Which climate is most suitable for the economic development of a country? Please answer with refrences..?

Question

e.g. i'd like to know wherher the economists or the geologist think thata specific climate like temperate or tropical... etc gives impetus to work and economic growth...

Answer 1

Voltaire tried this with political science, and postulated that democracies can only exist in small, subtropical or temperate countries, while a monarchy was best-suited for large or mostly inhospitable countries.

Economic development depends upon a variety of resources (not just an abudance of one, even a very valuable one - such as oil in Saudi Arabia, which is still effectively a banana republic), and as such a temperate or even tropical climate would be most beneficial; however, it is important to not overlook other factors such as availability of mining resources, trade networks, and a capable (and healthy) population. I say 'healthy' because you can have rich endowments, but if your population is stricken by malaria or other tropical diseases, the resources won't do you much good necessarily.

Answer 2

Freedom is the best climate for economic development. Next would be the rule of law and the protection of private property. There are many successful economies where they have few resources. Hong Kong, and Japan for example.

Switzerland does OK and they are in the Alps. And aren't blessed with a lot of resources either. On the other hand the Congo is loaded with resources and is a basket case. People are always looking for an excuse why one place has an good economy and another does not.

Freedom is the answer.

Answer 3

Strange question nowadays. In this age of low(ish) cost airconditioning and heating the cost of creating a working environment in a factory or office that is comfortable is low enough to make this question rather redundant. Climates as diverse as Southern California (warm to hot desert), Singapore (hot and sticky all year round), Shanghai (monsoon), South Korea (east coast maritime with cold winters and humid summers) and England (cool-temperate maritime) are all places where economic development is successfully happening.

Historically, temperate climates seemed to have been helpful.

Maybe in 21st century when people can increasingly do any business anywhere, climates that people enjoy living in will have a "comparative advantage". Cornwall will be more popular than the Orkneys and Shetlands; the south of France will be more popular than the north. It's relatively easy to make a city attractive to live in in the desert (just add water, basically -- examples in the western USA, northern coastal Chile and the Gulf such as Dubai already exist), and it's OK in temperate to warm-temperate places like western Europe, S Africa (both the hHighveldt and the Cape) etc. Much harder in a place with long cold winters like Russia or with endless rainfall like the far NE of India.

Answer 4

warm weather where work can go on year round . Look @ any job site bad winters always slows progress . More things grow in warmer climates so if locating was not a factor outside of climate. Warm climates would always be better for development . Look @ Canada 90 % of it population is within 200 miles of the USA border ..

Answer 5

Given most world wealth is concentrated in the Europe (GDP $13.2 trillion, the USA (GDP $11.8 trillion) and Japan GDP $3 trillion), accounting for $28 trillion of approximately $40 trillion in the world, I'd have to say definitely the temperate climates.

I also know when I go to the Caribbean, it is not to sharpen my work ethic. It's funny though - whenever I have an extra money, I always go to the tropics to do nothing.

Answer 6

An oxygen atmosphere is favorable. Difficult conditions actually promote more activity than optimal conditions. Chicago and New York are much more industrious than Miami or San Diego, for example.