Colonial Institutions and Comparative Development in North and South America
Map of North and South America
Colonialism started in
American continent with the sighting of one of the Islands of Bahama by
Christopher Columbus on 12th of October in 1492. This
fateful expedition initiated the modern history of colonization of
the New World and the South which were to leave lasting impression on
the economic and social landscape of these lands. The motivation
behind these expeditions is explained by the events that unfolded
later on.
During 16th
century the general price level quadrupled in Western Europe. Bodin
(1530-96) wrote
"The
principle and virtually sole cause of rise in prices is the abundance
of gold and silver which is greater in number today than it was
during the four previous centuries"
Most
of this gold and silver came from the newly developed Spanish
colonies in Central and South America. The empires of Aztecs in
Mexico and Incas in Peru had abundance of these precious metals and
that’s what the Spanish were after. 18000 tons of silver and 200
tons of gold were transferred from Americas to Spain from 1521 to
1660. Spain was forefront in this colonial enterprise.
Britain’s
domestic politics was ridden with much controversy and conflict
during this period. The country had not yet come to terms with the
aftermaths of the civil war (1455-88). The English attempt to
establish a colony in Roanoke, North Carolina thus ended in failure.
The next major attempt by the English to settle colonies in America
happened after she defeated Spain Armada in 1588. Spain’s failed
attempt to invade England emboldened the English and they sent three
ships namely
Susan
Constant, Godspeed and Discovery
under the leadership of Christopher Newport to settle colonies in the
New World.
Outrageous
and inhuman however this apparent plundering of the indigenous wealth
of American inhabitants was, the purpose of this writing is not to
deliver a tirade against it. Spanish set their colonies in Central
and South America while English took the left over in the North. Both
of these countries developed different institutions and left entirely
different colonial legacies. As we see now the countries which were
under English rule are way more prosperous than those who were under
Spanish colonial rule. Is it mere coincidence? This essay argues
against it. The roots of divergent path to prosperity are to be found
in the institutions which these European colonialists established in
their respective colonies. The colonists, recognizing their
objectives and constraints, put in function those institutions which
were exclusive, rent-generating and design to favor the minority
elite. These institutions were reformed later on (primarily in the
North) as per the necessity arose. The oppressive and extractive
economic institutions which the Spanish developed in Central and
Southern America were to leave last impression on the economic fate
of these countries. On the other hand, the historical reasons which
led to an entirely different institutional framework development, the
system which became more inclusive gradually, in North America
initiated a process which was conducive to economic prosperity.
Hernan
Cortes invaded Aztec empire in Mexico in 1519 and by fall reached the
capital Tenochtitlan. The main strategy of this Spanish conquistador
was to capture the ruler which would subdue the indigenous
population, discourage resistance and provide the best opportunity to
extract as much precious metal as possible. This strategy was to be
followed by all prominent conquistador in the Spanish colonial
history. The whole of Aztec empire was captured by 1521 and Cortes at
this time initiated some of those oppressive economic institutions
whose legacy still cast shadow on these lands. An institution by the
name of “Encomeinda”
was established. Encomienda
was to be an indigenous person granted to Encomendero,
Spanish colonialist. Encomienda
was
to provide his master with all sorts of services the colonialist
required. This was institutionalization of abject form of slavery
which would exclude the major chunk of population from any sort of
economic or social activity to take part in. The same strategy was
applied by Francisco Pizzaro in his conquest of Inca empire in Peru
in 1533. He defeated the Inca emperor, Atahualpa, at Cajamarca and by
next fall conquered Cusco, the Inca capital.
Hernan Cortes: Conqueror of Mexico
Same
institution of Encomienda
was
established in Inca empire too. The establishment of these
institutions were not without logic. The Spanish needed labor to
produce food and provide services for newly established colonies thus
came Encomienda.
Lateron after the discovery of Silver, at Andes, in present day
Bolivia, a new innovation occurred. Now they required labor for the
extraction of precious metal. Francisco de Toledo was the brain
behind the establishment of Reducciones
( reductions) where the adult working age population was concentrated
to work in extracting metal . Mita,
an Inca institution was also made functional to make the labor work
in plantations to produce food who in return were given were given
food and shelter.
Francisco de Toledo: The brain behind the establishment of Reducciones
These institutions were to last into the nineteenth
century where as entirely different institutional developments were
taking place in the colonies of North America. Another institutions
Trajin
was also put in place to make the indigenous population carry load
for the Spanish colonialist. These institutions were exclusive and
were designed to extract as much surplus as possible from the
indigenous population. Wages were forced down to subsistence level
and there was no incentive within the system to encourage any sort of
innovation.
Cusco; Ancient Capital of Incas Empire
There
was however a different story unfolding in the North America. Sailing
in the aforementioned three ships, the English, into Chesapeak Bay,
founded the settlement of Jamestown in May 1607. However the fate was
not much friendly to the English. The indigenous Powhatan confederacy
led by Wahunsunacock had no gold or silver. Moreover the demographic
realities of the North America were also not conducive to any
colonial plundering through forced labor. The population density of
the land where English had set foot on was merely 0.75 whereas those
in the lands of Aztecs and Incas was as much as 400. There was
immense shortage of food and services and Wahunsunacock already aware
of Spanish plundering in the South had imposed embargo on the new
colony thus ruling out any possibility of trade. The directors of the
Virginia company were forced to change the strategy and came up with
plan of putting settlers to work if the colony was to survive.
Map of thirteen states which were to become United States. States of Virginia and Carolina where the English planted their earliest colonies can be seen.
Exact location of First English colony of Jamestown in North America
An
oppressive institutional framework was put in place where the
settlers were to put in barracks and forced to work under the
supervisor from the company. Running away or trading anything with
the indigenous population was crime punishable by death. The
calculated ration was given to the settlers and every aspect of life
was controlled. Clearly, not tune to survive in such circumstances,
the opportunity cost of running away became more and more low. There
was no incentive in the system to make settlers worker by choice. The
company was eventually forced to change its strategy again a decade
later when a General Assembly was formed to give settlers a say in
the laws they were governed by. The system was opened a bit to give
settlers a breathing place, to create willingness to stay and work in
the colony. A decade further later another colony, Maryland, was
formed after the crown gave Lord Baltimore, 10 million acres of land
to establish it. The colony of Carolina was formed in 1663 by the
eight Proprietors . Both of these colonies initially put up a
hierarchical institutional structure where the tenants would work for
the lords and pay rents to the elite. The constitution of Carolina
was so formulated as there was to be Leet man who would work for the
land graves and Caziques. The political power was asymmetrically
distributed with only the elite having a say in the decision making.
Both the systems were exclusive, designed to generate as much rent as
possible and had no incentive for common settler to work willfully
and be innovative. The systems had to be revamped after colonial
elite failed to make settlers work. The lack of incentive pushed the
opportunity cost of fleeing low and in New World such a policy was
designed to fail. Clamoring for more economic and political freedom
led to the declaration of Maryland and South Carolina as crown colony
in 1693 and 1729 respectively. The colony status removed the
privileges of the ruling elite and made system relatively more
inclusive as the adult male settlers eventually got the say in
decision making process.
So
we see here entirely two different processes taking place maturing
themselves in North and South of America. In the North system
eventually got more and more inclusive thus increasing the incentive
and scope of innovation in the society whereas in South the system
led to congealed relations of power where minority perpetuated its
rule and continuously extracted resources from the majority. The
Spanish crown got more and more rich where as the indigenous
population more and more poor. The roots of the divergent processes
to prosperity lies here. Of course America was to experience its
political upheavals in the coming years but the relative
inclusiveness of its system was the reason behind its earlier take
off to development. These divergent paths went further into 19th
century. After the Napoleon invasion of Spain and abdication of king
Fredinand, the National Junta was formed to resist the French. This
national Junta was opposed to the privileges of the elite and this
was an anathema to the ruling elites in the colonies attached to the
crown. The independence movements thus started, in Bolivia in 1809
but eventually crushed, and culminated in the independence of Mexico
1821. The elite was the beneficiary of the institutional framework
put in place during the start of colonial settlements and would no
way let its privileges be curtailed.
The political upheavals in the United States during this time were
also bloody. The civil war 1861-65 resulted in massive bloodshed.
However the volatility of the country’s politics was not as intense
as those of central and south America. Mexico had 52 presidents from
just 1824 to 1857. The lack of political stability ,exclusiveness of
the system and caprice of the rulers threaten the property and
incentives to invest.
US had 338 banks by 1818 whereas 90 years later Mexico had only 42.
Later rulers of Mexico such Porfirio Diaz indulged in massive land
expropriation and rent generation. This was the direct legacy of
Spanish colonial rule which developed an elite and institutionalized
rent generation. The incentive to invest and innovate was absent
within such an institutional framework. While the labor generated
rent for elite in South, 40 percent of US citizens who had patents
during the first half of 19th
century had only primary school graduation. So its not surprise that
innovators like Edison emerged from US rather than Mexico. The only
guarantee that the former had was the security of return to his
innovation and lack of any sort of expropriation.
All
this historical discussion provide ample evidence to assume that the
institutional framework is key to innovation and economic prosperity.
The inclusive political and economic institutional framework provide
incentive for the masses to undertake economic ventures. As the
system gets more inclusive and competitive, it encourages innovation,
which further expedite the growth. The divergent path of North and
South America to economic prosperity are due to the
institutionalization of the rules which made the former gradually
inclusive and the latter exclusive. The institutions are those rules
which shape are behavior. The rules set up during the colonial
enterprise were designed to perpetuate the slavery and enrichment of
minority elite. The historical developments in North America revamped
the rules of the game later on whereas the South well into the
twentieth century could get out of the grip of them. This to large
extent explains Americas prosperity and South’s poverty.
No comments:
Post a Comment