The early industrial revolution in England was caused by a number of factors that were further facilitated by a number of innovations. The causes could be considered in various perspectives. This paper contends that the following were the main factors that would result to the early revolution: population growth, agricultural productivity, technological knowledge and entrepreneurship, capital formation and accumulation, and demand for consumers and producers. These factors combined to finally occasion the industrial revolution. This paper seeks to examine each cause.
England’s population growth rate was increasing so fast. With reduced mortality rates, the entire population doubled between 1680 and 1820. This increased population provided cheap labour for the industries, thereby facilitating production. The introduction of land enclosure system and the new techniques of farming such as crop rotation occasioned a revolution in agriculture which would facilitate further industrialisation. Large scale production for commercial purposes enabled others to specialise in other industries instead of the citizenry limiting themselves to agriculture only. A span of innovation of technology and development of an entrepreneurial spirit among the citizenry enabled concentration in industrial production. Mechanisation led to a radical departure in production both in quality and quantity. With the increased population and blossoming market, the demand for production and consumption increased. This was also aided by an accumulation nature of capital investment among entrepreneurs and pioneer business men. The latter would provide the necessary finance for production.
This revolution was driven by a number of innovations. New industrial technology was developed. In the textile industry, the jenny and steam engine were invented. The discovery of coal as an energy source further facilitated production processes. Another round of innovation lay in the blossoming factories which had new machinery. One overall change that the revolution introduced was the exodus from labour intensive work methods to machine based production. In each factory, a machine has been invented that facilitated production processes. Lastly, innovations also spanned the transportation sector. The introduction of coal powered steam driven railroads enabled faster transportation of goods and people.
While the revolution had kicked off in England, a number of factors delayed its adoption in continental Europe. First, the political instability did not facilitate the revolution. Germany was divided into different states applying varying taxes and tariffs thereby impeding the free flow of commodities. France had set its own economic privileges detrimental to flow of commodities from external sources. The culture and ideology of trade protectionism intended to cushion domestic markets from external competition frustrated the flow of commodities and the economic ideas into these European countries. Finally, the aristocrats in continental Europe were reluctant to invest in new entrepreneurial systems that would expose them to risks. They preferred to retain their old system that earned them income from land.
The impact of the Industrial Revolution was tremendous and widespread. It changed the industrial landscape. The swift transition from labour intensive to capital intensive production steered innovation and creativity. It also affected women and children who for the first time started engaging in commercial production as labourers. In addition, the standards of living improved substantially. With the production of commodities, better transportation and expanded markets for products, the living standards shot up, population densities increased and the world was awaken to a new dispensation. It is this that later crystallised to the fight for democracy and civil rights, need to protect humanity and retention of the ecological balance. In a nut shell, the Industrial Revolution opened a new chapter for the world.
Works Cited
Allen, Robert C. "Determining the Industrial Revolution." The Historical Journal 54.3 (2011): 907-924.
