Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:49:15.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing the Obstacles to Industrialisation: The Mexican Economy, 1830–1940*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Stephen H. Haber
Stephen H. Haber
Affiliation:
Stephen H. Haber is Associate Professor of History at Stanford University.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

After England began what came to be known as the First Industrial Revolution at the end of the eighteenth century, industrial technology quickly diffused throughout the nations of the North Atlantic. Within fifty years of the first rumblings of British industrialisation, the factory system had spread to Western Europe and the United States. Latin America, however, lagged behind. It was not until the twentieth century that manufacturing came to lead the economies of Latin America and that agrarian societies were transformed into industrial societies.

This article seeks to understand this long lag in Latin American industrialisation through an analysis of the experience of Mexico during the period 1830–1940. The purpose of the paper is to look at the obstacles that prevented self-sustaining industrialisation from taking place in Mexico, as well as to assess the results of the industrialisation that did occur.

The basic argument advanced is that two different types of constraints prevailed during different periods of Mexico's industrialisation. During the period from 1830 to 1880 the obstacles to industrialisation were largely external to firms: insecure property rights, low per capita income growth resulting from pre-capitalist agricultural organisation, and the lack of a national market (caused by inefficient transport, banditry and internal tariffs) all served as a brake on Mexico's industrial development. During the period 1880–1910 the obstacles to industrialisation were largely internal to firms. These factors included the inability to realise scale economies, high fixed capital costs and low labour productivity. During the period from 1910 to 1930 these internal constraints combined with new external constraints – including the Revolution of 1910–17, the political uncertainty of the post-revolutionary period and the onset of the Great Depression – which further slowed the rate of industrial growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Latin American Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 1 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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 Coatsworth, John H., ‘Obstacles to Economic Growth in Nineteenth Century Mexico’, American Historical Review, vol. 83 (1978), p. 82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Coatsworth, John H., Growth Against Development: The Economic Impact of Railroads in Porfirian Mexico (Dekalb, Illinois, 1981), p. 18.Google Scholar

3 Ibid., p. 35.

4 Cárdenas, Enrique, ‘Some Issues on Mexico's Nineteenth Century Depression’, mimeo (1981), pp. 29–30.Google Scholar

5 Vanderwood, Paul, Disorder and Progress: Bandits, Police, and Mexican Development (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1981), pp. 3, 11 and 37.Google Scholar

6 Ibid., p. 11.

7 Pollard, Sidney, Peaceful Conquest: The Industrialization of Europe, 1760–1970 (London, 1981).Google Scholar

8 Wilkie, James W., The Mexican Revolution: Federal Expenditure and Social Change since 1910 (Berkeley, 1970), p. 218.Google Scholar

9 Dirección General de Estadística, Estadisticas Sociales del Porfiriato, 1877–1910 (México, 1956), pp. 118–120.Google Scholar The data are for 1895, when in the nation as a whole 17% of the population spoke only an indigenous language. The percentage of non-Spanish speakers in the mid-nineteenth century was certainly significantly higher than the 1895 figure. But even in 1895 the majority of the population in indian-dominated states like Yucatán and Oaxaca spoke only an indigenous language. In seven other states (out of 31) over 20% of the population spoke no Spanish in 1895. It is highly likely that in the mid-nineteenth century the national average approached the levels of these states.

10 Coatsworth, , ‘Obstacles to Economic Growth’, p. 82.Google Scholar

11 El Economista Mexicano, 7 05 1904, p. 114.Google Scholar

12 Coatsworth, , ‘Obstacles to Economic Growth’, p. 98.Google Scholar Walker, David W., Business, Kinship and Politics: The Martinez de Río Family in Mexico, 1823–1867 (Austin, Texas, 1986).Google Scholar

13 de Hacienda y Crédito Público, Secretaría, Documentos para el estudio de la industrialización en México, 1837–1845 (México, 1977), doc. 5Google Scholar de Fomento, Ministerio, Estadística del Departamento de México (México, 1854), doc. 2.Google Scholar For a discussion of the Banco de Avío see Potash, Robert A., The Mexican Government and Industrial Development in the Early Republic: The Banco de Avío (Amherst, 1983).Google Scholar

The literature has tended to overestimate the role of the bank in financing Mexico's early industrialization. The total loans of the bank to cotton textile manufacturers from 1830 to 1842 came to 509,000 pesos, but in 1854, when there were fewer mills in operation than in 1842, the total value of the plant, equipment, and buildings of the industry (valued at acquisition cost) was 8,872,951 pesos, indicating that the bank could only have been responsible for six per cent of the finance capital of these enterprises.

14 Ministerio de Fomento, Estadística del Departamento de México, doc. 2.

15 Calculated from ibid.;and de Hacienda, Secretaría, Estadística de la República Mexicana (México, 1880), cuadros de industria.Google Scholar

16 US Bureau of the Çensus, Census of Manufactures, 1879.

17 de Borja Castro, A. V., ‘Relatorio do segundo grupo’, in de Souza Rego, Antonio José, Relatorio da segunda exposição nacional de 1866 (Rio de Janeiro, 1869), p. 49Google Scholar; Ministério de Trabalho, Industria, e Comercio, Comisāo Executiva Textil, Indústria textil algodeira (Rio de Janeiro, 1946), p. 51.

18 del Estado, Secretaría, Memoria de la Secretaría del Estado y del Despacho de Fomento Colonización Industria y Comercio de la República Mexicana, 1857 (México, 1857), docs. 18–2, 18–3.Google Scholar

19 Lenz, Hans and de Orozco, Federico Gómez, La industria papelera en México (México, 1940), p. 83.Google Scholar

20 de Hacienda, Secretaría, Estadistica de la República Mexicana (México, 1880), cuadros de industria.Google Scholar

21 Anderson, Rodney, Outcasts in their Own Land: Mexican Industrial Workers, 1906–1911 (Dekalb, Illinois, 1976), p. 19.Google Scholar

22 Coatsworth, , Growth Against Development, pp. 36 and 40.Google Scholar

23 Ibid., pp. 97–103.

24 Anderson, , Outcasts in their Own Land, p. 12.Google Scholar

25 de Historia Moderna de México, Seminario, Estadisticas económicas del Porfiriato: fuerza de trabajo y actividad económica por sectores (México, 1965), pp. 136–138 and 143.Google Scholar

26 Coatsworth, , ‘Obstacles to Economic Growth’, p. 99.Google Scholar

27 Tenenbaum, Barbara, ‘Planning for Mexican Industrial Development: The Liberal Nation State, Tariff Policy, and Nationalism, 1867 to 1910’, unpublished paper, presented at Conference of the American Historical Association, December 1983.Google Scholar

28 Coatsworth, , ‘Obstacles to Economic Growth’, p. 82.Google Scholar

29 The number of workers in non-agricultural activities increased threefold between 1861 and 1895 to almost two million workers in the latter year. See Anderson, , Outcasts in their Own Land, p. 19.Google Scholar

30 Ceceña, José Luis, México en la órbita imperial (México, 1973), p. 87Google Scholar; The Mexican Yearbook, 1912 (London, 1913), p. 114Google Scholar; Monterrey, Fundidora, ‘Informe Anual, 1902’, p. 46Google Scholar; Villegas, Luis Torón, La industria siderúrgica pesada del norte de México y su abastecimiento de materias primas (México, 1963), p. 55.Google Scholar Rodríguez, Oscar Realme, ‘La industria siderúrgica nacional’, unpubl. tesis de licenciatura, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1946, p. 97.Google Scholar

31 The Mexican Yearbook, 1908 (London, 1909), p. 539Google Scholar; The Mexican Yearbook, 1909–10 (London, 1911), p. 416Google Scholar; The Mexican Yearbook, 1912 (London, 1913), p. 113, 126Google Scholar; Lenz, and de Orozco, Gómez, La industria papelera, p. 83.Google Scholar

32 For a more complete discussion of the transformation of these industries see Haber, Stephen H., Industry and Underdevelopment: The Industrialization of Mexico, 1890–1940 (Stanford, 1989), chs. 4 and 6.Google Scholar

33 Calculated from data in El Economista Mexicano, 24 Dec. 1898, p. 249Google Scholar; El Economista Mexicano, 27 July 1907, p. 360Google Scholar Rosenzweig, Fernando, Comercio exterior de México, 1877–1911: estadísticas económicas del Porfiriato (México, 1960), p. 208.Google Scholar

34 Calculated from Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público, Documentos, doc. 5; Ministerio de Fomento, Estadistica del Departamento de México, doc. 2; Seminario de Historia, Estadisticas económicas del Porfiriato, p. 106.

35 Ibid.

36 Calculated from Seminario de Historia, Estadisticas económicas del Porfiriato, p. 106.

37 Anderson, , Outcasts in their Own Land, p. 47.Google Scholar

38 Calculated from Secretaria de Hacienda, Boletin de estadistica fiscal, 1894–1915 (México, various years).Google Scholar

39 Anderson, , Outcasts in their Own Land, p. 41.Google Scholar

40 Calculated from Secretaría de Hacienda, Boletin de estadistica fiscal, 1894–1915 (México, various years).Google Scholar

41 Calculated from data in Dirección General de Estadística, , Primer censo industrial de 1930 (México, 1934).Google Scholar

42 For a discussion of the development of these industries in Brazil see Suzigan, Wilson, Indústria Brasileira: Origem e Desenvolvimento (Sāo Paulo, 1986).Google Scholar

43 The minimum wage series in Seminario de Historia Moderna, Estadisticas económicas del Porfiriato, pp. 147–54, are widely cited to make this point but are of dubious value for a variety of reasons. In the first place, Mexico did not in fact have a legal minimum wage prior to the 1930s. Secondly, the authors did not publish the sources or methods used, so there is no way of knowing exactly what the ‘minimum wage’ figures represent. It is most likely the case that the reported figures represent the lowest wage rate that the researchers could find for a particular year, which is not, to put it mildly, a systematic approach to gathering wage data.

44 Coatsworth, , ‘Obstacles to Economic Growth’, p. 82.Google Scholar

45 El Economista Mexicano, 7 05 1904, p. 114.Google Scholar

46 Mexico's investment in human capital was extremely low. The educational system served only the few, with the vast majority of the population having almost no formal schooling and very low levels of literacy. In 1895 only 14% of the population could read and write. See Dirección General de Estadística, Estadísticas sociales del Porfiriato (México, 1956), p. 123.Google Scholar

47 Alexander Gerschenkron made this point about the role of imported technology for late developers in Eastern Europe. See (his) Gerschenkron, Alexander Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective: A Book of Essays (Cambridge, 1962), ch. I.Google Scholar

48 Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, p. 33.Google Scholar

49 See El Economista Mexicano, 18 Jan. 1902, p. 245Google Scholar; 21 June 1902, p. 203; 5 Sept. 1903 (English edition), p. 536; II July 1908, p. 297.

50 Clark, Gregory, ‘Why Isn't the Whole World Developed? Lessons from the Cotton Mills’, Journal of Economic History, vol. 47 (1987), p. 146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

51 For a detailed discussion of this attempt to export manufactured goods during the Porfiriato see Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, pp. 39–43.Google Scholar

52 For a typical analysis of the productivity of Mexican labour by a Mexican industrialist see Robredo, José, Punto de vista de los industriales de bilados y tejidos de la República (México, 1925), p. 51.Google Scholar For a similar analysis by a foreign observer see Jenner, G., ‘Informe de Mr G. Jenner sobre la inversión del capital inglés en México’, in Informes y documentos relativos a comercio interior, mes de setiembre 1886 (México, 1886).Google Scholar This experience with the slow transition to ‘factory time’ was not unique to Mexico. In Meiji Japan, for example, people returning from study or work abroad regularly commented on the laxness and lack of time discipline of Japanese workers compared to their Western counterparts. The transition to modern conceptions of time and work, however, appears to have proceeded more rapidly in Japan than in Mexico. See Smith, Thomas C., Native Sources of Japanese Industrialization, 1750–1920 (Berkeley, 1988), pp. 225–228.Google Scholar

53 One of the more notorious cases of this occurred in the San Lorenzo cotton mill in Orizaba Veracruz in 1923. For details on this case see Archivo General de la Nación, Ramo de Trabajo, Box, 560, file 6, doc. II.

54 Clark, , ‘Why isn't the Whole World Developed?’, pp. 151–152.Google Scholar

55 Ibid., pp. 146 and 150.

56 Clark, William A. Graham, Cotton Goods in Latin America: Part One, Mexico, Cuba, and Central America (Washington D.C., 1909), p. 38.Google Scholar

57 Calculated from data in The Mexican Yearbook, 1909–1910, pp. 414–15; El Economista Mexicano, 4 Jan. 1902, p. 217.Google Scholar

58 Yamada, Matsuo, ‘The Cotton Industry in Orizaba: A Case Study of Mexican Labor and Industrialization During the Díaz Regime’, unpubl. MA diss., University of Florida, 1965, p. 49.Google Scholar

59 For a more complete discussion of industrial concentration and the creation of barriers to entry see Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, chs. 4 and 6.Google Scholar For an analysis of concentration ratios for the textile industry see Haber, Stephen H., ‘Industrial Concentration and the Capital Markets: A Comparative Study of Brazil, Mexico, and the United States, 1830–1930’, Journal of Economic History, vol. 51 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60 For a detailed discussion of banking institutions during the Porfiriato see Martínez, Hilda Sánchez, ‘El sistema monetario y financiero mexicano bajo una perspectiva histórica: el Porfiriato’, in La banco, pasado y presente: ensayos del CIDE (México, 1983).Google Scholar

61 Monterrey, Fundidora, ‘Informe Anual’, 1902.Google Scholar

62 Mexico's most important financiers operated on an international scale and had connections to the big foreign banks. See Martinez, Sánchez, ‘El sistema monetario’.Google Scholar

63 For an analysis of the profitability of Mexican manufacturing during this period see Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, ch. 7.Google Scholar

64 Brazil had a much better developed banking system and far larger and more complex stock and bond markets than Mexico did. Over the long run this allowed Brazil to overtake Mexico's early lead in industrialisation and also gave rise to lower levels of industrial concentration than existed in Mexico. See Haber, , ‘Industrial Concentration’.Google Scholar

65 Lamoreaux, Naomi, The Great Merger Movement in American Business, 1894–1905 (Cambridge, Eng., 1985), pp. 126–127.Google Scholar

66 Womack, John, ‘The Mexican Economy During the Revolution, 1910–1920: Historiography and Analysis’, Marxist Perspectives, vol. 1 (1978), pp. 80–123.Google Scholar

67 Primer Congreso de Industriales, Nacional, Reseña y memoria del primer congreso nacional de industriales reunido en la Ciudad de México bajo el patrocinio de la Secretaria de Industria Comercio y Trabajo (México, 1918).Google Scholar

68 For a detailed discussed of the effects of the Revolution, as well as a discussion of how these values were calculated, see Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, ch. 8.Google Scholar

69 For a detailed discussion of the sources and methods employed in this analysis see Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, pp. 144–148.Google Scholar

70 Sterrett, Joseph and Davis, Joseph, The Fiscal and Economic Condition of Mexico (New York, 1928), p. 190.Google Scholar

71 Cárdenas, Enrique, La industrialización mexicana durante la Gran Depresión (México, 1987), chs. 3 and 4.Google Scholar

72 Calculated from data in Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática, Estadisticas históricas de México (México, 1985), p. 311.Google Scholar

73 For a detailed discussion of the effects of the depression on employment, wages, profits, and investment see Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, ch. 9.Google Scholar

74 Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática, Estadísticas históricas de México, p. 566.

75 Calculated from ibid., p. 311.

76 Cárdenas, , La industrialización mexicana, p. 144Google Scholar; Haber, , Industry and Underdevelopment, ch. 10.Google Scholar

77 Secretaría de Hacienda y Crédito Público, ‘Directrio de las fábricas de hilados y tejidos registrados’ (México, 1938).Google Scholar

78 Cárdenas, , La industrialización mexicana, p. 10.Google Scholar