Introduction
The concept of the ‘Great Divergence’ refers to the significant disparity in economic development and industrialisation that emerged between Western Europe (and later North America) and the rest of the world, notably Asia and Africa, from the late 18th century onwards. This phenomenon, which reshaped global power dynamics, remains a central topic in international relations as it underpins the historical roots of modern geopolitical inequalities. This essay explores the causes of the Great Divergence, focusing on economic, institutional, and geopolitical factors. It argues that while multiple elements contributed, the interplay of technological innovation, colonial exploitation, and institutional advancements in Europe played a pivotal role in creating this economic and political chasm. The discussion will proceed by examining the role of industrialisation, the impact of colonialism, and the significance of institutional frameworks, before concluding with a reflection on the enduring implications of this divergence in contemporary international relations.
The Role of Industrialisation and Technological Innovation
One of the most widely acknowledged causes of the Great Divergence is the Industrial Revolution, which began in Britain during the late 18th century. This period marked a transformative shift from agrarian economies to industrialised ones, driven by mechanisation, steam power, and advancements in textile and iron production. As Landes (1998) notes, Britain’s unique combination of accessible coal reserves, a culture of scientific inquiry, and an entrepreneurial spirit enabled it to lead this transformation. This technological leap significantly boosted productivity and economic output, setting Western Europe on a path of rapid growth that other regions struggled to match.
In contrast, regions such as China and India, which had historically been economic powerhouses, failed to industrialise at a comparable pace. Pomeranz (2000) argues that while China had sophisticated agricultural systems and vast markets, it lacked the immediate resource bases—such as coal—and the institutional incentives to drive large-scale mechanisation. Furthermore, cultural and political resistance to rapid change may have stifled innovation in these regions. This technological gap allowed Europe to surge ahead, creating a foundation for economic dominance that persisted for centuries. Indeed, industrialisation did not merely enhance economic capacity but also facilitated military advancements, further consolidating Europe’s global position (Kennedy, 1987).
However, technological innovation alone cannot fully explain the divergence. The benefits of industrialisation were unevenly distributed even within Europe, and other factors, as discussed below, were equally instrumental in amplifying this disparity. The question remains whether technology was a cause or merely a symptom of broader structural advantages.
The Impact of Colonialism and Resource Exploitation
Colonialism stands as a critical factor in the Great Divergence, enabling Europe to extract vast resources and wealth from Asia, Africa, and the Americas. From the 16th century onwards, European powers, notably Britain, France, and Spain, established colonies that provided raw materials, labour, and markets for their burgeoning industrial economies. As Acemoglu and Robinson (2012) highlight, the wealth accumulated from colonial exploitation—through mechanisms such as the slave trade and the extraction of commodities like cotton and sugar—directly funded industrial growth in Europe while impoverishing colonised regions.
For instance, Britain’s control over India not only provided cotton for its textile mills but also disrupted local economies by imposing unfavourable trade policies that deindustrialised Indian manufacturing (Bayly, 2004). Similarly, the transatlantic slave trade generated immense profits for European merchants, while devastating African societies through depopulation and social fragmentation. This exploitative relationship created a vicious cycle: Europe’s wealth grew, enabling further investment in technology and infrastructure, while colonised regions were systematically underdeveloped, lacking the means to compete on a global stage.
It is worth noting, however, that colonialism was not universally beneficial even within Europe. Smaller or less imperialistic nations, such as Switzerland, also industrialised successfully without vast colonial empires, suggesting that while colonialism accelerated divergence, it was not a prerequisite for economic advancement (Landes, 1998). Nonetheless, for major powers like Britain, colonial exploitation arguably provided the critical capital and resources to sustain rapid industrial growth, cementing their dominance in global affairs.
Institutional Frameworks and Political Stability
Beyond technology and colonialism, the development of conducive institutional frameworks in Europe played a significant role in the Great Divergence. Institutions such as property rights, legal systems, and financial mechanisms created an environment that fostered economic innovation and protected entrepreneurial activities. North and Thomas (1973) argue that the establishment of secure property rights in Europe incentivised investment and risk-taking, which were crucial for industrialisation. For example, Britain’s Glorious Revolution of 1688-1689 led to constitutional changes that limited monarchical power and enhanced parliamentary influence, providing greater economic freedoms and stability (Acemoglu and Robinson, 2012).
In contrast, many non-European societies operated under extractive institutions that stifled economic progress. In the Ottoman Empire, for instance, centralised control and frequent confiscation of wealth by the state discouraged long-term investment (Kuran, 2011). Similarly, in China, despite its bureaucratic sophistication, the imperial system prioritised stability over innovation, often suppressing mercantile activities that threatened state control (Pomeranz, 2000). These institutional differences meant that even when technological knowledge was present, it could not be effectively harnessed outside Europe due to political and structural constraints.
Additionally, Europe benefited from a degree of political fragmentation that, paradoxically, encouraged competition and innovation. The presence of multiple states vying for power drove military and economic advancements, as rulers sought to outpace rivals (Kennedy, 1987). This competitive dynamic was largely absent in more unified empires like China, where centralised authority could at times hinder adaptive change. Thus, institutional and political factors were not merely background conditions but active drivers of economic divergence.
Cultural and Intellectual Dimensions
While economic and institutional explanations dominate the discourse, cultural and intellectual factors also contributed to the Great Divergence, though their impact is harder to quantify. The Enlightenment in Europe fostered a culture of rational inquiry, individualism, and scientific progress that underpinned technological and industrial advancements. As Mokyr (2002) suggests, the intellectual climate in Europe encouraged the questioning of traditional practices and the pursuit of knowledge, creating a synergy with economic incentives.
Conversely, cultural attitudes in other regions sometimes resisted change. For example, in China, Confucian emphasis on moral order and stability may have prioritised social harmony over disruptive innovation, though this interpretation remains debated (Pomeranz, 2000). Such cultural explanations should be approached with caution, as they risk oversimplification and Eurocentrism. Indeed, attributing divergence solely to cultural superiority ignores the material conditions and historical contingencies that shaped these developments. Nevertheless, intellectual currents arguably played a supporting role in Europe’s ascendancy, complementing economic and institutional advantages.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Great Divergence was the result of a complex interplay of factors, including technological innovation, colonial exploitation, institutional frameworks, and, to a lesser extent, cultural dynamics. Industrialisation provided Europe with the tools for economic and military dominance, while colonialism supplied the resources to fuel this growth, often at the expense of other regions’ development. Meanwhile, institutional advancements created an environment conducive to sustained economic progress, distinguishing Europe from societies with more extractive or rigid systems. Although cultural factors contributed, their role remains secondary and contested.
The implications of the Great Divergence are profound for international relations today, as they underpin persistent global inequalities in wealth, power, and development. Understanding its causes is not merely an academic exercise but a means to address contemporary challenges such as economic disparity and post-colonial legacies. While this essay has focused on key drivers, it acknowledges that no single explanation is exhaustive; the divergence was a multifaceted process shaped by historical contingencies. Further research into regional specificities and comparative analyses could deepen our grasp of this transformative period, informing policies that seek to bridge the enduring divide it created.
References
- Acemoglu, D. and Robinson, J.A. (2012) Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. Crown Publishers.
- Bayly, C.A. (2004) The Birth of the Modern World, 1780-1914. Blackwell Publishing.
- Kennedy, P. (1987) The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000. Random House.
- Kuran, T. (2011) The Long Divergence: How Islamic Law Held Back the Middle East. Princeton University Press.
- Landes, D.S. (1998) The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor. W.W. Norton & Company.
- Mokyr, J. (2002) The Gifts of Athena: Historical Origins of the Knowledge Economy. Princeton University Press.
- North, D.C. and Thomas, R.P. (1973) The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History. Cambridge University Press.
- Pomeranz, K. (2000) The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy. Princeton University Press.
[Word Count: 1523, including references]
