{"id":5524,"date":"2024-12-10T12:14:43","date_gmt":"2024-12-10T11:14:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/?p=5524"},"modified":"2024-12-10T12:14:43","modified_gmt":"2024-12-10T11:14:43","slug":"the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/","title":{"rendered":"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr"},"content":{"rendered":"

Joel Mokyr is a professor of economics and history at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and a fellow at Tel Aviv University. His research explores European economic history, especially during the transition between the early modern and modern periods, focusing on the dynamics of scientific and technological progress.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

When we think of the Chinese economy, we think of enormous progress starting in the 1980s, which has brought the country to its current position as the world’s second-largest economic power. Considering its starting conditions, this growth appears even more spectacular, making it natural to wonder about its future trajectory. To better understand the future of China\u2019s economic scenario, however, it may not be enough to look only at recent dynamics. What\u2019s needed is the lens of a historian, particularly an economic historian, which allows us to understand the fundamental connections between long-term economic growth and the scientific progress that drives it, as well as to assess and compare the Chinese system with the Western one.<\/span><\/p>\n

In his research, Joel Mokyr identifies substantial differences between the two systems in terms of social organization, culture, and institutional structures. By weaving together historical facts, economic and demographic data, and an extensive array of primary and secondary sources, Mokyr helps us understand the importance of adopting a long-term perspective to highlight the intangible factors that have had\u2014and will continue to have\u2014a crucial impact on the trajectories of civilizations, shaping our relationship with science, innovation, and, consequently, progress.<\/span><\/p>\n

Professor Mokyr, in 1978, Deng Xiaoping announced a series of economic reforms in China. This led to three decades of rapid economic growth. In your view, what were the most significant factors?<\/b><\/h3>\n

There are fundamentally two components to Chinese growth. The first is that, for a hundred years, the West developed a series of technologies in manufacturing and other sectors. The Chinese imported these technologies wholesale: from laptop production to automobiles, motorcycles, and household items. Essentially, they adopted Western technology, methods, machinery, and engineering, which allowed them to achieve an enormous productivity boost.<\/span><\/p>\n

The second component is that China could rely on an incredibly large reservoir of low-cost labor. In short, they used Western techniques and realized they could produce equally well but more cheaply because their workers could be paid less. Combining the two, even an 8% annual growth didn\u2019t seem out of reach, and it worked. I believe Deng saw this opportunity and aimed to raise the standard of living as much as possible.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, over the last decade, China seems to have lost some of its growth momentum. Certainly, there have been factors like a real estate crisis, pandemic-related lockdowns, and renewed authoritarianism, but how do you explain this slowdown?<\/b><\/h3>\n

Today, China can produce almost everything that the West produces: electric cars, smartphones, and so on. But the low-cost labor pool seems to have dried up. They can no longer continue as they did before.<\/span><\/p>\n

The real question is whether the Chinese will be able to move beyond the model that has driven their growth so far. They have created hundreds of technical universities, offered substantial incentives to inventors, and invested in pure science and advanced engineering. They participate in AI, biotechnology, and other fields. But can this type of progress advance in a fundamentally unfree society, without democratic institutions and with limited internet access? The Chinese government doesn\u2019t ask the population what it wants; decisions are made from above. Covid was a clear example of this, with entire cities completely locked down despite the enormous cost to citizens. It\u2019s a repressive regime, and it\u2019s unclear if such a government can push the technological frontier forward, as this requires a certain level of freedom and nonconformity.<\/span><\/p>\n

Are there historical precedents of authoritarian states capable of innovation?<\/b><\/h3>\n

We don\u2019t have many examples of this kind. The Soviet Union is the most significant precedent. While it made some progress, it ultimately lagged far behind the West. The comparison between East and West Germany is emblematic \u2014 just think of the difference in 1989 between a Mercedes and a Trabant. A socialist system seems to struggle with what is known as \u201ccreative destruction,\u201d an economic concept indicating the continuous mutation of productive and technological structures \u2014 beneficial for innovators, but negative for those who merely observe \u2014 which is fundamental for long-term economic progress.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the last ten years, China has become much more authoritarian, and its capacity for innovation has suffered. Hong Kong serves as a testing ground: once a free country inspired by British institutions, it achieved phenomenal results. The same applies to Taiwan. Their resistance to becoming part of China is about more than just freedom; it\u2019s also about prosperity. The Chinese government understands this and seeks to assert an authoritarian state while still allowing a process of \u201ccreative destruction.\u201d They want the best of both worlds, but it remains to be seen whether this is a realistic hypothesis.<\/span><\/p>\n

However, if we go back in time, during the Middle Ages, China was far more innovative than Europe.<\/b><\/h3>\n

At that time, China was very creative and innovative. We owe many inventions to the Chinese: paper, printing, the compass. They had better ships and more advanced agricultural technologies than the Europeans. However, in Europe, most inventors were private individuals, motivated by financial incentives, while in China, they were mainly imperial bureaucrats, with innovation being part of their job. For many years, this worked quite well, as evidenced by Marco Polo\u2019s astonishment at the \u201cwonders\u201d he saw during his travels.<\/span><\/p>\n

A decisive change occurred after the Qing took power in 1644 (or perhaps even earlier, during the Ming dynasty). The priority became social stability and maintaining the status quo. At that point, innovation began to be seen as potentially disruptive and, therefore, dangerous. Most of China\u2019s significant progress happened before 1200. After 1400, almost nothing. For hundreds of years, nothing of significance occurred, so when the Europeans arrived in the 19th century during the First Opium War, China was significantly behind in terms of innovation and socioeconomic development.<\/span><\/p>\n

To what extent did European imperialism play a role in the misfortunes of the Chinese empire in the 19th century? Some argue that Western control during the \u201ccentury of humiliation\u201d (1839\u20131949) significantly hindered the country\u2019s development.<\/b><\/h3>\n

China is not a good example of the damages caused by Western imperialism. This reasoning might apply to India, although I\u2019m not entirely in agreement there either. India was indeed ruled by the British after the Sepoy Rebellion in 1857. China, however, was too large for any European nation to control entirely; they occupied only small areas like Hong Kong and a few port cities. It\u2019s not accurate to place all the blame on the West. In fact, the Western-governed cities were the most successful, where factories, schools, and hospitals were built. The West brought progress, certainly to its own benefit, but China still reaped rewards from it. There\u2019s an interesting study by Ruixue Jia from the University of California, San Diego, showing that ports allocated to Western powers by the unequal treaties that ended the Opium War consistently outperformed similar cities not included in the system: fifty years after the agreements, their residents were more literate, more educated, wealthier, and had better public infrastructure.<\/span><\/p>\n

Do you believe these advances were due to the inclusive institutions introduced by the West, which incentivize innovation, or more directly to the technical knowledge and culture brought by Westerners?<\/b><\/h3>\n

Probably a combination of the two. The West didn\u2019t bring many institutions to China. Its main export was communism, with questionable effects. For instance, China never showed interest in democracy \u2014 not during the interwar period, nor under Mao, nor under Deng; it wasn\u2019t ingrained in their system. However, other Western institutions did succeed. For example, under imperial rule, China had no concept of intellectual property rights, but after 1912, they finally introduced a patent system. Universities based on Western models were also established, although they remained under government control.<\/span><\/p>\n

Is democracy an inherently Western structure? Alexander the Great, when expanding his dominion in the East, was convinced that Athenian democracy wouldn\u2019t thrive there…<\/b><\/h3>\n

There are places in the East where democracy works: Taiwan, South Korea, and even Indonesia, in its own way. Japan became a democracy after 1945. So, it\u2019s not a matter of an East-West divide. Personally, I genuinely believed that China might become more like Taiwan \u2014 more open and democratic. Sometimes, after all, nations are simply unlucky. Italy is a good example: in 1922, it reached a negative turning point with a fascist dictatorship that lasted 22 years, which then collapsed, and democracy returned. Was Mussolini inevitable? No, but history can unfold from certain crucial moments.<\/span><\/p>\n

So, history is heavily shaped by contingencies?<\/b><\/h3>\n

Exactly. Contingencies shape history. Things that shouldn\u2019t happen do happen, and other things that could happen don\u2019t. Marxist \u201chistorical materialism\u201d doesn\u2019t sufficiently consider this possibility, even though ironically, the rise of communism in the Soviet Union was contingent because, in 1917, between the February and October revolutions, Russia experienced eight or nine months of democracy. Even well-established democracies can go off the rails: the United States today could face a turning point like Italy did in 1922.<\/span><\/p>\n

Do you think the upcoming U.S. elections in November might be such a critical juncture?<\/b><\/h3>\n

They could be, depending on the outcome. There are three possibilities: one good, one bad, and one terrible. The good outcome is that people recognize Donald Trump for what he is \u2014 a criminal and a fraud. The bad outcome is Trump\u2019s victory and the disruption of democracy. The terrible one is that Harris wins by a slim margin, and Trump begins to claim the elections were rigged, leading to potential violence.<\/span><\/p>\n

Are you concerned about a breakdown of the social contract? Something similar was at risk during the storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters in 2021.<\/b><\/h3>\n

Exactly. January 6, 2021, was a dark day, but fortunately, no shots were fired. If next time Trump supporters bring weapons, it could end like 1861, with a civil war. America is deeply divided, more so than under Richard Nixon. At that time, the Republican Party turned against the president. Today, the GOP sticks with Trump despite his more than questionable actions. I\u2019m very worried about the future of democracy. Have you read \u201cHow Democracies Die\u201d by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, two Harvard scholars? They describe the transition from democracies to autocracies, which happens far more frequently than people think \u2014 while the reverse process is much more difficult, as illustrated by how many people had to die to free the world from Hitler and Mussolini.<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s been a long time since the world has seen a figure like Trump: despite his obvious flaws, he has an incredible ability to keep people in his orbit. Even though they know he\u2019s lying, they stay with him out of pure opportunism and careerism because they believe he will win. In economics, this is what we call \u201cdynamic externalities\u201d: people think Trump will win, so others join him, turning him into a massive popular movement.<\/span><\/p>\n

Your new work focuses on the historical roots of the divergence between Europe and China. In your interpretation, why did different social structures become so significant in determining such different trajectories?<\/b><\/h3>\n

Economists and historians have proposed various interpretative channels to explain the great divergence between China and Europe. We focus on the question of who provides local public goods. Although this may seem relevant only starting from the 19th century, the provision of such goods played a crucial role in comparative long-term development. For much of history, education, insurance, infrastructure, and defense were offered at the local level; states were too weak and could only offer the army. Even in China, the state was not \u201cstrong\u201d enough to centrally manage these services. This is where the difference between Europe and China lies. In China, as in much of the rest of the world, extended families provided these goods\u2014large groups of people all related to one another. The reason they cooperated was that they were members of the same family. So if someone didn\u2019t do their part, others would know and could ostracize the \u201crebel\u201d from the group. This was a sanction mechanism that ensured sustainable equilibrium.<\/span><\/p>\n

What was the situation like in Europe?<\/b><\/h3>\n

In medieval Europe, nuclear families prevailed: the husband, wife, and children, living separately from their parents. The problem with nuclear families is that they\u2019re too small to provide local public goods. This necessitated a form of organization that could bring them together and foster cooperation. In Europe, this led to the development of medieval guilds, universities, monasteries, and, most interestingly, independent cities.<\/span><\/p>\n

Moreover, people raised in extended families have very different values. There\u2019s a real dichotomy between collectivism and individualism. This isn\u2019t about saying one is better than the other, but fundamentally, people living in nuclear families who come together in cooperative societies are more open to new ideas and tend to have a greater civic sense. No one knows exactly when it started, but it\u2019s believed that the process of nuclearization was already advanced in Europe by 1350-1400.<\/span><\/p>\n

In your research, you also explain how such different social structures can lead to different \u201cattitudes\u201d toward traditional knowledge and the role of ancestors, with significant consequences for attitudes toward innovation and economic growth…<\/b><\/h3>\n

In a clan, everyone knows who their ancestor was and who founded it three hundred years ago. There\u2019s a kind of \u201cancestor worship\u201d that psychologically discourages striving for a higher level of knowledge. Fortunately for Europe\u2019s destiny, by 1700, the worship of ancestors like the Romans and Greeks had almost completely faded. Only the high nobility\u2014a tiny fraction of the population\u2014still leaned on it. This allowed the Scientific Revolution to take off, transforming into an extraordinary historical phenomenon. At a certain point, Europe abandoned ancient science, medicine, and astronomy entirely, and Newton, Galileo, and Copernicus founded modern science.<\/span><\/p>\n

Can we then say that a distinctive feature of the \u201cmodern\u201d approach brought by the Scientific Revolution is its cumulative nature and focus on \u201ccutting-edge research\u201d?<\/b><\/h3>\n

Yes. How many people do you see studying the history of economics? How many doctors know the history of medicine? We\u2019re ahead of them, so why should we bother with past knowledge? What matters is the frontier of knowledge. That\u2019s the spirit today. But in the past, under an ancestor-worship regime, the approach would have been very different. Instead of examining data, they would pull out an old book and see what Aristotle had to say on the subject. They thought that was research, but it isn\u2019t, because it\u2019s entirely static. And then Aristotle was wrong about most of what we know; not because he wasn\u2019t intelligent, but because, for example, he didn\u2019t have a telescope, a microscope, or much of the mathematics we have. The new approach took root only in Europe and led to a historical turning point. The Industrial Revolution, and everything that followed, resulted from the willingness to introduce new, useful ideas, abandoning practices and theories that didn\u2019t work. The new generations were confident, with no inferiority complexes. Success wasn\u2019t due to greater intelligence but to the new cumulative nature of knowledge, which could spread rapidly and effectively, thanks in part to the printing press.<\/span><\/p>\n

You often cite a famous teaching from the Jewish texts of the Chazal, which says: \u201cIf those who came before us were like angels, we are merely men; and if those who came before us were like men, we are merely donkeys.\u201d How did the relationship of reverence toward ancestors evolve, and with what scientific consequences?<\/b><\/h3>\n

It\u2019s an old quote I like and have used multiple times. People think Jews are very educated, and it\u2019s true: in terms of literacy and years of schooling, in 1500, Jews were far ahead of everyone else. Practically every Jew had to be literate; otherwise, they couldn\u2019t be a true Jew, because Judaism is about reading. However, until 1800, they contributed almost nothing to physics, chemistry, mathematics, and medicine. The only exception was Baruch Spinoza, a giant of thought who overturned much of philosophy, but he was exiled from the Jewish community. After 1800, suddenly, the Freuds and Einsteins appeared, changing the world. Why hadn\u2019t this happened before? Because, despite being well-educated, Jews had been educated with a backward approach, focused on verifying everything in the sacred scriptures. Fortunately, the world has since moved forward, emancipating itself from ancestor worship and embracing the pursuit of useful knowledge.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Joel Mokyr is a professor of economics and history at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and a fellow at Tel Aviv University. His research explores […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9015,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[212,213],"class_list":["post-5524","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-non-categorizzato"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nThe Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr - Rivista Eco<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr - Rivista Eco\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Joel Mokyr is a professor of economics and history at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and a fellow at Tel Aviv University. His research explores […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Rivista Eco\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-12-10T11:14:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Gioele Giussani, Matteo Marti\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Gioele Giussani, Matteo Marti\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Gioele Giussani\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0e8e546f58826b8be6771ddbbaa47f09\"},\"headline\":\"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-12-10T11:14:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":2776,\"articleSection\":[\"Non categorizzato\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/\",\"name\":\"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr - Rivista Eco\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-12-10T11:14:43+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0e8e546f58826b8be6771ddbbaa47f09\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/2024\\\/12\\\/10\\\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"http:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"Rivista Eco\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0e8e546f58826b8be6771ddbbaa47f09\",\"name\":\"Gioele Giussani\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/956b9ec3504a32d46d43607233e4b9c4b3f8ff520835d8b93c92dbce2dba464d?s=96&d=mm&r=geb397e9def263e7965f9a0ff0c96c494\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/956b9ec3504a32d46d43607233e4b9c4b3f8ff520835d8b93c92dbce2dba464d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/956b9ec3504a32d46d43607233e4b9c4b3f8ff520835d8b93c92dbce2dba464d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Gioele Giussani\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.rivistaeco.com\\\/en\\\/author\\\/ggiussani\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr - Rivista Eco","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr - Rivista Eco","og_description":"Joel Mokyr is a professor of economics and history at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and a fellow at Tel Aviv University. His research explores […]","og_url":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/","og_site_name":"Rivista Eco","article_published_time":"2024-12-10T11:14:43+00:00","author":"Gioele Giussani, Matteo Marti","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Gioele Giussani, Matteo Marti","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/"},"author":{"name":"Gioele Giussani","@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/#\/schema\/person\/0e8e546f58826b8be6771ddbbaa47f09"},"headline":"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr","datePublished":"2024-12-10T11:14:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/"},"wordCount":2776,"articleSection":["Non categorizzato"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/","url":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/","name":"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr - Rivista Eco","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-12-10T11:14:43+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/#\/schema\/person\/0e8e546f58826b8be6771ddbbaa47f09"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/2024\/12\/10\/the-diverging-paths-of-europe-and-china-interview-with-joel-mokyr\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"http:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Diverging Paths of Europe and China. Interview with Joel Mokyr"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/","name":"Rivista Eco","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/#\/schema\/person\/0e8e546f58826b8be6771ddbbaa47f09","name":"Gioele Giussani","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/956b9ec3504a32d46d43607233e4b9c4b3f8ff520835d8b93c92dbce2dba464d?s=96&d=mm&r=geb397e9def263e7965f9a0ff0c96c494","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/956b9ec3504a32d46d43607233e4b9c4b3f8ff520835d8b93c92dbce2dba464d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/956b9ec3504a32d46d43607233e4b9c4b3f8ff520835d8b93c92dbce2dba464d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Gioele Giussani"},"url":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/author\/ggiussani\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5524","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9015"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5524"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5524\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5597,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5524\/revisions\/5597"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5524"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5524"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5524"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rivistaeco.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=5524"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}