North and South
The first two reading selections for Economics 344 make some notable observations about the growth and development of budding economies. In Engerman and Sokoloff's chapter entitled "Factor Endowments, Institutions, and Differential Paths of Growth Among New World Economies," the authors compare the economic growth levels of the North American colonies to those of Latin American colonies. Then, in "Tracking the Economic Divergence of the North and the South," Peter Coclanis notes the different economic paths taken by these two distinct regions of the United States. Overall, these two essays are similar in nature - they make similar comparisons across two regions using similar criteria. The readings, however, differ drastically in their subject matter and in the scope of the comparisons. In the first reading, Stanley Engerman and Kenneth Sokoloff attempt to explain what factors contributed to the different levels of economic development between the North American colonies and the Latin American colonies. They hypothesize that the United States and Canada were able to sustain economic growth due to factor endowments that were superior to those of Central and South America. Endowments such as climate, soil, and density of th
The factor endowments are noted here as well, while political factors play less of a role. e native population, they say, predisposed certain colonies to accomplishing economic growth. The bulk of the similarities lie in the nature of the essays and the methods and criteria used to draw comparisons. The North, in comparison to the South, was more economically diverse, less specialized in crop production, had fewer slaves and more European workers, and had a more equal distribution of wealth and landholdings. Certainly it is not difficult to discern that the first reading has a much broader scope than the second. They had a mainly European labor force with a high level of human capital. They were not entirely specialized in one area of crop production. However, the authors rather quickly dismiss the idea that the South differed much from the rest of the United States. Indeed, the discussion of the South in the second reading closely resembles the discussion of Latin America in the first essay. In sum, it is obvious these two essays, while similar in nature and methodology, differ greatly in scope and detail. Overall, the author concludes that the economic divergence of the North and South was quite large, and the differences most definitely outweigh the similarities. Numerous differences in the economic patterns of the North and the South are pointed out - indeed, in many !ways the South resembled those colonies that became less successful. They did not have a huge native population or slave population. Some parallels are drawn between the South and the less prosperous Latin American colonies - large-scale agriculture with one main crop, high inequality, and an abundance of slave labor. Simultaneously, he discusses the North's diverse and flexible enterprise system, its non-reliance on slave labor, its equal distribution of wealth, and its relative equality.
Common topics in this essay:
North South,
Engerman Sokoloff,
Latin American,
Colonies Coclanis,
America Endowments,
Latin America,
United Canada,
South Coclanis,
United Overall,
economic growth,
,
factor endowments,
north south,
american colonies,
distribution wealth,
latin american,
native population,
slave labor,
equal distribution wealth,
economic trends,
climate soil,
latin american colonies,
sustained economic growth,
economic divergence north,
colonies latin american,
|
Acceptance Essays
