Great-Divergence-Comparative-Analysis - The Great...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 5 pages.

The Great Divergence Comparative AnalysisGlobal history is built on various events in various parts of the world with a range of results, all of which effect modern society. In our economic past, numerous financial events haveoccurred but none more debated than “The Great Divergence”. Many attempts have been made to explain the opposing economic paths Europe and China took in the 1900s, but one author named Kenneth Pomeranz offers an explanation through his renowned essay. However, Pomeranz’s essay on this topic was critiqued by Jan De Vries, 10 years after its 2002 release. In
his critique, De Vries provided an offsetting concession to Pomeranz’s reasons for why this eventoccured. With respect to both texts, Pomeranz neglects to include details on critical ideas such as external resources and technological advancements, which he considers the sole factors responsible to The Great Divergence1.Both scholars agreed that the growth of global trade and offshore production, were integral parts to Europe’s economic growth after the mid-1900s2. “New World” resources gave Britain access to food and raw materials at competitive prices. Such raw materials consisted of: fiber, cotton, sugar, timber, and tobacco3. Pomeranz makes viable points in his essay highlightingupon the limited farming land in England during the 1800s and China’s poor utilization of peripheral resources4. He also insisted that sugar was a valuable supplement to the insufficient caloric consumption of British workers5. As De Vries argues, sugar’s vitality as a prime import is

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture