Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

In Victorian Britain, an abundance of cheap labour — poor peasants and vagrants constantly migrating to cities — meant wages remained low. Industrialists therefore had little incentive to invest in expensive machinery, since human labour was cheaper and more flexible, especially for seasonal industries like gas works and breweries.

By contrast, in colonies and settler economies such as nineteenth-century America, labour was scarce and wages were high. Industrialists there were keen to adopt mechanical power to minimise dependence on human labour.

Thus, labour availability directly shaped technological adoption: scarcity accelerated mechanisation, while abundance slowed it. In Britain, hand labour also remained preferred for intricate, customised goods that machines could not replicate.

Source: Chapter 4 — Hand Labour and Steam Power; The Pace of Industrial Change

---

• The examiner expects you to use both sides of the contrast (Britain vs. colonies) — don't just describe one.
• Key causal logic: low wages → no urgency to mechanise; labour scarcity → mechanisation essential. State this explicitly.
• Mentioning seasonal demand and handmade goods adds a third dimension showing why British industrialists actively preferred hand labour — earns the third mark.
• Avoid writing a general essay on industrialisation; stay focused on the labour–technology relationship as the question demands.