This thesis answers the question why there was a cluster of innovation in the English textile industry between 1760 and 1820. In order to answer this question, this thesis uses records concerning...Show moreThis thesis answers the question why there was a cluster of innovation in the English textile industry between 1760 and 1820. In order to answer this question, this thesis uses records concerning eight important textile inventors: Samuel Crompton, Richard Arkwright, James Hargreaves, Matthew Murray, Edmund Cartwright, William Radcliffe, Jedediah Strutt and John Kennedy. Crucial for clusters of innovative activity in general is that the existing stock of knowledge and techniques is constantly recombined into new technical knowledge, leading to innovation. It is pivotal for constant recombination that individual access costs to new technical knowledge are low. This, in turn, is achieved when new knowledge rapidly circulates, allowing inventors to constantly build on innovations done before them. A thorough study of eight important textile inventors will show that the cluster of innovative activity in the British textile industry existed because groups of inventors, manufacturers, financiers and workmen in the North West of England closely cooperated in a number of ways and because new technical knowledge rapidly circulated within and between these groups. These processes took place within a cultural context favourable to innovation, a political context in which elites supported innovation and an economic context in which large amounts of human capital were available. The cooperation took place both inside and outside of the inventive process. Within the inventive process, workmen and financiers provided the inventor with the technical and financial aid necessary to continue inventing. Outside of the inventive process, they helped some inventors to be properly rewarded for their efforts and collectively opposed inventors with overtly monopolistic tendencies. Rapid circulation of knowledge within and between these groups was realised in several ways. First, the successful collective action taken against monopolistic inventors insured the quick diffusion of their inventions. Second, most inventors at times freely shared their inventions with fellow inventors, manufacturers, and the public at large. Third, inventions were massively stolen. One of the ways in which new technical knowledge was stolen, was through the patent system. Contrary to popular belief, the English patent system, in most cases, did not allow individuals a sufficient return on the money, time and effort they had put into their innovative process. The specification of their invention, included in the patent application, was widely copied. Most inventors were unable to successfully fight these infringements. However, many inventors kept taking out patents, hoping to be successfully remunerated. In this way, the system contributed to the free circulation of new technical knowledge. These findings contribute to several debates within the field of social and economic history, economics and organisational science.Show less
