I think the way to reconcile these two facts, that global gaps and inequality continue to widen, and that potential "catchup gains" due to Gershenkronian '"relative backwardness" have never been greater, is to recognize that they are the two sides of the same coin. The greater inequality means that there is a larger gap and thus more potential for catching up.
A crucial element of this can be seen in the old Rostowian concept of the "takeoff into sustained growth," once quite fashionable and now rarely heard of. Nevertheless, it is quite relevant. We have a group of countries at the bottom that are not growing and are thus falling further and further behind, as the data noted by Doug suggests. Nevertheless, from time to time a country in that group, "takes off" and starts growing. When they do, they grow ever more rapidly as they are able to play "catchup" over a bigger gap. We have recently seen some of the most rapid rates of growth in world economic history in parts of East Asia, where many countries have succeeded in "taking off" after long stagnation. Most dramatic has been (until very recently) the province of Guangdong in southern China, adjacent to Hong Kong, where growth rates have exceeded an annual rate of 20% until very recently for quite some time. Barkley Rosser -----Original Message----- From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 3:13 PM Subject: Neo-liberalism
>Brad De Long forwarded, in a post with a record-challenging number of
>>>>>'s:
>
>"First, because the productivity gap between the periphery and the
>industrial core has never been larger, what Alexander Gerschenkron called
>the "advantages of backwardness" are now uniquely great."
>
>That reminds me of Reagan's old anecdote about the boy who opened the barn
>door on Christmas day to find a big pile of horseshit waiting for him. But
>he didn't despair, he was overjoyed - "there must be a horse here somewhere
>then!" As Pritchett's paper shows, or as anyone who plays with Maddison's
>data or the Penn World Tables can see, the "backward" have been steadily
>slipping further backward. Does that mean they're just getting richer with
>potential every day?
>
>Doug
>
>
>
>
>
>