| 1. |
- Hillbom, Ellen, et al.
(författare)
-
Introduction
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Agricultural Transformation in a Global History Perspective. - 9780415684958 ; , s. 1-25
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Axelsson, Tobias, et al.
(författare)
-
State led agricultural development and change in Yogyakarta 1973-1996
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Agricultural Transformation in a Global History Perspective. - 9780415684958 ; , s. 86-107
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the early 1990s, Indonesia was seen as one of the post war success stories. The country was boasting an impressive growth record and had seen the number of poor continuously decline. This picture of Indonesia stood in stark contrast to the situation only 30 years earlier when the economy was in a shambles and starvation was a real threat. At the core of this change in Indonesia lies the transformation process of the economy. In this process we have seen the Indonesian economy becoming increasingly dominated by manufacturing and services. At the same time, the agricultural sector has undergone dramatic changes and while it has decreased in importance to the economy as a whole, it has developed significantly and thereby improved the livelihoods of those still active in farming. The aim of this chapter is to focus on this development process in the agricultural sector. Much has been written on this process in Indonesia from a macro point of view. The focal point here is on the local processes and drivers for change on a local level. The time frame of the study is 1973-1996. The study is based on statistical data form Yogyakarta and also policy documents and interviews with farmers and local civil servants. This gives a good picture of the transformation process and also the driving forces behind it. The findings show that the villages, and the province, chosen for this study mirror the development for Java as a whole. It is interesting to see that the state has played a crucial role, both positively and negatively, in the transformation process. In a sense the state has forcefully modernised the agricultural sector but failed to create a broad base for continued agricultural development and as a consequence the rapid change of the late 1970s is replaced with a much slower development throughout the remainder of the Suharto regime.
|
|
| 8. |
- Bengtsson, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Aristocratic Wealth and Inequality in a Changing Society: Sweden, 1750–1900
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of History. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1502-7716 .- 0346-8755. ; 44:1, s. 27-52
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The role of the European nobility and their ability to retain their political and economic power are part of the debate on the modernization of Europe’s economy. This paper contributes to the literature by exploring the wealth of the Swedish nobility as the country evolved from an agrarian to an industrial economy. We use a sample of 200+ probate inventories of nobles for each of the benchmark years 1750, 1800, 1850 and 1900. We show that the nobility, less than 0.5 per cent of the population, was markedly dominant in 1750: the average noble was 60 times richer than the average person, and the nobles held 29 per cent of all private wealth. 90 per cent of the nobles were richer than the average person. By 1900 the advantage of the nobles’ wealth had declined; the group held only 5 per cent of total private wealth. At the same time, stratification within the nobility had increased dramatically. One group of super-rich Swedish nobles, often large land owners from the high nobility, possessed the biggest fortunes, but a large minority of nobles were no richer than the average Swede.
|
|
| 9. |
- Bengtsson, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Mercantilist Inequality : Wealth and Poverty in Stockholm 1650-1750
- 2019
-
Annan publikation (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This paper maps social structure, poverty, wealth and economic inequality in Stockholm from 1650 to 1750. We begin by establishing the social structure, using census data and other sources. To study wealth and poverty, the main sources are a sample from the wealth tax of 1715, and probate inventory samples from 1650, 1700 and 1750. These provide detailed and sometimes surprising insights into the living standards of both the poor and rich. Stockholm in this period was a starkly unequal city, with the top decile of wealth holders owning about 90 per cent of total wealth. We argue that this inequality was the result of deliberate policy – the Mercantilist conviction of “just rewards” for each and every one according to his or her standing. The case of Stockholm shows the need for the historical inequality literature to consider class and power relations to understand the determinants of inequality.
|
|
| 10. |
- Bengtsson, Erik, et al.
(författare)
-
Mercantilist Inequality: Wealth and Poverty in Stockholm 1650–1750
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Economic History Review. - : Wiley. - 1468-0289 .- 0013-0117. ; 75:1, s. 157-180
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article describes and analyses social structure, poverty, wealth, and economic inequality in Stockholm from 1650 to 1750. We begin by establishing the social structure, using census data and other sources. To study wealth and poverty, the main sources are a complete record of the wealth tax of 1715, comprising 17,782 taxpayers, and a total of 1,125 probate inventories sampled from the years 1650, 1700, and 1750. These provide detailed and sometimes surprising insights into the living standards of both the poor and the rich. Stockholm in this period was a starkly unequal city, with the top decile of wealth holders owning about 90 per cent of total wealth. We relate this inequality to mercantilist policies. The city was run as an oligarchy and the oligarchical political institutions engendered policies that were rigged for inequality. The case of Stockholm thus shows the need for the historical inequality literature to consider class and power relations to understand the determinants of inequality.
|
|
