IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ereveh/v24y2020i4p633-674..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A reassessment of the Great Divergence debate: towards a reconciliation of apparently distinct determinants

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Court

Abstract

This article looks at the most recent data to define when the Little and Great Divergence occurred. It sorts the deep determinants of economic development into three categories (biogeography, culture-institutions, and contingency-conjuncture) to provides a comprehensive review of these factors in the context of the Great Divergence, and it discusses the concepts of persistence and reversal of fortune. The paper concludes that the Great Divergence was never an inevitability but became an increasingly likely prospect as time progressed. Furthermore, biogeography, culture-institutions, and contingency-conjuncture are not contradictory hypotheses. Rather, there is a clear pattern of change over time of the relative importance of these three categories of determinants. Further research is needed to uncover the underlying causal link or latent variable that could explain the successive relative importance over time of biogeographical, cultural–institutional, and contingent–conjunctural determinants of the Great Divergence.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Court, 2020. "A reassessment of the Great Divergence debate: towards a reconciliation of apparently distinct determinants," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 24(4), pages 633-674.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ereveh:v:24:y:2020:i:4:p:633-674.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ereh/hez015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ereveh:v:24:y:2020:i:4:p:633-674.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ereh .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.