Introduction
In his work, David S. Landes analyzes a fundamental question: why do some nations prosper while others remain in poverty? It is not merely a matter of chance, but a complex interplay of geography, institutions, and culture. In this article, you will learn how climate shaped political systems, why England initiated the Industrial Revolution, and whether modern data has become for China what coal was for 19th-century Europe. You will discover the mechanisms that have determined the global balance of power for centuries.
Geography and Hydraulic Logic: The Foundations of Power
Landes treats geography as an active matrix of possibilities. Historically, tropical climates, through extreme heat and parasitic plagues, hindered capital accumulation by forcing people into a struggle for survival. Western Europe, with its cool winters and stable rainfall, gained ideal conditions for agriculture and stable institutions. A key concept is hydraulic logic: in great river civilizations (China, Egypt), the necessity of managing irrigation forced the emergence of Oriental despotism.
Europe avoided this fate thanks to dispersed access to water, which favored polycentrism. The continent's political fragmentation after the fall of Rome gave rise to jurisdictional competition. Rulers had to compete for capital and people, offering privileges and property protection to prevent them from fleeing to neighboring states. It was this competition, rather than central planning, that became the incubator for liberty and capitalism.
The Great Divergence: Why England and Not China?
Medieval Europe made a breakthrough thanks to a "culture of the tool." Inventions such as the mechanical clock (time control) and eyeglasses (extending intellectual work) became catalysts for progress. However, it was the printing press that shattered the elite's monopoly on knowledge. In the debate over the "Great Divergence," Landes emphasizes culture and institutions, while Jared Diamond points to ecological factors, and Kenneth Pomeranz highlights access to coal and New World resources.
Despite early technical successes, China became mired in isolationism and bureaucratic control that stifled innovation. England became the "workshop of the world" thanks to a unique mania for improvement—an ethos of practical utility and the commercialization of discoveries. Stable rule of law and cheap energy from coal allowed the British to be the first to break the Malthusian barrier and impose new rules of the economic game on the world.
Data as the New Coal: From Steam to Artificial Intelligence
The history of catching up with the West shows that the key is technology adaptation and human capital, as proven by Japan. Today, we observe an analogy between the Industrial Revolution and the data revolution. While the steam engine automated muscles, artificial intelligence automates cognitive processes. In this new landscape, data serves as the "new coal"—the fuel for algorithms building a new hegemony.
The Chinese model of digital industrialization differs from the British one: instead of bottom-up pluralism, it relies on state digital capitalism and the centralization of information. China avoided the middle-income trap by becoming an epicenter of AI innovation. However, the question arises whether this model is universal or represents an Asia-specific form of digital authoritarianism that challenges Western liberal institutions.
Summary
In a world dominated by technology and data flows, has geography lost its significance, or has it merely changed its face? Perhaps it is within digital spaces that the struggle for resources and influence will play out anew, defining future inequalities. History teaches us that the wealth of nations is determined not only by the resources they possess but by their ability to create institutions that allow them to use those resources creatively. Will history come full circle, and will we, aware of past mistakes, manage to create a more just and sustainable world?
📄 Full analysis available in PDF