The structural transformation Economic progress is often celebrated as a story of innovation, technological breakthroughs, and institutional advancement. It reshapes everyday life by replacing old practices with new systems, rendering obsolete products and methods that once seemed indispensable. Though innovation has been present throughout human history, sustainable economic growth is a relatively recent phenomenon. The emergence of this modern growth trajectory is commonly associated with Britain’s Industrial Revolution. Economic historian and Nobel Laureate of 2025, Joel Mokyr argues that the take- off of sustained economic growth took place in Britain with the Industrial Revolution, commonly set between 1760 and 1830.
After Britain, economic take-offs into sustained growth have occurred in several Western countries. According to Mokyr, earlier civilizations experienced cycles of progress and stagnation. But scientific knowledge is rarely then translated into continuous economic production. The Industrial Revolution in Britain marked a turning point: scientific innovation became institutionalised. Technological advances fed into production, and economic growth became permanent rather than temporary. This ‘new normal’ of growth fundamentally changed living standards over the long term. Mokyr advocates that the Industrial Revolution in Britain had an intellectual origin.
The Enlightenment, a pan-European movement, started in 1685 and ended in 1815, according to Mokyr, and paved the way for linking scientific inventions to te chnological innovations. Enlightenment thinkers insisted that scientific ideas should be reproducible, verifiable, and practically useful. Scientists started to find methods and experiments that should be reproducible and should have economic value addition. Enlightenment facilitated an increase in knowledge and its accessibility to those who could make best use of it. It spread to a large circle and the circle was becoming larger.
The collective knowledge in society in Europe was much greater than in any other area on the globe at that time. The total amount of knowledge – scientific or otherwise – that society controlled was vast. This vast array of knowledge had successfully been transformed into economic production and that is the primary reason for rapid economic growth of the Western economies. The intellectual elucidations were supported by institutional efforts. Intellect turned out to be the capital that could foster economic growth. Mokyr writes: “The short answer as to why the West is so much richer today than it was two centuries ago is that collectively, these societies ‘know’ more.” Without Enlightenment, in the opinion of Mokyr, the Industrial Revolution could not have happened.
One of the prerequisites for sustained growth, according to Mokyr, is the joint evolution of science and technology which was hitherto not present. It is of central importance how science interacts with technology, and how change in technology impacts economic production. Secondly it is crucial to have skilled and knowledgeable p ersonnel to implement new technologies in economic production. Mokyr stressed that sustained growth first occurred in Britain because it was home to many skilled artisans and engineers. They were able to understand designs and transform ideas into commercial products, and this was vital in achieving sustained growth.
Mokyr’s insight that modern long-term growth rests on creation, accumulation and diffusion of knowledge remains one of the most persuasive elements of his argument. The democratization of knowledge serves as an important impetus for economic development when Mokyr observes that “the central fact of modern economic growth is the ultimate irreversibility of the accumulation of useful knowledge paired with ever-falling access cost.” Mokyr argues that “as long as knowledge was confined to a small number of specialists with high access costs of everyone else there was a serious risk that it would be lost.”
The decline in access cost implies knowledge is spread over many more minds and storage devices, so that any reversal in technological progress after the Industrial Revolution is ruled out. A revolution always implies a profound change. Western civilisation had been receptive to new ideas and concepts. Britain’s Industrial Revolution was the result of a cultural shift that encouraged innovation and systematic use of scientific knowledge. “Seeds of innovation sprouted and flourished”. Mokyr’s arguments move away from the established framework of describing the Industrial Revolution by materialistic explanations like resource endowments.
However, industrialisation had contrasting conse quences: technological advancement and prosperity in Britain coincided with deindustrialisation and structural economic changes in India. England struck down the ancient industries of India over a whole century. England when it obtained supremacy in India had the opportunity to enrich India also while bringing prosperity to herself. The fruits of the Industrial Revolution could have reached India too. India was well endowed with a potential of wealth, raw materials, skilled artisans, and markets.
Britain possessed the opportunity to promote shared development across its empire, but colonial priorities often favoured extraction and unilateral advantage instead. Therefore, the purpose of intellect, whether good or otherwise, depends entirely upon the objective it nourishes. The study of Britain’s Industrial Revolution, through contrasting lenses, offers crucial lessons for contemporary development policy. Mokyr’s postulates are clearly relevant for present-day India. For India today, the path towards ‘developed nation’ status requires fostering what might be called an ‘Indian Enlightenment’ – characterized by massive investment in education, research, and human capital.
While India is projected to become the world’s third-largest economy by 2030, it continues to grapple with the intricacies of its “developing nation” status, characterized by low per capita income coupled with low living standards. India’s economic progress remains heavily reliant on the service sector, which despite its significant contributions, often operates in an unorganised manner that lacks the high-productivity value-addition with high reward typical of a developed economy. Further the vast workforce in the unorganised sector is either uneducated or lowly educated. They are oblivious of the idea that ‘there is a world of thought and knowledge unattained by them’.
The ‘Indian lettered classes’ should take the burden of educating the ‘Indian working folk’ properly. Restoration of material prosperity is an imperative need in India. For this the energy and cooperation of the whole nation is necessary. The people of India must have the right to acquire education and knowledge. Only by the spread of knowledge could the country as a whole achieve its desired objectives of a prosperous nation. Education, more particularly higher education, must move beyond the confinement of a small, elite circle and reach the masses to become truly practical and widespread. High access costs create ‘information silos’ that concentrate power and stifle competition. Therefore, research, scientific societies, journals, open lectures, and consistent deliberations facilitate the interaction between those who control propositional knowledge and those who implement techniques.
India must have the aspiration to transform into a knowledge society. After all, as Dr APJ Abdul Kalam asserted many years ago: “Knowledge is the primary source of wealth creation and societal well-being in the twenty-first century.” Intellectual pursuits must be underpinned by robust, equitable institutional frameworks to ensure that the benefits of innovation are broadly share d. India’s own development trajectory highlights this challenge.
Ultimately, the history of industrialisation teaches that economic progress is neither automatic nor morally neutral. The central question for modern societies is therefore not whether to pursue innovation, but how to guide it. When intellect serves narrow interests, progress may enrich a few while impoverishing others. When guided by inclusive institutions and ethical objectives, it can elevate entire societies. True economic development lies not merely in accelerating growth, but in ensuring that the fruits of knowledge and innovation are shared widely, sustainably, and justly.
(The writer is a cost accountant who worked for a public sector power utility.)