CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 227Historical Economic and Social StudiesEconomic Theory and PolicyAgglomeration and Urban Systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Industrialization and Regional Inequality: Wages in Britain, 1760–1914

Hunt, E. H.·1986·The Journal of Economic History
DOI 10.1017/s0022050700050658
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper describes the geographical pattern of wages in Britain between 1760 and 1914. It then draws out some of the implications of the wages pattern and considers, in particular, the implications for the “growth pole” debate on the likely effect of industrialization upon regional income inequalities. The market forces responsible for creating and maintaining these differentials are then described, followed by a final section which discsusses the significance of changing regional wage differentials to the standar-of-living debate. It concludes that from a regional perspective the overall effects of industrialization upon living standards are indisputably favorable.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0022050700050658

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Regional cost-of-living differences in the 1840s were minor.

    “Yet Crafts (1982: 68) and Hunt (1986) have shown that regional cost-of-living differences in the 1840s were minor.”

    From The Mechanics of the Industrial Revolution (2023) · cites this paper as Hunt (1986)

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 31 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Saito, 1981, Labour Supply Behaviour of the Poor in the English Industrial Revolution, Journal of European Economic History, 10
  2. Bowley, J.R.S.S. (Dec. 1898), pp. 704–7.
  3. Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 117–18; Levitt and Smout, State of the Scottish Working Class, pp. 79, 106.
  4. Levitt, 1979, The State of the Scottish Working-Class in 1843, 81
  5. Bowley, 1899, The Statistics of Wages in the United Kingdom in the last Hundred Years: Part 2, Agricultural Wages in Scotland, J.R.S.S., 62, 562
  6. 10.2307/2594429 · DOI
  7. Hunt, British Labour History, pp. 171–76.
  8. 1900, Wages in the United Kingdom in the Nineteenth Century, 706
  9. Bowley, 1900, The Statistics of Wages in the United Kingdom: Part 6, Wages in the Building Trades in English Towns, J.R.S.S., 302
  10. For 1833–1845 there are again no worthwhile figures of farm wages in separate Welsh counties, although some rural Welsh counties were almost certainly among the lowest-paid British counties (Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 21–2, 25). Bowley (J.R.S.S., Dec. 1898) estimated average farm wages in Wales as a whole at 8s.2d. to 8s.8d. in 1833 and 7s.6d. in 1837. Welsh figures are available for 1867–1870, when four Welsh counties appear among the 18 counties where wages were lowest (Figure 8).
  11. Graham, 1892, The Rural Exodus, 7
  12. Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 15, 39–40, 45–46.
  13. On rising relative wages in other occupations in South Wales, see Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 21–24.
  14. Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 21–27.
  15. Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 251–65; and Hunt, British Labour History, pp. 145–48.
  16. Bowley, Wages in the United Kingdom in the Nineteenth Century, pp. 58–59.
  17. Richardson T. L. , “The Standard of Living Controversy, 1790–1840,” (Ph.D. diss., University of Hull, 1977), pp. 445–50.
  18. Hunt, Regional Wage Variations, pp. 68, 102–3. Rent for two rooms was estimated at 2s. in Exeter and 4s.9d. in London (Hackney).
  19. Gilboy, Wages pp. 196–8, 209, 223; Levitt and Smout, State of the Scottish Working Class, pp. 79, 107; Morgan, “Agricultural Wage Rates,” pp. 193, 195–96.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Hunt, E. H.
Affiliations
London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Corresponding author
Hunt, E. H.
Venue
The Journal of Economic History
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
1986-12
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
935-966
ISSN
  • 0022-0507 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6372
DOI
10.1017/s0022050700050658
OpenAlex
W2153840336
Cited by
226
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 8128 d)
Locations
  • The Journal of Economic History (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Historical Economic and Social Studies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economic Theory and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Agglomeration and Urban Systems
Keywords
regional wage differentials, industrialization, regional disparities, growth pole theory, living standards, market forces, regional income inequality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review