why countries in the north are relatively rich than those in the South?

Question

North-south problem
(expection of Australia and Nz)
why is that?

Answer 1

A *great* book that answers this question is "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond. They even made it into a television series. It starts with someone from Indonesia asking the author that very question of why the North is rich and the south is not.

The number one factor he believes explains the difference is geography as well as the number of plant and animal species available in the north versus the south.

The north has more a temperate climate, is more conducive to east-west movement and thus the transmission of learning There were also more and better animals in the northern hemisphere than the south (like horses and cows) and grains (like wheat and corn).

This allowed the north to develop faster, and their proximity to animals frankly, caused more diseases to develop, but over time that gave the Northerners more resistance to disease. Thus when the Southerners were exposed to some pretty rough germs like typhoid or smallpox, they died in droves while the Northerners did not.

Easily available metal deposits in the north versus the south also fostered metallurgy sooner, and thus the devlop of more effective tools and technology that were used to lethal effect against the Southerners during the age of conquest (about 1300-1800). Plus, the more hot, jungle-type climates and vegetation of the south are not relatively less conducive to invention since crops don't grow as well down there versus, say Europe or China. Having to deal with cold, more frequent seasons, and greater access to coastlines seem to have made the Northerners a bit more pushed to invention, since necessity is the mother of invention.

But at the end of the day, if there had been a lot more land like Northern Europe in the Southern continents, and they had the horse, cow, pig, wheat, and corn before the Northerners, with highly exposed deposits of copper, tin, coal, and iron, well, history might well have been extremely different.

Answer 2

During the majority of our history, the nations from Europe dominated the world in economy and military might. They acheived technological advancements before many southern hemisphere nations. When they came into contact with southern nations they swept in and "colonized". To this day the national borders of Africa are still the borders set by the European nations! Because of this they dominated and controled these nations. They controlled their laws, finances etc.

Consider India. India had a growing fabric export when Britian took control. They made better cloth and they made MORE of it. However the British ALSO had a cotton manufacturing export. Therefore they banned all fabric manufacture in India. People from India were required to purchase inferior fabric from the Britian.

Religion was another dominating aspect. When a European country took control of a country they pushed their religion (sometimes on pain of death) on the "colony" nation.

By the time the southern nations attained freedom from their colonizing dominant nation the European people were far advanced. They had the colonies, the power and the wealth. In a world where colonies meant power, where could a new nation go for colonies when the world was already divided up?

All of these factors and more have dramatic impacts on the national wealth of north vs south. It is improving in modern times, but this will take time. The people of the southern nations are starting at a major defecit. IT's very hard, if not impossible, to overcome that without major leaps in technology.

Answer 3

People have raised good points -- geography and natural resources are important, however even more important is culture. Europe developed a culture which prized and rewarded clear-thinking and individual effort. The cultural institutions which developed in Western Civilization have always been far in advance of cultural institutions of others. Counties which are thriving now are countries which have appropriated what the West has offered -- look at Japan.

Bottom line, culture is the most important element in success.

Two kids from poor backgrounds, from the same neighborhood, attend the same school. Years go by and one ends up in prison and the other in grad school. What's the difference? Culture ... the structure within each kid's head.

Answer 4

because Britain is where industrial development started and it spread to culturally relatively-similar countries first. Others (such as Japan and more recently China) only started following the road to economic success when they overcame the desire to fight wars instead. Some countries (such as in the Middle East) are still in the war state of mind.

Answer 5

As others have pointed out, there are multiple texts that deal with this problem.

A good general theory is that people in more extreme regions had to develop agracultural societies to survive, and developed "society" as well as some immunity to disease.

Answer 6

Friction free vs friction laiden conditions
..the friction of all recognisable sorts