Abstract
The boom in global history that The Great Divergence helped to stimulate has produced much new analysis of the path of economic change that preceded the Industrial Revolution. This can be used to provide the framework within which work on Japan is presented in Part II of the book. Thus, explanations of the timing and nature of the Great Divergence can be categorised as: (i) those that relate to divergences in access to the natural resources, in particular coal, on which accelerated economic growth and industrialisation depended, via engagement in trade, colonisation, and globalisation in general; (ii) those that see divergence as the result of differences in the institutional structures that condition the spread of the market and determine household behaviour, for example in relation to demography; (iii) those relating to the role of state institutions in promoting the conditions for industrialisation; (iv) those that see the Divergence as resulting from differences in cultural and institutional approaches to science, technology, and wealth-creation; (v) those that see industrialisation as dependent on growth in the market for consumer goods, the extent and nature of which may have diverged across Eurasia.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. London: Profile Books.
Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2005). The rise of Europe: Atlantic trade, institutional change, and economic growth. American Economic Review, 95(3), 546–579.
Allen, R. (2009). The British industrial revolution in global perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berg, M. (2005). Luxury and pleasure in eighteenth-century Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brenner, R., & Isett, C. (2002). England’s divergence from China’s Yangzi Delta: Property relations, microeconomics, and patterns of development. Journal of Asian Studies, 61(2), 609–662.
Chang, H.-J. (2002). Kicking away the ladder: Development strategy in historical perspective. London: Anthem.
De Vries, J. (1993). Between purchasing power and the world of goods: Understanding the household economy in early modern Europe. In J. Brewer & R. Porter (Eds.), Consumption and the world of goods (pp. 85–132). London: Routledge.
De Vries, J. (2008). The industrious revolution: Consumer behavior and the household economy, 1650 to the present. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Flynn, D., & Giráldez, A. (2002). Cycles of silver: Global economic unity through the mid-eighteenth century. Journal of World History, 13(2), 391–427.
Flynn, D., & Giráldez, A. (2004). Path dependence, time lags and the birth of globalisation: A critique of O’Rourke and Williamson. European Review of Economic History, 8, 81–108.
Greif, A., & Tabellini, G. (2010). Cultural and institutional bifurcation: China and Europe compared. American Economic Review: Papers & Proceedings, 100(2), 1–10.
Griffin, E. (2010). A short history of the industrial revolution. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hoffman, P. (2012). Why was it Europeans who conquered the world? Journal of Economic History, 72(3), 601–632.
Huang, P. (1990). The peasant family and rural development in the lower Yangzi region, 1350–1988. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Inikori, J. (2002). Africans and the industrial revolution in England: A study in international trade and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCloskey, D. (2010). Bourgeois dignity: Why economics can’t explain the modern world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mokyr, J. (1990). The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress. New York: Oxford University Press.
Moulder, F. (1977). Japan, China and the modern world economy: Toward a reinterpretation of East Asian development ca. 1600 to ca. 1918. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Brien, P. (2010). Ten years of debate on the origins of the great divergence. Reviews in History. http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews. No.: 1008.
O’Rourke, K., & Williamson, J. (2002). When did globalisation begin? European Review of Economic History, 6, 23–50.
Parthasarathi, P. (2011). Why Europe grew rich and Asia did not: Global economic divergence, 1600–1850. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pomeranz, K. (2000). The great divergence: China, Europe and the making of the modern world economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Pomeranz, K. (2002). Political economy and ecology on the eve of industrialization: Europe, China, and the global conjuncture. American Historical Review, 107(2), 425–446.
Vries, P. (2001). Are coal and colonies really necessary? Kenneth Pomeranz and the great divergence. Journal of World History, 12(2), 407–446.
Vries, P. (2002). Governing growth: A comparative analysis of the role of the state in the rise of the West. Journal of World History, 13(1), 67–138.
Vries, P. (2010). The California School and beyond: How to study the great divergence. History Compass, 8(7), 730–751.
Vries, P. (2012). Challenges, (non-)responses, and politics: A review of Prasannan Parthasarathi, why Europe grew rich and Asia did not: Global economic divergence, 1600–1850. Journal of World History, 23(3), 639–664.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Francks, P. (2016). Explaining the Great Divergence. In: Japan and the Great Divergence. Palgrave Studies in Economic History. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57673-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57673-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-57672-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-57673-6
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)