Advanced Technology the Key to the Chinese Economy Development - Essay Example

Advanced Technology – the Key to the Chinese Economy Development Table of Contents The high level equilibrium trap 1 Population, Science and innovations 3 Conclusion 4 References 5 Introduction Economists are concerned over the issue of not occurrence of industrial revolution in China in the eighteenth century although China possessed all the elements required for the revolution to take place. The use of advanced technology took the industrial development on the rise for China. The early development of commerce was facilitated by the productivities in agriculture and use of technology. The country remained creative for several thousand years and many historians are of the opinion that the country achieved a burst of technology and remained at the threshold level before the industrial revolution. China failed to take the next step and the topic of discussion of the articles revolves around the cause of failure taking the Needham under consideration. The high level equilibrium trap The above concept was first proposed by Mark Elvin and later supported by some eminent historians. Elvin analysed the economy and the surprising technological advancements and came out with the hypothesis of inadequate capital, constraints in the market, lack of entrepreneurship to be the major causes of failure. He supported his view with examples and evidences. The incentives behind technological innovations were led by family farming, the market system and the fee-simple ownership. So the advancement took the rising curve initially (Maluste, 2011, p.22). The population expanded rapidly and the amount of land got limited. The required amount of food to feed the entire population got limited leading to cheap labour and cost of capital increased. So the country lacked the required surplus necessary for sustained industrialization. Although China reached at the threshold level at the fourteenth century the population grew to such a level where there was no requirement for the labour saving devices (Lin, 1995, p.272). The potential of agriculture is correlated with agriculture. If there is inhibition of technology the equilibrium trap is absent. Therefore, focus should be towards the rising cause of land ratio and the reason which can be stated is the lack of inventive creativity. According to Chao, the worsening of man to land ratio was not due to orientation of inventions. If the man to land ratio of the twelfth century is taken under account the claim of no need of technological advancements appears tenuous. The surveys proved that in those periods there was not a single day where the farm households were not occupied in the farm lands. Therefore the claim of no need of labour saving devices is not valid (Bloom, et al, 2006, p.1). The other reason stated by the above discussed hypothesis is inadequate surplus from agriculture rising from weak man to land ratio. This reason has some flaws as well. The surplus of per capita should have been higher in the fourteenth and fifteenth century than that achieved in the twelfth century. Again there is no empirical support to claim the statement that high man to land ratio depleted from the agricultural surplus. Therefore the concept of high level equilibrium trap stands invalid in analysing the reasons of absence of industrial revolution in China (Kuijs, 2012, p.15). Population, Science and innovations China failed to reap the benefits of technological advancements as it did not transformed the experience based procedure of discovery to experiment cum science based improvement. The Needham’s model assumes source of invention to be trial and error. One type of trial and error is based on experience while the other is based on experiment. The former refers to the activities of peasants on the farmland while the later trial and error refers to the activities of investor to innovate new technologies. The technology can be freely obtained from the former wile that from later trial and error is costly. The implications drawn from the Needham’s model are discussed below (Swamy, 2010, p.12). The probability of invention or innovation of new technology is dependent upon the positive function of the number of trials. The chance of innovation is a pessimistic role of the maximum productivity of preceding draws or the level of technology already existing. The advancements in the quality of resources and the increase in the stock of scientific knowledge act to be the incentive for the investor in finding a better technology. The explanation of Needham’s model remains incomplete without throwing light upon the reasons of failure of China to gain from industrial revolution. The scientific revolution is brought about by a combination of two elements namely the mathematization of hypothesis about nature as well as using controlled experiments to analyse the validity of hypothesis. Research is still on course to examine the reasons behind why the gifted population of the country did not make to the next level even when they had the advantages of superior achievement (Elvin, 1973, p.286). The existing bureaucratic system of the country at first was favourable for the transition to take place but was ineffective in using the techniques of higher artisan ate with the mathematical and logical reasoning. Some researchers opined the imperial as well as the ideological unification of the country acted to be the constraint in the growth of science. The country was under the rule of dominant ideological system where public refute was not allowed. So in spite of the population had all the requirements required for the industrial revolution it failed to gain from it mainly due to the cause that Chinese people were failed from making direct contributions to the theoretical infrastructure as well as the methodological foundations of modern science (Urata, 2010, p.1). Conclusion The author agreed with the opinions of some other researchers on the failure of the country to make a transition and stated that the socio political system played a role in the process. The incentive structure of the system diverted the intelligence of the population from the scientific endeavours. The population of the country were gifted by more geniuses that the European population but because of the incentive structure less number of gifted population became interested in acquiring human capital required for the technological boom to take place. Therefore despite the lead in advancements, the country ultimately failed to cope with the benefits of the scientific revolution. References Arora. 2008. Indian Economic Development Xi. Tata McGraw-Hill Education; India. Bloom, D. E., Canning, D. Hu, L. Liu, Y., Mahal, A. and Yip, W. 2006. Why Has China’s Economy Taken Off Faster than India’s?. Available at: http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic626482.files/Bloom_Canning_China_India.pdf. [Pdf]. [Accessed on 24 April, 2013]. Elvin, M. 1973. The Pattern of the Chinese Past: A Social and Economic Interpretation. California: Stanford University Press. Kuijs, L. 2012. Economic Growth Patterns and Strategies in China and India: Past and Future. Available at: http://www.fungglobalinstitute.org/images/docs/340.pdf. [Pdf]. [Accessed on 24 April, 2013]. Lin, J. Y. 1995. The Needham Puzzle. Why the Industrial Revolution Did Not Originate in China. Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 43, No. 2, 269-292. Maluste, R. G. 2011. Endogenous Origins of Economic Reforms in India and China: The Role of Attitudinal Changes: India (1980-1984) and China (1978-1982). Universal-Publishers; USA. Swamy, S. 2010. Economic Development and Reforms in India and China: A Comparative Perspective. Har Anand Publications; India. Urata, S. 2010. China and India Continue High-Speed Growth. Available at: http://www.jcer.or.jp/eng/pdf/asia10intro.pdf. [Pdf]. [Accessed on 24 April, 2013]. Read More