Journal
MODERN CHINA
Volume 49, Issue 5, Pages 519-531Publisher
SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/00977004231164778
Keywords
crops cum animal husbandry agriculture vs. crops-only agriculture; development vs. involution; equal rural-urban trade vs. unequal involutionary commercialization; capital intensive agriculture vs. capital and labor dual intensifying agriculture; economies of scale vs. de-involution
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Kenneth Pomeranz and Li Bozhong have admitted their previous mistake but still argue that their earlier argument on agriculture and labor productivity remains valid. This article compares the fundamental differences between 18th-century England's mixed agriculture and China's crop-focused agriculture to emphasize their distinctiveness. It is crucial to acknowledge and understand the significant disparities between the two and their separate paths of modern development, rather than obscuring them by claiming equivalence.
Kenneth Pomeranz and Li Bozhong have recently conceded that they had been wrong that the great divergence between China and the West occurred only after 1800, but they continue to insist that when it came to agriculture and its labor productivity, their earlier argument still holds. This article summarizes the broad differences between eighteenth-century England's crops cum animal husbandry agriculture and China's crops-only agriculture to demonstrate the fundamental differences between the two. It is time we recognize fully how very different the two were and are, and how and why each follows an entirely different pattern to modern development. It is simply wrong to continue to obscure those basic differences by insisting on equivalence between them.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available