Following America into the second industrial revolution: new rules of competition and Ontario's farm machinery industry, 1850–1930
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the hiatus in farm expansion from 1880 to 1900, Canadian‐owned Massey‐Harris became a competitive multinational corporation as American branch plants arrived in Ontario. This equivocal performance in Canada's agricultural implements industry poses problems for explanations of Canada's branch plant economy. Most commentators blame an ill‐conceived National Policy for promoting and protecting inefficient industry and frustrating industrial development. In reviewing their explanations, I use systematic comparisons among plants as well as between the Ontario, New York, Ohio, and Illinois industries. I argue that Canada's National Policy was an effective industrial policy that promoted competitive implement manufacture under the constraints of Victorian era technology. Problems emerged in the 1880s, however, as Chicago firms developed mass production in harvesting machinery, and these became entrenched as gasoline tractor development swept the industry after 1900. Ontario firms struggled, but they outperformed competitors in New York and Ohio, who had been industry leaders in] 880. Canada's branch plant economy in the farm machinery industry was made in Chicago and by mechanical engineers, not in Ottawa and by politicians. En dépit de l'hiatus dans l'expansion du pare agricole entre 1880 et 1900, la société canadienne Massey‐Harris est devenue une grande société multinational compétitive lorsque des usines‐succursales américaines ont fait leur arrivée en l'Ontario. Cette baisse de performance de I'Industrie canadienne de fabrication d'outils et d'engins agricoles pose des problèmes sur le plan de l'explication de l'économie des usines‐succursales canadiennes. Pour la plupart des analystes, cette situation serait due à une politique nationals mal‐conçue. Celle‐ci aurait favorisé et protégé une Industrie inefficace, et ainsi frustré le développement industriel. En passant en revue ces analyses, je procède à une série de comparisons systématiques, d'une part des usines entre elles et, d'autre part, entre les industries de New York, de l'Ohio et de l'lllinois. J'avance que la Politique nationale canadienne etait une politique industrielle efficace qui a su promouvoir une Industrie de fabrication d'outils et d'engins agricoles compétitive dans le cadre de la technologie de l'époque victorienne et de ses contraintes. Des problèmes, qui ont fait leur apparition au cours des années 1880, suite à l'adoption par les sociétés de Chicago de la production de masse des moissonneuses, ont perduré suite à l'arrivée en masse des tracteurs à essence après 1900. Ce fut un moment très difficile pour les sociétés de l'Ontario mais elles réussirent à battre leurs concurrents de New York et de l'Ohio qui étaient leaders de l'industrie en 1880. Dans l'industrie des engins agricoles, le sort de l'économie des usines‐succursales était décidéà Chicago, par des ingénieurs en mécanique agricole, non à Ottawa, par des hommes politiques.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".