Question: Which countries in Europe provided funding for new industries during the Industrial Revolution?
About the article "Industrial Revolution", section "Continental Europe".

Candidate passages:
Industrialisation beyond Great Britain.
Continental Europe.
The Industrial Revolution on Continental Europe came a little later than in Great Britain.
In many industries, this involved the application of technology developed in Britain in new places.
Often the technology was purchased from Britain or British engineers and entrepreneurs moved abroad in search of new opportunities.
By 1809 part of the Ruhr Valley in Westphalia was called 'Miniature England' because of its similarities to the industrial areas of England.
The German, Russian and Belgian governments all provided state funding to the new industries.
In some cases (such as iron), the different availability of resources locally meant that only some aspects of the British technology were adopted.
Great Britain provided the legal and cultural foundations that enabled entrepreneurs to pioneer the industrial revolution.
Key factors fostering this environment were: (1) The period of peace and stability which followed the unification of England and Scotland; (2) no trade barriers between England and Scotland; (3) the rule of law (respecting the sanctity of contracts); (4) a straightforward legal system which allowed the formation of joint-stock companies (corporations); and (5) a free market (capitalism).
Geographical and natural resource advantages of Great Britain were the fact that it had extensive coast lines and many navigable rivers in an age where water was the easiest means of transportation and having the highest quality coal in Europe.
There were two main values that really drove the industrial revolution in Britain.
These values were self-interest and an entrepreneurial spirit.
Because of these interests, many industrial advances were made that resulted in a huge increase in personal wealth.
These advancements also greatly benefitted the British society as a whole.
Countries around the world started to recognize the changes and advancements in Britain and use them as an example to begin their own industrial revolutions.
The debate about the start of the Industrial Revolution also concerns the massive lead that Great Britain had over other countries.
Some have stressed the importance of natural or financial resources that Britain received from its many overseas colonies or that profits from the British slave trade between Africa and the Caribbean helped fuel industrial investment.
However, it has been pointed out that slave trade and West Indian plantations provided only 5% of the British national income during the years of the Industrial Revolution.
Even though slavery accounted for minimal economic profits in Britain during the Industrial Revolution, Caribbean-based demand accounted for 12% of Britain's industrial output.
Instead, the greater liberalisation of trade from a large merchant base may have allowed Britain to produce and use emerging scientific and technological developments more effectively than countries with stronger monarchies, particularly China and Russia.
Britain emerged from the Napoleonic Wars as the only European nation not ravaged by financial plunder and economic collapse, and having the only merchant fleet of any useful size (European merchant fleets were destroyed during the war by the Royal Navy).
Britain's extensive exporting cottage industries also ensured markets were already available for many early forms of manufactured goods.
The conflict resulted in most British warfare being conducted overseas, reducing the devastating effects of territorial conquest that affected much of Europe.
This was further aided by Britain's geographical position—an island separated from the rest of mainland Europe.
Another theory is that Britain was able to succeed in the Industrial Revolution due to the availability of key resources it possessed.
It had a dense population for its small geographical size.
Enclosure of common land and the related agricultural revolution made a supply of this labour readily available.
There was also a local coincidence of natural resources in the North of England, the English Midlands, South Wales and the Scottish Lowlands.
Local supplies of coal, iron, lead, copper, tin, limestone and water power, resulted in excellent conditions for the development and expansion of industry.
Also, the damp, mild weather conditions of the North West of England provided ideal conditions for the spinning of cotton, providing a natural starting point for the birth of the textiles industry.
The stable political situation in Britain from around 1688, and British society's greater receptiveness to change (compared with other European countries) can also be said to be factors favouring the Industrial Revolution.
Peasant resistance to industrialisation was largely eliminated by the Enclosure movement, and the landed upper classes developed commercial interests that made them pioneers in removing obstacles to the growth of capitalism.
(This point is also made in Hilaire Belloc's The Servile State.
)Britain's population grew 280% 1550–1820, while the rest of Western Europe grew 50-80%.
70% of European urbanisation happened in Britain 1750–1800.
By 1800, only the Netherlands was more urbanised than Britain.
This was only possible because coal, coke, imported cotton, brick and slate had replaced wood, charcoal, flax, peat and thatch.
The latter compete with land grown to feed people while mined materials do not.
Yet more land would be freed when chemical fertilisers replaced manure and horse's work was mechanised.
A workhorse needs for fodder while even early steam engines produced 4 times more mechanical energy.
In 1700, 5/6 of coal mined worldwide was in Britain, while the Netherlands had none; so despite having Europe's best transport, most urbanised, well paid, literate people and lowest taxes, it failed to industrialise.
In the 18th century, it was the only European country whose cities and population shrank.
Without coal, Britain would have run out of suitable river sites for mills by the 1830s. 
The thesis of each of these works is this: during the 19th century, the development of new systems based on steam power and electricity created a Second Industrial Revolution, which resulted in much more capital-intensive industries than had the industrial revolution of the previous century.
The mobilization of the capital necessary to exploit these new systems required a larger number of workers and managers, and larger physical plants than ever before.
More particularly, the thesis of "The Visible Hand" is that, counter to other theses regarding how capitalism functions, administrative structure and managerial coordination replaced Adam Smith's "invisible hand" (market forces) as the core developmental and structuring impetus of modern business.
In the wake of this increase of industrial scale, three successful models of capitalism emerged, which Chandler associated with the three leading countries of the period: Great Britain ("personal capitalism"), the United States ("competitive capitalism") and Germany ("cooperative capitalism.
")Despite the important differences in these three models, the common thread among the developed nations is that the large industrial firm has been the engine of growth in three ways: first, it has provided focal points for capital and labor on large scales; second, it became the educator whereby a nation learned the pertinent technology and developed managerial skills; third, it served as the core around which medium and small firms that supply and serve it grew. 
China, India and South-East Asia were industrial ("industrial" here do not refer to "industrial revolution" who took place in Europe in 1800, so those countries could not be "industrial for major parts of human history" since industry begins in the 1800) powerhouse for major parts of human history .
These countries and regions suffered great loss of industrial production due to colonization during 18th-20th centuries.
After many decades of their independence, these countries have started reindustrializing themselves.
In last three decades, share of these countries in global industrial output has increased manifold.
In context of declining share of OECD in world GDP and outsourcing of manufacturing and services, reindustrialization is considered as a contrasts to deindustrialization, the process under which industry, especially manufacturing, is relocated outside of a country's borders, and seeks to reverse that trend. 
The Second Industrial Revolution, also known as the Technological Revolution, was a phase of the larger Industrial Revolution corresponding to the latter half of the 19th century until World War I.
It is considered to have begun around the time of the introduction of Bessemer steel in the 1860s and culminated in early factory electrification, mass production and the production line.
The Second Industrial Revolution was characterized by the build out of railroads, large scale iron and steel production, widespread use of machinery in manufacturing, greatly increased use of steam power, and by electrical communications.
The Second Industrial Revolution saw rapid industrial development, primarily in Britain, Germany and the United States, but also in France, the Low Countries and Japan.
It followed on from the First Industrial Revolution that began in Britain in the late 18th century that then spread throughout Western Europe and North America.
The concept was introduced by Patrick Geddes, "Cities in Evolution" (1910), but David Landes' use of the term in a 1966 essay and in "The Unbound Prometheus" (1972) standardized scholarly definitions of the term, which was most intensely promoted by American historian Alfred Chandler (1918–2007).
However, some continue to express reservations about its use.
Landes (2003) stresses the importance of new technologies, especially electricity, the internal combustion engine, new materials and substances, including alloys and chemicals, and communication technologies such as the telegraph, telephone and radio.
While the first industrial revolution was centered on textiles, iron and steam engine technologies, the second industrial revolution revolved around steel, railroads, electricity, and chemicals.
Vaclav Smill called the period 1867–1914 "The Age of Synergy" during which most of the great innovations were developed.
Unlike the First Industrial Revolution, the inventions and innovations were science based.