Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective

by Alexander Gerschenkron

These fourteen essays covering a wide range of subjects of great current interest reflect the continuous evolution of the author’s thought from 1951 to 1961. Range and flexibility characterize Alexander Gerschenkron’s dynamic approach to Europe’s industrial history. Connecting evolution in individual countries with their degree of economic backwardness, he presents the industrialization of the continent as a “case of unity in diversity,” thus offering a cogent alternative, supported by case studies, to the traditional view of industrialization as monotonous repetition of the same process from country to country. Brought together for the first time, these essays were originally published in specialized periodicals in the United States and abroad.

Explaining and systematizing the elements of creative innovation in industrial history, Gerschenkron opens new paths of research and poses a number of pertinent questions for the problem of economic development in backward countries. His versatile analysis not only includes construction of ingenious industrial output indices and fruitful historical hypotheses on the index-number problem, but also original insights gleaned from a study of Soviet novels and a brilliant critique of Doctor Zhivago .

Genres: Economics, History, Nonfiction

456 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1962

About the author

"Gerschenkron was an economic historian and a comparativist, writing on the European past and the Soviet present. He taught from 1948 to 1975 in the department of economics at Harvard, producing, if that is quite the word, scores of graduate students and writing a moderate number of books. He made an impression. Students and colleagues lived in awe of him, and not only because they were merely economists while he was everything, a polymath ranging over statistics and Greek poetry and a great deal in between. Other people who know everything - the Bernard Lewises and the Albert Hirschmans of the scholarly world - tell stories about Gerschenkrons erudition and wit as though even they, too, were impressed."

- Donald McCloskey

Reviews

[Aslihan · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book is a collection of essays studying the relationship between economic backwardness and industrial development. It draws evidence from the Soviet Union, Italy and Bulgaria and provides somewhat of a comparative angle both temporally -compared to the early industrialized countries- and spatially. Written in 1962, the book is very much representative of the critical angle towards Soviet socialism and the social repercussions of state planning. Compared to contemporary MArxist thought and critical analysis, it is interesting to see that while methodological instruments and computing techniques are much more advanced today, the theoretical contribution of contemporary research is much more limited. The theoretical and intellectual aura of the earlier era seems to be much wider and deeper. The essays on Soviet intellectual history, Soviet literature and Doctor Zhivago are not directly on economic theory but they introduce a very vivid analytical angle by way of literature. Personally, somewhat of a delayed reading for me, but definitely valuable insight, so better late than never.

[Zhenyao Li · Rating 5 out of 5]

细读之后发现作者对判断工业化的因果关系有很深度的思考。我们很难找出一篮子原因解释发达国家发达的原因，因为因果似乎是co-evolve的，你无法把类似资本原始积累这样宏大的命题当作万能灵药。因果之间的关系是有伸缩性的。
落后在作者看来是一个典型的政经问题，换句话说，正是恰恰因为他觉得落后的相对性使得我们需要把落后国家的分析放到比较视角来论证一样，落后国家对相对落后所带来的政治经济风险同样需要区域内其他国家承担。作者所关注的经济活动状态和发展障碍之间的tension同时也受到其他国家影响。
作者对于Rostow这种线形发展的批判有两方面：1，作者看中的是相对落后程度，国家本身地区禀赋以及所处环境对于发展的影响，这样看来线形论无疑有过分简化理论之嫌。2，Rostow所在意的创业精神，技术等因素，与作者批判的原始积累原理相似，无法简单证得因果关系。

[Hlompho]

gerschenkron