The sources of scale: Large employers in Britain in 1881

The article assesses the relative weight of different sources of workforce size, using both relative marginal effects and proportion of variance explained for the 545 largest British firms in 1881. Despite data uncertainties, integration is shown as the largest contributor to scale. Integration with mining had even larger effects, raising employment by 35%. Internal capital intensity reduced labour for the majority of firms by about 4 workers per £10,000 capital, but much more for tramways. Place-based externalities had greatest marginal effects for agglomerations (measured by population size). Generally, sectoral localisation was insignificant, but for small localities with more than one firm in a single sector, firm size increased 26–30% compared to diversified localities. Local monopsony (measured by workforce proportion of local population) explained a large proportion of variance because it occurred in a large number of small places. Of other variables explored, only legal form is of major importance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Business History
Published
2024-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2024.2415053
Primary Topic
Historical Economic and Social Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The sources of scale: Large employers in Britain in 1881

Robert J. Bennett, Les Hannah
Business History
Historical Economic and Social Studies
article

The sources of scale: Large employers in Britain in 1881

Robert J. Bennett, Les Hannah
article en

Abstract

The article assesses the relative weight of different sources of workforce size, using both relative marginal effects and proportion of variance explained for the 545 largest British firms in 1881. Despite data uncertainties, integration is shown as the largest contributor to scale. Integration with mining had even larger effects, raising employment by 35%. Internal capital intensity reduced labour for the majority of firms by about 4 workers per £10,000 capital, but much more for tramways. Place-based externalities had greatest marginal effects for agglomerations (measured by population size). Generally, sectoral localisation was insignificant, but for small localities with more than one firm in a single sector, firm size increased 26–30% compared to diversified localities. Local monopsony (measured by workforce proportion of local population) explained a large proportion of variance because it occurred in a large number of small places. Of other variables explored, only legal form is of major importance.

Business HistoryVol. 68(1)
University of Cambridge (GB), Population Council (US), London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Economic and Social Research Council
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Historical Economic and Social Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.