have enabled Geneva, which produces wheat at a lower cost, to compete with the Berne market. Previously, the additional cost of transport prevented Geneva wheat from being competitive in Berne. However, with the reduction in transport costs, Genevan wheat has become economically viable on the Berne market, forcing local producers to adapt, either by reducing their prices, increasing their quality, or seeking competitive advantages elsewhere.
This dynamic has created a mechanism for equalising prices across the different regions, helping to harmonise prices within the same national or even international market. Competition between local markets has therefore stimulated efficiency and innovation, while exposing local producers to price pressure and external competition.
This economic integration also had social and political implications, as governments had to negotiate trade agreements and tariffs to protect their local economies, while taking advantage of the opportunities offered by enlarged markets.
Regional adaptations in the face of globalisation
Changes in modes of transport and the fall in associated costs led to a restructuring of regional economies and increased specialisation along the lines of Ricardo's principles of comparative advantage. Regions began to concentrate on the production of goods for which they had the greatest relative efficiency, resulting in a reduction in the protected industries that had survived due to isolation and high transport costs. However, this specialisation could also prove to be a double-edged sword. Regions that based their economy on a single industrial or agricultural sector found themselves vulnerable to fluctuations in that sector. If this sector went into crisis, the region could suffer severe economic downturns without other sectors to cushion the blow. There were also regions that had no obvious sectors for profitable specialisation. These regions risked being marginalised in an increasingly globalised economy, where international competition could wipe out local industries that were not competitive on the world market. So while some territories prospered in the new globalised economy, others struggled to find their place in this rapidly changing economic order.
The integration of markets on various scales, whether regional, continental or global, has had complex and often contradictory social repercussions. In regions where goods have traditionally been expensive, consumers have benefited from the lower prices resulting from the opening up of markets. This has increased their purchasing power and given them access to a wider variety of products. However, this same opening has put unfavourable pressure on local producers and traders in regions where these products were previously sold at higher prices due to isolation or trade protection. Without the ability to compete with import prices or with goods produced more efficiently in other regions, many local producers have gone out of business or have had to adapt significantly in order to survive. The removal of market protections has therefore led to increased competition, which may have stimulated innovation and efficiency in some sectors, but has also led to economic disruption and job losses in others. The social consequences of this transition have often required a policy response, either through the introduction of new forms of support for sectors in difficulty, or through the implementation of policies aimed at facilitating professional retraining and labour mobility.
Transatlantic farm crisis: The impact of American cereals
The end of the American Civil War ushered in a period of national reconstruction in which the country's unity was symbolised by the development of a vast transcontinental rail network. The completion of the first transcontinental rail line in 1869 linked the eastern and western United States, enabling the efficient transport of agricultural products from the Great Plains to domestic and export markets.
This new transport capacity had a dramatic impact on world agricultural markets. Trains could now fill their cars with Midwestern wheat and move it quickly to the coasts, where it was loaded onto steamships and exported en masse to Europe. This flood of American wheat onto European markets led to a fall in prices, making traditional European agricultural production uncompetitive.
The great agricultural crisis of 1873 to 1890 in Europe was exacerbated by this transatlantic competition. European farmers, many of whom worked less extensive and less mechanised land than their American counterparts, were unable to compete with the production costs and prices of American wheat. As a result, many farms went bankrupt or were forced to switch production, causing a prolonged period of economic hardship and social distress for Europe's rural communities.
Agricultural and industrial transformations
In the 1880s, the European wine industry was devastated by the phylloxera epidemic, a plague caused by an aphid native to North America that attacks the roots of vines. This disaster forced European winegrowers to reconsider their agricultural practices. Faced with the destruction of their vineyards, they had to find new sources of income, which accelerated the transition from subsistence farming based on cereals to speculative commercial farming.
This new form of agriculture focused on the production of high value-added goods such as meat, dairy products, sugar and fruit, aimed at satisfying the growing demand from urban populations. Subsistence farming, which had historically been aimed at ensuring food self-sufficiency for rural households, gradually gave way to specialised forms of animal husbandry and crop production intended for sale on booming urban markets.
Switzerland, with its mountainous geography, was a notable exception to this transition. Swiss farmland was less suited to large-scale cereal crops but lent itself well to livestock farming, particularly cattle. Swiss farmers therefore already had a long tradition of dairy farming and cheese production, which put them in an advantageous position to meet urban demand. Switzerland's geographical constraints thus favoured the early development of specialised commercial farming, enabling it to adapt more easily to the changes in the European agricultural market at the end of the 19th century.
Between protectionism and free trade: Trade policies in transition
Protectionism often emerges in response to the pressure of foreign competition on domestic industries. Governments that adopt protectionist policies generally impose customs duties on imports, quotas, or other restrictions that increase the cost of foreign products on the domestic market. The idea is to make domestic products more competitive in terms of price or to give domestic industry time to adapt and modernise in the face of international competition. These measures can encourage the development and survival of fledgling or struggling industrial sectors, by offering them a kind of shield against cheap and often more competitive imports. Protectionism can also take the form of direct government subsidies to local industries or specific regulations favouring national companies. However, protectionism is a subject of intense economic debate. Critics argue that it leads to overall inefficiency, higher prices for consumers and trade retaliation, while supporters argue that it is necessary to protect jobs and national industrial skills. The balance between the benefits of protecting local industries and the potential costs to consumers and the global economy is at the heart of discussions on protectionism.
Free trade is a trade policy based on the principle of reducing or eliminating tariff and non-tariff barriers between countries. This allows goods and services to move across international borders with a minimum of hindrance. Free trade agreements are often put in place to encourage this type of trade, with the idea that this can boost economic efficiency by allowing markets to adjust naturally to supply and demand conditions on a global scale. Under free trade, countries concentrate on producing goods and services in which they have a comparative advantage, i.e. which they can produce more efficiently or at lower cost than others. In theory, this should lead to a more efficient allocation of resources, higher economic growth, lower prices for consumers, and greater diversity of choice in the marketplace. However, while free trade can bring efficiency gains and consumer benefits, it can also lead to job losses in industries that cannot compete with low-cost imports and to downward pressure on wages in some sectors. Free trade debates therefore focus on striking a balance between the benefits of open markets and the protection of domestic industries and workers.
From post-Napoleonic isolationism to free trade
The period following the Napoleonic Wars was marked by a strong protectionist movement across Europe. In the aftermath of the 1815 war, nations devastated by conflict sought to rebuild their economies. Protectionism emerged as a way for these countries to protect themselves against the commercial dominance of Britain, which had made significant progress in the Industrial Revolution while other nations were mired in war. For countries like France and Belgium, which were beginning their own industrialisation, protectionism provided an environment where fledgling industries could develop without being stifled by competition from British products, which were often more advanced and cheaper. Tariffs and import restrictions were key tools in this strategy, allowing local industries to mature and become competitive. This period is important in the chronology of economic history because it demonstrates the impact that protectionist policies can have on national industrial development. It also paved the way for later economic developments and for the gradual liberalisation of trade that was to follow.
The period from 1850 to 1873 was characterised by a series of agricultural crises, the most notable of which was undoubtedly potato disease, such as the great Irish famine that began in the 1840s. Poor harvests in many parts of Europe led to food shortages and rising prices for staples such as wheat. Faced with these challenges, several countries that depended heavily on agriculture for their livelihoods and were unable to produce enough food for their populations were forced to relax their trade policies. Lowering taxes and tariffs on imports of wheat and other cereals was essential to allow food in and to combat famine and price inflation. This reduction in trade barriers was a pragmatic response to the food crises and marked a shift towards more liberal trade policies. It temporarily eased the pressure on local populations while opening up national markets to foreign competition, which in time may also have contributed to greater economic integration and the emergence of more global trade relations.
The period from 1874 to 1895 was marked by a deep economic depression, often referred to as the Great Depression of the 19th century. This crisis was triggered by a number of interconnected factors, not least the massive impact of the arrival of American wheat on European markets. American agricultural production, boosted by the completion of the great transcontinental railways, flooded Europe with cheap grain, destabilising traditional agricultural markets and exacerbating the difficulties of European farmers. In the industrial sector, this period also witnessed a significant crisis. In response to increased demand from the US due to the construction of its railway lines, the European steel industry had considerably increased its production capacity. Large-scale ironworks sprang up to manufacture the steel needed for rails and locomotives. However, after 1873, once the United States and Germany - the latter having invested French war indemnities in railway unification - had finished building their rail networks, demand for railway equipment collapsed. Europe then found itself with a steel industry that was oversized in relation to demand. Overcapacity led to a crisis of overproduction, resulting in a collapse in steel prices. The less solid companies did not survive this sharp fall in demand, leading to bankruptcies and mass redundancies. Workers whose jobs depended on these industries found themselves out of work, exacerbating social and economic problems across Europe. This dark period demonstrated the vulnerability of economies to the volatility of global markets and underlined the need for economic diversification to protect societies from such destructive sectoral shocks.
The period from 1895 to 1914 was an era of economic recovery after the long years of depression that marked the end of the 19th century. Western nations, seeking to recover from previous crises, often adopted protectionist policies. These measures aimed to support and stabilise domestic industries by protecting them from foreign competition through high tariffs and import quotas. Despite the resumption of economic growth, free trade has not made a comeback as the predominant system. On the contrary, the era is often seen as the heyday of protectionism in many Western countries. These protectionist policies were motivated by a desire to safeguard domestic jobs and promote independent industrialisation, as well as a reaction against the perceived excesses of globalisation that had led to the previous economic imbalances and crises. During this period, the UK remained the dominant economic power, with London acting as the world's financial centre. However, other nations, such as the United States and Germany, began to challenge this supremacy with their own rapidly expanding industries. Protectionism helped to consolidate these trends, with countries developing economic strategies centred on self-sufficiency and the growth of domestic markets. It was also a time of arms races and colonial rivalries, culminating in the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. Protectionism, by strengthening national industries, particularly those linked to armaments, also played a role in the growing geopolitical tensions of the time.
During this period of high protectionism in most Western countries, Switzerland and Great Britain stood out for their different approaches to trade. Because of its small size and lack of abundant natural resources, Switzerland was heavily dependent on exporting high-quality products and importing raw materials. As a result, it could not afford to adopt protectionist policies that would have led to retaliation from its trading partners and restricted its access to export markets. The Swiss economy therefore focused on sectors where it could maintain a competitive advantage, such as watchmaking, precision instruments, and later pharmaceuticals and financial products. Great Britain, meanwhile, had adopted free trade by the mid-nineteenth century, with the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846, which had previously been a policy of protection for British grain producers. As the first industrialised nation and with its extensive colonial empire providing it with numerous outlets and resources, Great Britain was able to take advantage of the opening up of international markets. However, in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, even the UK faced increasing protectionist pressures in response to the rise of competing industries in the USA and Germany. Meanwhile, nations such as Germany, France and Italy maintained protectionist policies. For these countries, high tariffs and import controls were used to protect their fledgling industries or to prop up the prices of agricultural products against foreign competition. Protectionism has also been used as an economic policy tool to encourage industrialisation and to pursue national strategic objectives, sometimes to the detriment of international trade relations.
Protectionism in the face of global competition: Causes and consequences
The closure of national markets by protectionist measures at the end of the 19th century was largely motivated by the defence of national agricultural sectors against the arrival of new international competitors. The crisis of 1873, often attributed to the flooding of European markets with cheap wheat from the American Great Plains, marked the beginning of an era of increased agricultural competition on a global scale. As the cost of shipping fell, thanks to technological advances such as steamships and the opening of sea routes like the Suez Canal, countries with vast tracts of farmland like Argentina and Australia became increasingly important exporters. Argentina, with its fertile pampas, has become a major exporter of beef, taking advantage of mechanical refrigeration to send meat to Europe. Australia, meanwhile, has taken advantage of its vast land and climate to become a major exporter of wool and wheat. These new players on the world market put pressure on European farmers, whose small farms could not compete in terms of production costs. As a result, many European countries reacted by erecting customs barriers to protect their farmers from competition from low-cost agricultural products from the southern hemisphere and America. Agricultural protectionism was therefore a direct response to the globalisation of the agricultural sector and the threat it posed to traditional agricultural structures in Europe. The aim of these policies was to maintain prices for agricultural products at a level that would allow local farmers to survive, while trying to preserve the social and economic fabric of rural communities.
The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were periods of growing nationalism and military preparedness, particularly in Europe. The fear of the disappearance of traditional agrarian structures, which formed the basis of many national societies, was reinforced by nationalist concerns. The national peasantry was seen not only as a source of food self-sufficiency, but also as an essential component of national identity and culture. Agriculture was also seen as strategically vital in times of conflict, as a nation able to produce its own food was less vulnerable to blockades and import disruptions in times of war. This took on added importance in the context of rising tensions and the arms race that characterised Europe in the run-up to the First World War. Politically, the governments of the time, which were often perceived as left-wing or socially progressive, had an interest in safeguarding the interests of the traditionally more conservative peasantry. Protecting agriculture through protectionist measures was therefore also an electoral strategy, aimed at winning or retaining the support of rural populations. So the motivations behind maintaining protectionism were complex and intertwined, combining economic, strategic, political and cultural considerations. These protectionist policies, once in place, were often difficult to dismantle and persisted right up to the eve of the First World War, which would dramatically reshape the global economic and political order.
Gerschenkron's theory states that countries that start their industrialisation process later benefit from a 'backwardness advantage': they can jump straight to the most advanced technologies without having to go through the intermediate stages that the pioneers of industrialisation had to endure. This allows them to accelerate their industrial development and catch up quickly with more established economies. During the economic depression that lasted from 1873 to 1895, European industry underwent profound structural transformations. One major change was the transition from the production of iron to steel, a material that was stronger and more adaptable to a variety of industrial applications. With the introduction of new manufacturing processes, such as the Bessemer process, the steel industries were able to significantly increase their productivity and the quality of their output. Latecomers such as Russia took advantage of this period to directly build modern blast furnaces adapted to steel production, without having to convert existing infrastructures dedicated to iron production. By contrast, countries in the first wave of industrialisation, such as Great Britain and Belgium, had to invest in modernising their industrial base in order to remain competitive. To defend themselves against competition from newcomers to industrialisation, who benefited from lower production costs thanks to their advanced technology, the long-established industrialised countries often resorted to protectionism. By imposing customs barriers on imports of industrial products, these nations sought to protect their established industries, preserve jobs and give their companies time to adapt to the new conditions of the global market.
Evolution and interdependence of industrialised economies
Economic dominance and cooperation before the 20th century
At the end of the 19th century, the growing complexity of advanced economies and the emergence of complementarity on a global scale marked a period of significant economic and geopolitical transformation. From 1850 to 1900, Great Britain was the primary pole of the world economy, dominating international trade and finance thanks to its extensive empire, powerful navy and industrial lead. During this same period, the United States began to emerge as a secondary economic power, with the potential to become a major pole in the intercontinental system. The adoption of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, which was reinforced throughout the 19th century, illustrates this rise in power. It stated that any European intervention in the affairs of the nations of the American continent would be regarded as hostile action towards the United States. The aim of this policy was to prevent European colonialism in the Western Hemisphere and to mark the American sphere of influence. This period also saw the United States begin to challenge Britain's commercial and maritime supremacy. Anglo-American rivalry manifested itself not only in the economic sphere, but also in foreign policy and military presence. The tensions between the two nations reflected the shift in the balance of economic and political power, with the United States seeking to extend its influence beyond its borders and take a leading role on the international stage. This transition was also marked by a growing differentiation of economic roles: while Britain continued to be the world's financial centre and a major exporter of manufactured goods, the United States, with its vast territory and abundant natural resources, became a leader in the production of raw materials and foodstuffs. The complementary nature of the two economies, with one providing capital and finished goods and the other resources and agricultural products, contributed to the dynamics of an increasingly interdependent world market.
In the context of the late nineteenth century, with increasingly competitive international markets and a changing global economy, countries other than Britain and the United States responded in different ways to the challenges posed by global trade. Countries such as France and Germany, with large domestic markets, chose a path of economic development centred on self-sufficiency and internal growth. To protect their infant industries and sustain their economic growth, these countries often adopted protectionist policies. High tariffs, quotas and strict import regulations were used to limit foreign competition and favour domestic producers. These protectionist measures not only preserved jobs in domestic sectors in the face of international competition, but also helped to stimulate domestic demand for locally produced goods. This helped to build robust and diversified industries capable of meeting the needs of domestic consumers and, in some cases, competing effectively on international markets. In this way, France and Germany were able to sustain their economic growth through the size and strength of their domestic markets, while developing competitive industrial sectors that would eventually position them as major players on the world economic stage. This strategy of economic development also strengthened their economic independence, which was particularly important in the climate of political instability and international tensions that characterised the period leading up to the First World War.
Switzerland and Denmark, due to their relatively small size and insufficient domestic markets to support autonomous economic growth, adopted a different strategy. In line with Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage, they specialised in production niches where they could compete internationally, and where the major industrial powers had not yet established a dominant presence. Switzerland concentrated on sectors such as watchmaking, machinery manufacturing, fine chemicals and, later, banking and financial services. These industries required a high level of skill and precision, for which Switzerland had already acquired an international reputation. Denmark, on the other hand, developed specialised, export-oriented agriculture, particularly in dairy and pig production. By investing in production quality and efficiency, Denmark has been able to become a major exporter of food products to the rest of Europe, complementing the agricultural products produced by other nations. This specialisation enabled them to export products that were not in direct competition with the industries of the importing countries, fostering a relationship of economic complementarity rather than rivalry. Swiss and Danish products were often seen as complementary to the larger, more diversified economies of their trading partners, contributing to the economic growth of these nations without threatening the local industries of the importing countries. This approach not only allowed Switzerland and Denmark to prosper in a climate of growing protectionism, but also strengthened the economic ties between European nations, creating interdependencies that contributed to the stability and growth of the European market as a whole.
Despite the age of its industrial machinery and growing competition from new industrial entrants, Britain made the strategic choice to abandon protectionism and continue to promote free trade in the 19th century. This choice was partly based on the fact that the United Kingdom had already established a dominant position in international trade and owned the British Empire, which provided it with a vast network of captive markets for its products and sources of raw materials. By exploiting its naval supremacy and extensive trading network, Britain consolidated its role as a central intermediary in world trade. Products from the colonies, such as Indian cotton and spices, were often transhipped through British ports before being redistributed in Europe and elsewhere. Similarly, British manufactured goods were exported around the world, reinforcing Britain's image as the 'merchant of the world'. This trade policy was made possible by a series of technological innovations, particularly in shipping and communications, which reduced transport costs and times. London's financial system, as the world's leading banking and insurance centre, also played a key role in facilitating international trade transactions. However, this economic model based on free trade began to be challenged at the end of the century in the face of the economic rise of the United States and Germany, which adopted protectionist measures to support their industrial development. Nevertheless, until the First World War, Great Britain managed to maintain its leading position in world trade, largely thanks to its free trade policy and its global empire.
Britain's response to the growing protectionism of other nations was to double down on the globalisation of trade. Instead of retreating behind tariff barriers, Britain used its competitive advantage - a powerful merchant navy, a vast colonial empire, and a first-rate financial and commercial infrastructure - to reinforce its position as the nerve centre of world trade. By encouraging the free flow of goods through its ports and acting as an intermediary for colonial and foreign products, Britain promoted economic globalisation and interdependence. In doing so, it not only extended its economic influence, but also facilitated the integration of world markets, laying the foundations for the modern global economy. This strategy also had cultural and political implications, exporting British models of commerce, finance, law and governance around the world. It enabled Britain to maintain its role as a dominant power despite internal and external challenges, until the ravages of the First World War and the emergence of new centres of power began to erode this position in the early twentieth century.
Challenges and directions for the British economy at the turn of the century
British industrial decline and strategic response
After 1900, Britain's position as the world's leading industrial power began to wane. British industrial supremacy, unchallenged throughout the nineteenth century, faced new challenges as the United States and Germany, in particular, accelerated their own industrial development. British industry, which had been at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution, found itself with production facilities and methods that had changed little since they were first introduced. Many of these tools and plants, designed and built during the first wave of industrialisation, had become obsolete and inefficient compared with the modern equipment adopted by the new industrialists. The result was a relative decline in the productivity and competitiveness of British industry. Britain was faced with the need to invest in modernising its industrial infrastructure, but various factors, such as complacency due to its former dominance, vested interests and resistance to change, often slowed this process. At the same time, Britain's approach to free trade continued, leaving domestic industry vulnerable to competition from cheaper, more modern foreign products. This had the effect of further highlighting the technological and efficiency backwardness of British industries. The First World War, which broke out in 1914, further accentuated these challenges. Not only did the conflict drain economic resources, it also disrupted the trading networks on which Britain relied. Post-war reconstruction and economic recovery required even greater modernisation, which Britain had to undertake in a radically changed international context.
Britain's response to the challenges facing its industry from 1900 onwards was to persevere with its free trade policy, a strategy that was based on several key factors:
As its urban population grew and the percentage of the workforce employed in agriculture fell, Britain became less and less self-sufficient in food production. To meet the food needs of its population, it has found itself obliged to import large quantities of food. This dependence on agricultural imports has made free trade essential to maintaining price stability and food supply. Denmark, with its efficient and specialised agriculture, particularly in dairy products and pork, took advantage of this situation to become a major supplier of agricultural products to the British market. This continued free trade, despite the relative decline of certain British industries, reflected the need for Britain to continue to import what it could no longer produce sufficiently, notably food, at prices affordable to its population.
By importing food from various parts of the world such as Argentina, Denmark, Australia and the United States, Britain was able to take advantage of international competition to drive down food prices. This strategy had direct benefits for British workers. With a lower cost of living, particularly for essentials such as food, workers could afford to feed themselves and maintain a decent standard of living without requiring wage increases from employers. This contributed to a degree of social and economic stability by easing inflationary pressures and limiting demands for higher wages, which could have increased production costs and reduced the competitiveness of British industries.
Faced with competition from the world's major agricultural exporters, British farmers had to adapt by changing their production practices. At the beginning of the 20th century, they gradually moved away from cereal crops such as wheat, which were widely imported and available at lower cost due to international competition. Instead, they turned to the production of perishable, high value-added foodstuffs that did not stand up well to long-distance transport or were demanded by British consumers for their freshness, such as vegetables, dairy products and eggs. This shift towards agricultural products for the local market has enabled British farmers to continue to prosper despite the country's opening up to international trade in basic foodstuffs. By focusing on these fresh products, British agriculture has been able to maintain its relevance and contribution to the national economy without the need for government support in the form of protectionist policies. It has also helped to ensure that farmland remains productive and that rural communities retain their economic viability in an increasingly globalised world.
Economic complementarities: Globalisation and specialisation
At the beginning of the 20th century, globalisation entered a phase in which the complementarity of national economies began to play a central role, reflecting in part the theory expounded by Friedrich Engels that the first economic priority is to meet the food needs of the population. This period of globalisation was characterised by a significant improvement in food conditions in Europe, thanks to the importation of foodstuffs from countries around the world, allowing for a diversification and abundance of food resources.
This complementarity can be seen as a practical application of David Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage. Countries specialised in producing the goods and services for which they were most competitive, while importing those for which they were less competitive. In this way, the major industrial powers were able to develop and expand their economies without necessarily entering into direct competition with each other. For example, while countries like Britain and Germany concentrated on industrialisation and manufacturing, others, like Argentina and Australia, exported their agricultural surpluses.
This specialisation led to greater efficiency and overall economic growth, as nations were able to trade goods and services more productively, with each country drawing on its unique strengths. It also led to deeper economic interdependence, as national economies became intertwined in a complex network of international trade. This interdependence has been beneficial for global economic development, but it has also created new vulnerabilities, as will become evident with the trade disruptions caused by the two world wars.
Summary of global economic dynamics
The period from the end of the eighteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth witnessed a profound transformation of the world's economies, a time when nations traversed fluctuating paths between protectionism and free trade. The advent of transport and communication technologies shortened distances, reshaped trade and redrawn economic maps, leading to an unprecedented integration of international markets.
The Great Depression of the late 19th century was a watershed, prompting countries to turn inward, while others, such as Britain, responded with a push towards greater globalisation, positioning themselves as the hub of world trade. Nations were forced to reassess and adapt their economic strategies in response to rapidly changing global market conditions, leading to a specialisation and complementarity that redefined international relations.
In the early twentieth century, as Britain faced a relative decline in industry, it continued to promote free trade, relying on its commercial and maritime supremacy to maintain its position on the world stage. At the same time, smaller countries such as Switzerland and Denmark found ways to succeed by specialising in sectors that complemented rather than rivalled the great industrial powers.
The period leading up to the First World War was one of consolidation of national economies in an interdependent global system, in which complementarity and specialisation played an essential role. This era laid the foundations for contemporary economic globalisation and established patterns of trade and production that continue to shape our world today. However, the lessons of that era still resonate, reminding us of the challenges inherent in balancing national interests with the benefits and vulnerabilities of a globalised economy.