Factor endowment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. WikiProject Economics or the Economics Portal may be able to help recruit one. (November 2008) |
|
|
This article contains weasel words, vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. Such statements should be clarified or removed. (March 2009) |
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (March 2009) |
 |
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2009) |
In economics a country's factor endowment is commonly understood as the amount of land, labor, capital, and entrepreneurship that a country possesses and can exploit for manufacturing. Countries with a large endowment of resources tend to be more prosperous than those with a small endowment, all other things being equal. The development of sound institutions to access and equitably distribute these resources, however, is necessary in order for a country to obtain the greatest benefit from its factor endowment.
Nonetheless, the New World economies inherited attractive endowments such as conducive soils, ideal weather conditions, and suitable size and sparse populations that eventually came under the control of institutionalizing European colonists who had a marginal economic interest to exploit and benefit from these new discoveries. Colonists were driven to yield high profits and power by reproducing such economies’ vulnerable legal and political framework, which ultimately led them towards the paths of economic developments with various degrees of inequality in human capital, wealth, and political power.
[edit] Factor endowments in the New World
One historical example often cited to emphasize the importance of institutions in developing a country's factor endowment is that of North America (the United States and Canada) around the turn of the century. It is commonly argued that these countries benefited greatly by borrowing many of Britain's institutions and laws. While North America undoubtedly gained from this borrowing, this does not fully explain why the rest of the New World (which also enjoyed a large factor endowment and access to British institutions) did not develop in a similar way. In fact, data shows that connection between the prosperity of the colonizing and the wealth of the colony was weaker than many thought. The future United States and Canada surpassed several British established colonies in the Caribbean, such as Barbados, Jamaica, Belize, and Guyana. This shows that there must have been another explanation as to why the future United States and Canada developed at a faster rate than other colonies in the region.[1]
Kenneth Sokoloff and Stanley Engerman argue in their article "History Lessons: Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World"[2] that the difference between North America and the rest of the New World was not just in institutions but in the nature of their respective factor endowments. Countries like Brazil and Cuba had an extremely large yet concentrated factor endowment that tended toward exploitation and a hierarchical social system. The true advantage of the United States and Canada lay in a more equitable distribution of factors that could not be exploited on an extremely large scale. This distribution led to a more open and opportunistic economy, and eventually to long-term prosperity.
Sokoloff and Engerman hypothesize that in societies founded with greater inequality, the elites gained more power to influence the choice of legal and economic institutions.[3] The U.S. began its economic growth largely through slave labor and trade of the output of that labor. As the elites enacted policy to generate more economic equality, for example by increasing literacy rates, the U.S. GDP per capita pulled ahead of other long-since established countries along with the literacy rates. In contrast, countries in which the elites used their countries' factor endowments to maintain their dominance over lower classes saw their economies growing at a much lower rate relative to the U.S.
[edit] Notes
- ^ Kenneth L. Sokoloff, Stanley L. Engerman. "History Lessons: Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World". The Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol 14 No.3 (2000): pp. 217-232
- ^ Kenneth L. Sokoloff, Stanley L. Engerman. "History Lessons: Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World". The Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol 14 No.3 (2000): pp. 217-232
- ^ Kenneth L. Sokoloff, Stanley L. Engerman. "History Lessons: Institutions, Factor Endowments, and Paths of Development in the New World". The Journal of Economic Perspectives Vol 14 No.3 (2000): pp. 217-232
