The Great Divergence chm 下载 lrf pdf 阿里云 azw3 kindle 网盘

The Great Divergence brings new insight to one of the classic questions of history: Why did sustained industrial growth begin in Northwest Europe, despite surprising similarities between advanced areas of Europe and East Asia? As Ken Pomeranz shows, as recently as 1750, parallels between these two parts of the world were very high in life expectancy, consumption, product and factor markets, and the strategies of households. Perhaps most surprisingly, Pomeranz demonstrates that the Chinese and Japanese cores were no worse off ecologically than Western Europe. Core areas throughout the eighteenth-century Old World faced comparable local shortages of land-intensive products, shortages that were only partly resolved by trade.

Pomeranz argues that Europe's nineteenth-century divergence from the Old World owes much to the fortunate location of coal, which substituted for timber. This made Europe's failure to use its land intensively much less of a problem, while allowing growth in energy-intensive industries. Another crucial difference that he notes has to do with trade. Fortuitous global conjunctures made the Americas a greater source of needed primary products for Europe than any Asian periphery. This allowed Northwest Europe to grow dramatically in population, specialize further in manufactures, and remove labor from the land, using increased imports rather than maximizing yields. Together, coal and the New World allowed Europe to grow along resource-intensive, labor-saving paths.

Meanwhile, Asia hit a cul-de-sac. Although the East Asian hinterlands boomed after 1750, both in population and in manufacturing, this growth prevented these peripheral regions from exporting vital resources to the cloth-producing Yangzi Delta. As a result, growth in the core of East Asia's economy essentially stopped, and what growth did exist was forced along labor-intensive, resource-saving paths--paths Europe could have been forced down, too, had it not been for favorable resource stocks from underground and overseas.

暂无相关目录，正在全力查找中！

Kenneth Pomeranz is Professor of History at the University of California, Irvine. He is author of The Making of a Hinterland: State, Society, and Economy in Inland North China, 1853-1937, which won the John King Fairbank Prize from the American Historical Association, and coauthor (with Steven Topik) of The World that Trade Created.

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关书籍摘录，正在全力查找中！

在线阅读地址：The Great Divergence在线阅读

在线听书地址：The Great Divergence在线收听

在线购买地址：The Great Divergence在线购买

不仅富有的商人和事业稳固的工匠,甚至地位脆弱的学徒期满的工人都回购买某些"奢侈品":镶有金银纽扣的腰带,鞋子和背心,酿造和蒸馏的饮料,糖,茶,咖啡等等.分享和显示这类商品成为城市"平民文化"的重要组成部分.

1600年代初,仅泰山每年就可能吸引百万旅游者.以平价包干全部旅途花费的组团旅行看来甚至在相当"落后"的农村地区也有很有市场-----令精英阶层的道德家们极为反感. 同时正是声称看不起宗教朝拜的绅士们自己也开始越来越多地旅行,不仅为了事业,也为了教育和享受.

he cites such examples as ribbon-makers in rural Saxony who aped urban fashion to distinguish themselves from peasants, and Wurttemburg artisans who, in the words of a contemporary, could afford little besides potatoes “but would consider themselves less than human if they were compelled to give up their morning coffee.”

在某些情况下，由于需要作一种多少有点不同类型的比较，我们将把全世界作为我们的单位甚至更大的单位——查尔斯.梯力称之为“环境比较”，在这种比较中，我们不是比较两个独立的事物（如经典社会学理论所做的），而是考虑一个较大的整体的两个组成部分，观察这一体系中每个部分的地位和机能怎样影响它们的性质。

相关分析仍然很重要。我们对一个互相作用的体系——其中的一个部分比其余部分从中受益更多——的感知，本身并不能证明把那个部分称为“中心”，并假定它是其他一切事物的畸形的塑造者是正确的。反之，我们将要看到的是在不同方向移动的影响力的矢量。

书籍介绍

The Great Divergence brings new insight to one of the classic questions of history: Why did sustained industrial growth begin in Northwest Europe, despite surprising similarities between advanced areas of Europe and East Asia? As Ken Pomeranz shows, as recently as 1750, parallels between these two parts of the world were very high in life expectancy, consumption, product and factor markets, and the strategies of households. Perhaps most surprisingly, Pomeranz demonstrates that the Chinese and Japanese cores were no worse off ecologically than Western Europe. Core areas throughout the eighteenth-century Old World faced comparable local shortages of land-intensive products, shortages that were only partly resolved by trade.

Pomeranz argues that Europe's nineteenth-century divergence from the Old World owes much to the fortunate location of coal, which substituted for timber. This made Europe's failure to use its land intensively much less of a problem, while allowing growth in energy-intensive industries. Another crucial difference that he notes has to do with trade. Fortuitous global conjunctures made the Americas a greater source of needed primary products for Europe than any Asian periphery. This allowed Northwest Europe to grow dramatically in population, specialize further in manufactures, and remove labor from the land, using increased imports rather than maximizing yields. Together, coal and the New World allowed Europe to grow along resource-intensive, labor-saving paths.

Meanwhile, Asia hit a cul-de-sac. Although the East Asian hinterlands boomed after 1750, both in population and in manufacturing, this growth prevented these peripheral regions from exporting vital resources to the cloth-producing Yangzi Delta. As a result, growth in the core of East Asia's economy essentially stopped, and what growth did exist was forced along labor-intensive, resource-saving paths--paths Europe could have been forced down, too, had it not been for favorable resource stocks from underground and overseas.