How Much Did the Liberty Shipbuilders Learn? New Evidence for an Old Case Study

Peter Thompson ()

Development and Comp Systems from University Library of Munich, Germany

Abstract: This paper uses previously unavailable historical records to show that several assumptions central to a learning by doing explanation of productivity growth in the construction of Liberty ships during World War II are mistaken. Impressive increases in output per worker recorded at one of the largest shipyards in the program, Calship, are shown to be strongly associated with increases in capital intensity and with a reduction in quality, where the latter is measured by the probability of a ship developing serious fractures that threatened the lives of its crew. Capital deepening and quality change, in conjunction with changes in production technologies and capacity utilization, account for virtually all the increase in labor productivity.

Keywords: Economic Growth Learning by doing; Liberty ships (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: N6 O3 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 30 pages
Date: 1997-12-11
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-tid
Note: Type of Document - Acrobat; prepared on IBM PC; to print on HP; pages: 30; figures: included
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/dev/papers/9712/9712001.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: How Much Did the Liberty Shipbuilders Learn? New Evidence for an Old Case Study (2001)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:9712001

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Development and Comp Systems from University Library of Munich, Germany
Bibliographic data for series maintained by EconWPA ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).