为什么理解分化的时机很重要

IF 1.7 1区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Journal of Global History Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1017/S174002282000042X
J. Goldstone
{"title":"为什么理解分化的时机很重要","authors":"J. Goldstone","doi":"10.1017/S174002282000042X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What is divergence and why does it matter? The question motivating all of us is to understand what led up to modern economic growth. Malanima is correct that I follow Kuznets and describe this as rapid and sustained growth in both population and output per head, but I would now add a third qualifier, to levels beyond the pre-industrial peak. All three qualifiers are necessary because history has many examples of sustained growth in population and output per head: as van Zanden and Bolt show in their comment, both Britain and Holland had positive trend growth in real GDP/capita all the way from the late Middle Ages to the eighteenth century. It seems clear that classical Greece and Rome each had at least three centuries of sustained growth in population and GDP/cap as well, and China likely did also before achieving the heights reached in the Northern Song.1 But all of these sustained growth episodes were very slow, as van Zanden and Bolt show in their regressions for Holland and England, where real income growth averaged not more than 0.2% per year. There were shorter periods of much more rapid growth, which I have labelled ‘efflorescences.’ In these cases, a combination of technical innovations in farming or transport or other production allows higher output that supports urbanisation and more extensive trade, which in turn leads to greater specialisation, greater monetary circulation and profits that feed further investment to boost productivity, in a virtuous cycle.2 In post-classical Europe, the High Middle Ages in the north, Renaissance Italy and Golden Age Holland are examples; outside Europe, the peaks of the Song and Qing dynasties in China, the early Baghdad Caliphate and perhaps the Mughal Empire under Akbar are likely others. But over time, population continues to grow, trade patterns change, climate shifts, administrative inefficiency, wars and diseases take their toll and after a century or less, rapid growth in GDP/cap comes to an end. Finally, past episodes of rapid and/or sustained growth, as beautifully shown by Broadberry’s Figure 5 above, showing GDP/cap in the leading regions of China and Europe, often approached but never reached beyond an apparent limit in GDP/cap of about $1800.3 Instead, from classical times up to 1750, as Malanima makes clear, GDP/cap fluctuated in a relatively narrow band under","PeriodicalId":46192,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global History","volume":"16 1","pages":"309 - 314"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why understanding the timing of divergence matters\",\"authors\":\"J. Goldstone\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S174002282000042X\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"What is divergence and why does it matter? The question motivating all of us is to understand what led up to modern economic growth. Malanima is correct that I follow Kuznets and describe this as rapid and sustained growth in both population and output per head, but I would now add a third qualifier, to levels beyond the pre-industrial peak. All three qualifiers are necessary because history has many examples of sustained growth in population and output per head: as van Zanden and Bolt show in their comment, both Britain and Holland had positive trend growth in real GDP/capita all the way from the late Middle Ages to the eighteenth century. It seems clear that classical Greece and Rome each had at least three centuries of sustained growth in population and GDP/cap as well, and China likely did also before achieving the heights reached in the Northern Song.1 But all of these sustained growth episodes were very slow, as van Zanden and Bolt show in their regressions for Holland and England, where real income growth averaged not more than 0.2% per year. There were shorter periods of much more rapid growth, which I have labelled ‘efflorescences.’ In these cases, a combination of technical innovations in farming or transport or other production allows higher output that supports urbanisation and more extensive trade, which in turn leads to greater specialisation, greater monetary circulation and profits that feed further investment to boost productivity, in a virtuous cycle.2 In post-classical Europe, the High Middle Ages in the north, Renaissance Italy and Golden Age Holland are examples; outside Europe, the peaks of the Song and Qing dynasties in China, the early Baghdad Caliphate and perhaps the Mughal Empire under Akbar are likely others. But over time, population continues to grow, trade patterns change, climate shifts, administrative inefficiency, wars and diseases take their toll and after a century or less, rapid growth in GDP/cap comes to an end. Finally, past episodes of rapid and/or sustained growth, as beautifully shown by Broadberry’s Figure 5 above, showing GDP/cap in the leading regions of China and Europe, often approached but never reached beyond an apparent limit in GDP/cap of about $1800.3 Instead, from classical times up to 1750, as Malanima makes clear, GDP/cap fluctuated in a relatively narrow band under\",\"PeriodicalId\":46192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Global History\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"309 - 314\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Global History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S174002282000042X\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S174002282000042X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

什么是散度,为什么它很重要?激励我们所有人的问题是理解是什么导致了现代经济增长。Malanima是正确的,我遵循库兹涅茨将其描述为人口和人均产出的快速和持续增长,但我现在要添加第三个限定词,即超过工业化前峰值的水平。这三个限定条件都是必要的,因为历史上有许多人口和人均产出持续增长的例子:正如范·赞登和博尔特在他们的评论中所表明的那样,从中世纪晚期到18世纪,英国和荷兰的实际人均GDP都有正趋势增长。很明显,古典希腊和罗马在人口和GDP/cap方面都有至少三个世纪的持续增长,中国在达到北宋的高度之前也可能这样做。但所有这些持续增长的时期都非常缓慢,正如范·赞登和博尔特在他们对荷兰和英国的回归中所显示的那样,这两个国家的实际收入增长平均每年不超过0.2%。有一段较短的时期生长得更快,我称之为“花期”。“在这些情况下,农业、运输或其他生产领域的技术创新结合起来,可以提高产出,从而支持城市化和更广泛的贸易,这反过来又会带来更大的专业化、更大的货币流通和利润,从而促进进一步的投资,从而提高生产率,形成良性循环。在后古典时代的欧洲,北部的中世纪盛期、文艺复兴时期的意大利和黄金时代的荷兰都是例子;在欧洲以外,中国宋朝和清朝的鼎盛时期,早期的巴格达哈里发,也许还有阿克巴领导下的莫卧儿帝国,都是可能的例子。但随着时间的推移,人口继续增长,贸易模式改变,气候变化,行政效率低下,战争和疾病造成了损失,一个世纪或更短的时间后,GDP/cap的快速增长结束了。最后,过去快速和/或持续增长的时期,如Broadberry上面的图5所示,显示了中国和欧洲主要地区的GDP/上限,经常接近但从未超过GDP/上限的明显限制,约为1800.3美元。相反,从古典时期到1750年,Malanima明确表示,GDP/上限在相对狭窄的范围内波动
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Why understanding the timing of divergence matters
What is divergence and why does it matter? The question motivating all of us is to understand what led up to modern economic growth. Malanima is correct that I follow Kuznets and describe this as rapid and sustained growth in both population and output per head, but I would now add a third qualifier, to levels beyond the pre-industrial peak. All three qualifiers are necessary because history has many examples of sustained growth in population and output per head: as van Zanden and Bolt show in their comment, both Britain and Holland had positive trend growth in real GDP/capita all the way from the late Middle Ages to the eighteenth century. It seems clear that classical Greece and Rome each had at least three centuries of sustained growth in population and GDP/cap as well, and China likely did also before achieving the heights reached in the Northern Song.1 But all of these sustained growth episodes were very slow, as van Zanden and Bolt show in their regressions for Holland and England, where real income growth averaged not more than 0.2% per year. There were shorter periods of much more rapid growth, which I have labelled ‘efflorescences.’ In these cases, a combination of technical innovations in farming or transport or other production allows higher output that supports urbanisation and more extensive trade, which in turn leads to greater specialisation, greater monetary circulation and profits that feed further investment to boost productivity, in a virtuous cycle.2 In post-classical Europe, the High Middle Ages in the north, Renaissance Italy and Golden Age Holland are examples; outside Europe, the peaks of the Song and Qing dynasties in China, the early Baghdad Caliphate and perhaps the Mughal Empire under Akbar are likely others. But over time, population continues to grow, trade patterns change, climate shifts, administrative inefficiency, wars and diseases take their toll and after a century or less, rapid growth in GDP/cap comes to an end. Finally, past episodes of rapid and/or sustained growth, as beautifully shown by Broadberry’s Figure 5 above, showing GDP/cap in the leading regions of China and Europe, often approached but never reached beyond an apparent limit in GDP/cap of about $1800.3 Instead, from classical times up to 1750, as Malanima makes clear, GDP/cap fluctuated in a relatively narrow band under
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Journal of Global History addresses the main problems of global change over time, together with the diverse histories of globalization. It also examines counter-currents to globalization, including those that have structured other spatial units. The journal seeks to transcend the dichotomy between "the West and the rest", straddle traditional regional boundaries, relate material to cultural and political history, and overcome thematic fragmentation in historiography. The journal also acts as a forum for interdisciplinary conversations across a wide variety of social and natural sciences. Published for London School of Economics and Political Science
期刊最新文献
Do mountains kill states? Exploring the diversity of Southeast Asian highland communities A merger of equals: The political economy of the World Bank’s early contacts with China Freeing Chinese Men on the María Luz: Gender and the Latin American Coolie Trade Parsi capital and imperial infrastructure: Shipping and shopping in the port of Aden, 1840-1888 Islands in a sea of sand: The role of Tarim Basin polities in global trade during late antiquity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1