Economic history is primarily the history of economic development (why…
Economic history is primarily the history of economic development
what is economic development?
one has to distinguish very clearly between economic development and economic growth. Economic development. Economic development is th process in which a nation is being improved politically, economically and also the social well being of the people. Economic growth is the phenomenon of productivity and growth in GDP. As amatory Sen has pointed out, economic growth is therefore one aspect of economic development.Hence though, economi growth is part of economic development -> currently dominating the litarture
the process through which emerging economies becomes advanced economies (completely different picture) or why they don't.
clive bell: examines aspects of the economic development process in relatively low-income countries focusing on structural change poverty and economic growth.
strands of history that are left out
history of economic life (concept by Sewell 2010)
General note: economic development and this are not mutually exclusive. more economic development for instance will change the patterns of consumption which effect will that have oil humans?
if you adopt the second definition of economic development there is a hig chance that some crucial factors are not considered
if you adopt the third definition then all changes in the western world would not be considered
other clearly economic life issues would not be considered
moral meanings of bankruptcy of the financial crisis for instance
what about the hyper inflation of German in the 20s and their German Ansgt about inflation?
consumption from a more cultural viewpoint
the macro developments of capitalism
Mita in Potosi
what did that do with the families there? -> socially completely disruptive effects
transatlantic slavery -> instead of just focusing on what it contributed to economic growth and in which ways it shaped the development of Latin America one could focus on how working in the field shaped their cultural identity.
general development can be explained quite well with peter Temins article 2013 in which he explains the decline of economic history at MIT with Dewey still being relevant to all then the emergence of Samuelson who revolutionised the whole field of development economic and Solow was also very much into this direction. Economic historians like North an, Prker and Engermann tried to respond to this by using new tools of neoclassical economics to also appeal to economists. At the same time the social historians who had contributed a lot to the field more turned to the new cultural econiomics which is why the history of economic
what about criticism of the homo economics? -> about economic decision making in the past to analyse economic phenomena.
oil shocks deeply influenced by loss aversion
the new history of capitalism
all of the new books are mainly about economic development and argue along the same lines as Pomeranz etc that the slave labour act was crucial, yes, especially Baptist makes a lot of accounting mistakes but the message is clear. Also: they put a lot of emphasis on violence which is a clear counteraction to stately and engermann who had argued in 1974 that slavery was much more profitable than has so far been assumed neglecting violence on normal farm plantations -> mostly look at abolitionist literature but the height was actually relatively similar.
why would that be
most of the research have dealt with the second question of why some nations are rich and others poor. However, it has increasingly become a question of economic development because of several factors
end of the cold war
growth of East Asian Tiger states
the growing recognition that Sub-Sahara regions are not catching up at all but also other parts of the world
new theoretical insights by Romer and Lucas
new data (Maddison 2001)
since the 1980s because of the relative convergence between the American economy and Japan and Germany
productivity growth slowdown starting in the 1960s and 1970s
measurement of stuff very difficult (Boskin commission has for instance found that economic growth has been underestimated by 0.9% per year.
until the 1950s it certainly was not because there was the classcal view until the 1950s that there had been a long
example Japan why it is problematic.
Frank Walter Rodney
critique: Japan directly partopated in the market, so did China and all Tiger states and that is their economic growth.