Did economic factors determine the outcome of the First and Second World
Wars?
The First and Second World Wars: it was the length of the war which saw the side with the greatest
economic strength and endurance, rather than the most advanced and developed industries and
economies, emerge triumphant. (Economic strength = ability to sustain a long war)
Germany had a far more advanced/developed industry than the Allies (e.g – first to produce
chemical weapons in WW1), but did not have the economic strength/resources to back it up, meet
the demands of production, and sustain a long war.
o In the American Civil War, the greater industrial development of the Union gave it victory
over the less economically developed Confederacy (strong economy from cotton, but fewer
factories and inferior rail network)
o In the Austro-Prussian war, Prussia’s more advanced industrial economy could produce
greater changes in weaponry ––> enabled it to equip its troops with the superior Dreyse rifle
o In the Franco-Prussian War, the more advanced Prussian economy meant it had a far
superior rail network to the French, and better artillery
o However: in WW1/2, the Germans produced far better tanks than the Allies, but could not
make enough of them. Here Allied economic strength = more important than Germany’s
advanced economy
Strength vs development. (19th century: development more important, 20 th century: strength more
important. Economic advantages could win 19 th century wars but 20th century wars won by being
able to sustain the war effort).
War economy: reorganisation of industries in a time of war to ensure a country’s productive capacity
is configured in an optimum way to support the war effort.
First World War
Britain + France’s war economies were better managed than Germany’s, meaning they were able to
sustain a long war, while Germany could not organise enough production to meet the Allies’
resources. US economic aid helped the Allies to sustain the war, whereas the Allied blockade meant
Germany could not sustain the demands of Total War (or feed its people, leading to a loss of
morale).
France’s war economy
A few months into the war, the French realised the importance of specifically allocating
manpower and resources to the economy – i.e. a state-controlled war-economy
o Businessmen were used to allocate resources and develop mass production (e.g
Renault – by 1918 he had 22,000 workers)
o Mass production sustained by enlisting a larger workforce, including
women/children/veterans/soldiers allocated to war production
Britain’s war economy
o Workforce expanded by using more women and children
o Britain had existing experience of mass production
, o War production expanded enormously – using private industry
o Negotiations with trade unions, high wages and rewards led to greater efforts by
workers
o Organisation of a war economy allowed for the tank to be developed (used alongside air
power to help achieve victory in 1918)
o the Allies were able to produce more tanks than the Germans - by 1918 they had
produced hundreds, compared to the Germans’ 20. Battle of Amiens August 1918 –
Rawlinson broke the German lines using over 500 tanks alongside infantry in an all-arms
battle.
Allied economic output was over 3 times greater than that of the Central Powers
Germany’s war economy
Germany also took over its industrial resources
o Businessmen (e.g Rathenau) used to allocate resources
o A special Raw Materials Department was created
However, Germany’s war economy was not as strong or well-managed as Britain and
France’s
o Germany lacked access to large-scale purchases in North America
o Key raw materials had to be rationed, especially food from 1915 (in Britain from
1918). From 1916 there was a shortage of raw materials.
o The military attempted to control war production with the Hindenburg Programme
(Total War??) – but its production demands worsened the manpower crisis, and
constraints on the availability of raw materials meant its targets were not met (the
HP has been criticised as unrealistic)
o Authoritarian demands for greater efforts from workers did not work
o U-boat warfare threatened the British economy but was counterproductive as the
policy of ‘unrestricted submarine warfare’ resulted in the USA’s entry in the war
(Synthesis: Continental Blockade)
o The German economy was unable to meet the demands of Total War
Russia’s war economy
o Like other countries Russia used businessmen to allocate resources
o Manufacturers managed to increase arms productions to new levels (4.5 million shells a
month in 1916)
However industrial production hit problems by 1917
o Russia’s infrastructure was less efficient in bringing food to cities – this was a major
factor in underperformance by troops + internal unrest (effectively taking Russia out of
the war)
The importance of America
France and Britain depended increasingly on the USA (and Canada) for war products, food,
and credit
o Even before the USA joined the war in 1917, Britain + France’s ability to tap into its
enormous industrial resources gave them the ability to sustain warfare on a new scale
o The advantage of US economic support was a major factor in Allied victory in 1918: the
economic resources and manpower that the Americans brought were crucial
Wars?
The First and Second World Wars: it was the length of the war which saw the side with the greatest
economic strength and endurance, rather than the most advanced and developed industries and
economies, emerge triumphant. (Economic strength = ability to sustain a long war)
Germany had a far more advanced/developed industry than the Allies (e.g – first to produce
chemical weapons in WW1), but did not have the economic strength/resources to back it up, meet
the demands of production, and sustain a long war.
o In the American Civil War, the greater industrial development of the Union gave it victory
over the less economically developed Confederacy (strong economy from cotton, but fewer
factories and inferior rail network)
o In the Austro-Prussian war, Prussia’s more advanced industrial economy could produce
greater changes in weaponry ––> enabled it to equip its troops with the superior Dreyse rifle
o In the Franco-Prussian War, the more advanced Prussian economy meant it had a far
superior rail network to the French, and better artillery
o However: in WW1/2, the Germans produced far better tanks than the Allies, but could not
make enough of them. Here Allied economic strength = more important than Germany’s
advanced economy
Strength vs development. (19th century: development more important, 20 th century: strength more
important. Economic advantages could win 19 th century wars but 20th century wars won by being
able to sustain the war effort).
War economy: reorganisation of industries in a time of war to ensure a country’s productive capacity
is configured in an optimum way to support the war effort.
First World War
Britain + France’s war economies were better managed than Germany’s, meaning they were able to
sustain a long war, while Germany could not organise enough production to meet the Allies’
resources. US economic aid helped the Allies to sustain the war, whereas the Allied blockade meant
Germany could not sustain the demands of Total War (or feed its people, leading to a loss of
morale).
France’s war economy
A few months into the war, the French realised the importance of specifically allocating
manpower and resources to the economy – i.e. a state-controlled war-economy
o Businessmen were used to allocate resources and develop mass production (e.g
Renault – by 1918 he had 22,000 workers)
o Mass production sustained by enlisting a larger workforce, including
women/children/veterans/soldiers allocated to war production
Britain’s war economy
o Workforce expanded by using more women and children
o Britain had existing experience of mass production
, o War production expanded enormously – using private industry
o Negotiations with trade unions, high wages and rewards led to greater efforts by
workers
o Organisation of a war economy allowed for the tank to be developed (used alongside air
power to help achieve victory in 1918)
o the Allies were able to produce more tanks than the Germans - by 1918 they had
produced hundreds, compared to the Germans’ 20. Battle of Amiens August 1918 –
Rawlinson broke the German lines using over 500 tanks alongside infantry in an all-arms
battle.
Allied economic output was over 3 times greater than that of the Central Powers
Germany’s war economy
Germany also took over its industrial resources
o Businessmen (e.g Rathenau) used to allocate resources
o A special Raw Materials Department was created
However, Germany’s war economy was not as strong or well-managed as Britain and
France’s
o Germany lacked access to large-scale purchases in North America
o Key raw materials had to be rationed, especially food from 1915 (in Britain from
1918). From 1916 there was a shortage of raw materials.
o The military attempted to control war production with the Hindenburg Programme
(Total War??) – but its production demands worsened the manpower crisis, and
constraints on the availability of raw materials meant its targets were not met (the
HP has been criticised as unrealistic)
o Authoritarian demands for greater efforts from workers did not work
o U-boat warfare threatened the British economy but was counterproductive as the
policy of ‘unrestricted submarine warfare’ resulted in the USA’s entry in the war
(Synthesis: Continental Blockade)
o The German economy was unable to meet the demands of Total War
Russia’s war economy
o Like other countries Russia used businessmen to allocate resources
o Manufacturers managed to increase arms productions to new levels (4.5 million shells a
month in 1916)
However industrial production hit problems by 1917
o Russia’s infrastructure was less efficient in bringing food to cities – this was a major
factor in underperformance by troops + internal unrest (effectively taking Russia out of
the war)
The importance of America
France and Britain depended increasingly on the USA (and Canada) for war products, food,
and credit
o Even before the USA joined the war in 1917, Britain + France’s ability to tap into its
enormous industrial resources gave them the ability to sustain warfare on a new scale
o The advantage of US economic support was a major factor in Allied victory in 1918: the
economic resources and manpower that the Americans brought were crucial
