Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T00:43:52.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficiency and Management: A Comment on Gregory Clark's “Why Isn't the Whole World Developed?”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2009

Mira Wilkins
Mira Wilkins
Affiliation:
Professor of Economics, Florida International University, Miami, Florida 33199.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Notes and Discussion
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 47 , Issue 4 , December 1987 , pp. 981 - 983
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This Journal, 47 (Mar. 1987), pp. 141–74. The quotation is from pp. 141–42.Google Scholar

2 Williamson, Oliver E., Economic Institutions of Capitalism (New York, 1985), p. 13;Google Scholar an exception lies in the work of Kuwahara, Tetsuya, “The Business Strategy of Japanese Cotton Spinners: Overseas Operations 1890 to 1931,” in Okochi, Akio and Yonekawa, Shin-ichi, eds., The Textile Industry and its Business (Tokyo, 1982), pp. 139–66,Google Scholar and his “The Establishment of Oligopoly in the Japanese Cotton Spinning Industry and the Business Strategies of Latecomers: The Case of Naigaiwata & Co., Ltd.,” in Nakagawa, Keiichiro and Morikawa, Hidemasa, eds., Japanese Yearbook on Business History: 1986 (Tokyo, 1986), pp. 103–34; Robert Tignor, at Princeton University, is doing highly innovative research on British textile firms in Egypt, but is considering a period later than Clark's.Google Scholar

3 See, for example, Jones, Geoffrey, “The Performance of British Multinational Enterprise, 1890–1945,” in Hertner, Peter and Jones, Geoffrey, eds., Multinationals: Theory and History (Aldershot, 1986), pp. 96–112;Google Scholar and Jones, Geoffrey, ed., British Multinationals: Origins, Management and Performance (Aldershot, 1986);Google Scholar Alfred D. Chandler's new work on managerial enterprise helps explain some of the problems the British had in exporting management abroad; see also Wilkins, Mira, “The History of European Multinationals—A New Look,” Journal of European Economic History, 15 (Winter 1986), pp. 483–510.Google Scholar

4 Wilkins, Mira, “The Free-Standing Company, 1870–1914, An Important Type of British Foreign Direct Investment,” Economic History Review (forthcoming).Google Scholar

5 Wilkins, Mira, “Japanese Multinational Enterprise before 1914,” Business History Review, 60 (Summer 1986), pp. 208–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Ibid.,Google ScholarChao, Kang, The Development of Cotton Textile Production in China (Cambridge, Mass., 1977), p. 140;Google ScholarKuwahara, “The Business Strategy of Japanese Cotton Spinners,” pp. 158, 165 fn. 27; Kuwahara, “The Establishment of Oligopoly in the Japanese Cotton Spinning Industry,” pp. 103–34.Google Scholar

7 Kuwahara, “The Establishment of Oligopoly in the Japanese Cotton Spinning Industry,” p. 122.Google Scholar

8 Ibid., p. 124; Kuwahara, “The Business Strategy of Japanese Cotton Spinners,” p. 165 fn. 27.Google Scholar