Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/330475 
Year of Publication: 
2023
Citation: 
[Journal:] Essays in Economic & Business History (EEBH) [ISSN:] 2376-9459 [Volume:] 41 [Issue:] 1 [Year:] 2023 [Pages:] 1-30
Publisher: 
Economic and Business History Society (EBHS), Rockford, MI
Abstract: 
The interpretation of the reasons for the successes and delays in the race for industrialization is still a fundamental issue in the historiographical debate. In particular, the discussion about the "economic success" of the space commonly called the West (that practically means North America, Europe, Japan and Australia/New Zealand) is certainly lively, and its enormous theoretical impact is evident. This article focuses on three different issues: the role played by exogenous factors and endogenous factors in the historiography on different case studies and paths of industrialization; Eurocentrism/ethnocentrism in the approaches to the history of industrialization; and the debate on the roots of the supposed "victory" of the Western (or Euro-American) model. Although the debate is still open, this article shows that in recent decades a new approach on the history of industrialization has emerged and is gaining some hegemony: the need to consider not only endogenous readings of individual cases, but also to insert them into global contexts of relationships.
Subjects: 
Industrialization
Industrial Revolution
Great Divergence
Eurocentrism
JEL: 
N00
N01
N10
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.