| Entries and exits of firms in the British motor industry are analyzed from 1885-1981. Using comprehensive historical materials compiled by historians, automobile collectors, and enthusiasts, I analyze how this initially precarious industry materialized and became legitimated in the wake of government regulation and opposition from other industries. Event count and event history analyses are used to show the influence of broader European developments on the rise of the industry. For both entries and exits, an extended time-varying model of density-dependent legitimation and competition shows that legitimation comes from European motor firm density, whereas competition operates at the national level.;Controlling for prior industry experience did not diminish the effects of time-varying density dependence on firm vital rates. As found in the U.S. automobile industry, firms that enter the automobile industry from other industries have lower initial mortality rates than new start-ups. Motor firms with strong social movement networks and broad public exposure, namely ex-bicycle manufacturers, are found to have the best initial survival rate. They are at less risk of disbanding than firms with no prior industry experience, and even other laterally diversified firms with better technological capital: engine-manufacturers, component manufacturers and motorcycle makers, etc. Industry boundaries are identified and consolidated by social networks. Technological progress alone did not foresee the rise of the industry. This dissertation shows that industry emerged as a social fact--a social construct.;Firm concentration factors into the segregating and blending of the auto industry's boundaries. Using the theory of resource-partitioning, this dissertation, for the first time, shows that the vital rates of specialist and generalist sub-populations are significantly affected by industry concentration. Unlike the conventional wisdom, which assumes increasing industry concentration promotes higher barriers to entry, the results show that specialist firms are more likely to be founded with rising concentration. On the other hand, generalist entries diminish with a more concentrated industry. In addition, it is confirmed that the life-chances of specialists markedly improve with higher industry concentration, while generalists are at greater risk of disbanding. All models control for size and find consistent monotonic negative age dependence and size dependence. |
