楼主: 网络借贷174
402 0

[英文文献] Might Australia Have Failed? Endowments, Institutions and Contingency [推广有奖]

  • 0关注
  • 0粉丝

等待验证会员

学前班

0%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
0
论坛币
0 个
通用积分
0
学术水平
0 点
热心指数
0 点
信用等级
0 点
经验
10 点
帖子
0
精华
0
在线时间
0 小时
注册时间
2020-9-19
最后登录
2020-9-19

楼主
网络借贷174 发表于 2005-5-22 21:10:47 |AI写论文

+2 论坛币
k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群
赵安豆老师微信:zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币!

+2 论坛币
英文文献:Might Australia Have Failed? Endowments, Institutions and Contingency
英文文献作者:Ian McLean
英文文献摘要:
Some of the hypotheses regarding the role of institutions in long-run growth which have recently been advanced in the growth and history literatures imply that, given its initial conditions, Australia in the nineteenth century should have acquired quite different economic (and political) institutions from those it did, leading in turn to lower long-term growth rates than it actually achieved. In accounting for why this did not occur in Australia, it is suggested here that the emphasis in these literatures on both initial conditions and on institutional persistence is misplaced relative to the importance of institutional innovation, adaptation, and even disappearance. The mechanisms linking initial endowments and institutional change in Australia are complex, with timing, sequence, and chance playing a prominent role. The economic institutions examined in this paper are the markets for convict and indentured labor, and the property rights in - and conditions of access to - the abundant natural resources (land and gold).
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝


您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
扫码
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2026-1-29 04:37