为什么寒冷地带的国家比温暖地带的国家更发达？
Why are colder countries more developed than the warmer ones?
译文简介
除了公元19-20世纪之外，寒冷天气地区的经济并没有真正领先于温暖地区的经济。
正文翻译
Why are colder countries more developed than the warmer ones?
为什么寒冷地带的国家比温暖地带的国家更发达？
评论翻译
很赞 ( 1 )
收藏
Other than the 19-20th century CE, cold weather regions were not really ahead of the economies of warmer regions. Historically, the civilization was centered around warm, tropics & subtropics. The first 5 civilizations - Sumer, Nile valley, Indus Valley, Yellow river valley, Norte Chico - were all in subtropics. The ones that followed - in Greece, Persia, Rome were in the same zone too. [Subtropics often were better than tropics because the latter was often next to dense rainforests with wildlife & epidemic dangers.] Still the warmer regions performed better throughout history.
Colonialism changed this dynamic for the first time. I will explain this how. The cold weather regions have very low population density as not many people preferred cold winters. This allowed the farmers to have much larger lands and more potential mines & mineral resources. Until the modern era, these were hard to tap though.
When industrial revolution came, the technology drastically helped those in cold climates. Mechanised farming - tractors and other machines - allowed industrial scale farming over those lands. This allowed the farmers to get rich because they had now huge lands that could be fully tapped. Factories also could now get minerals resources and infrastructure as large parts of their countries were sparsely occupied. In contrast, industrial revolution could not do much to densely populated tropics that already had high farming productivity - but shared by a large number of farmers. Tropics were too densely populated - meaning lesser resources & lesser room or infrastructure.
Other aspect colonialism did was to open up huge markets. England had a small domestic market - population was small. But, through its colonies it got a huge market for its textile mills and industries. In earlier times there was not much international trade and thus those in sparsely populated regions could not benefit from their innovations.
In 21st century CE, we are entering a post-industrial era and the pendulum might be shifting again. Mines and lands are not as important as they were in say 20th century. It is about the number of minds networked. In this, the subtropics/tropics such as California, Singapore, Shanghai or Bangalore are getting back in the game. The size of the domestic market matters big once again - as Californian startups could attest and density helps in various other ways too for an information economy.
除了公元19-20世纪之外，寒冷天气地区的经济并没有真正领先于温暖地区的经济。从历史上看，文明是以温暖、热带和亚热带为中心的。前5个文明--苏美尔、尼罗河流域、印度河流域、黄河流域、卡劳尔文明--都是在亚热带地区。随后的文明--希腊、波斯、罗马也都在同一区域。[亚热带往往比热带好，因为后者往往是在有野生动物和流行病危险的茂密雨林旁边］ 在整个历史上，较温暖的地区的表现更好。
殖民主义第一次改变了这种动态。我将解释这一点。寒冷天气地区的人口密度很低，因为没有多少人喜欢寒冷的冬天。这使得农民可以拥有更大块的土地和更多的潜在矿山和矿产资源。这些资源直到现代都很难被开发。
当工业革命到来时，技术进步极大地帮助了寒冷气候下的人们。机械化耕作--拖拉机和其他机器--允许在这些土地上进行工业规模的耕作。这让当地农民发了财，因为他们现在有了可以充分开发的大片土地。工厂现在也可以获得矿物资源和基础设施，因为他们国家的大部分地区都人烟稀少。相比之下，工业革命对人口稠密的热带地区没有什么作用，这些地区已经有很高的农业生产力，但被大量的农民所分享。热带地区人口过于稠密，意味着资源和空间或基础设施较少。
殖民主义的另一个作用是开辟了巨大的市场。英国的国内市场很小--人口很少。但是，通过其殖民地，它的纺织厂和工业获得了巨大的市场。在早期，没有太多的国际贸易，因此那些人口稀少地区的人无法从他们的创新中受益。
在公元21世纪，我们正在进入一个后工业化时代，钟摆可能会再次转移。矿山和土地并不像20世纪时那么重要了。现在重要的是网络思维的数量。在这一点上，加利福尼亚、新加坡、上海或班加罗尔等亚热带/热带地区正在重新参与游戏。国内市场的规模再次变得非常重要--加利福尼亚的初创企业可以证明这一点，人口密度在其他方面也有助于信息经济的发展。
This isn’t correct. “The cold weather regions have very low population density“. You write this implying it was the main factor in early development. But actually the countries that developed first were the most densely populated ones: the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands, not Russia, Spain or Sweden. Belgium and the Netherlands have population densities that are still on the level of India (Netherlands higher than India, Belgium slightly lower), despite India’s huge population boom in the 20th century.
Besides, it’s really not progress in agriculture that was the hallmark of the industrial revolution, but the mechanization of industrial production.
不对。"寒冷地区的人口密度非常低"。你这样写，暗示这是早期发展的主要因素。但实际上最先发展的国家是人口密度最高的国家：英国、比利时和荷兰，而不是俄罗斯、西班牙或瑞典。比利时和荷兰的人口密度仍处于印度的水平（荷兰高于印度，比利时略低），尽管印度在20世纪有着巨大的人口增长。
此外，工业革命的标志真的不是农业的进步，而是工业生产的机械化。
Britain wasn’t landlocked like Russia, its climate was better, and its harder to invade Britain than Russia (imagine all the damage done to Russia in World War 1, World War 2, Napoleon, and the sanctions later on.
英国不像俄罗斯那样是内陆国，它的气候更好，而且它比俄罗斯更难入侵。想象一下在第一次世界大战、第二次世界大战、拿破仑以及后来的制裁中对俄罗斯造成的所有伤害。
Balaji - I would like to disagree on the last paragraph. Getting back in game? game of what ? You seem to conveniently forget the fact that technology is going to increase the gap between have's and have not's. Technology in the future is going to be more of a net job destroyer than job creator and that is going to be huge problem with countries of huge population.Countries like India and China will have gigantic task of providing jobs of millions of graduates. So whatever boom we are seeing in these countries happening because of cheap labour will not continue till perpetuity. And land is not important? how are we going to feed the population of these countries? where can we get water and all resources needed for an economy to produce products?It is only matter of time where countries with land and technology and less population (like US, Canada)are going to be way more strong economically when the 4th industrial revolution (Robotic revolution) reaches its peak.
我不同意最后一段的说法。钟摆再次转移？你似乎很容易忘记这样一个事实，即技术将扩大有的和无的差距。未来的技术将更多地成为净就业的破坏者，而不是就业的创造者，这将是人口众多的国家要面临的巨大问题。因此，我们在这些国家看到的因廉价劳动力而出现的任何繁荣都不会持续到永久。当第四次工业革命（机器人革命）达到顶峰时，拥有土地、技术和较少人口的国家（如美国、加拿大）将在经济上更为强大，这只是时间问题。
Yes, who was the big-shot IIT guy just a few days ago (was it Nilekani or Raghuram Rajan,? doesn’t matter though) who said ….don’t expect much from the “Make in India” manufacturing push…focus on the service industry instead…
Service industry? You mean shopping malls full of imported products (Nike, Adidas, Calvin Klein, Giorgio Armani, Gucci etc.) Are there, will there be so many ‘High-end” consumers to afford to continually keep on buying these products…and if so…what happens to the millions of mom&pop corner stores that exist in almost every street corner of small-town (& big city) India???
Just yesterday I arrived back from “Cutting-edge” Mumbai & the first page of the Times of india property Section said it all….”Save the Mall” “High Prices and an economic slowdown are impacting the fate of the much-beloved, family-friendlymalls”…..!!!
是的，就在几天前，一个经济界的大人物（是尼勒卡尼还是拉格鲁姆拉詹？不重要了），他说....不要对"印度制造"的推动抱有太大期望......而是要专注于服务业。
服务业？你的意思是满是进口产品（耐克、阿迪达斯、卡尔文-克莱恩、乔治-阿玛尼、古驰等）的购物中心，是否会有那么多"高端"消费者负担得起持续购买这些产品......如果是这样......那么存在于印度小镇（和大城市）几乎每个街角的数百万家小便利店如何解释？
就在昨天，我从"尖端"的孟买回来，《印度时报》财经板块的第一页说了一切.... "拯救购物中心"、"高价格和经济放缓正在影响备受喜爱的、适合家庭的购物中心的命运".....!!
I am not sure how your comment relate to my comment. I am not debating whether manufacturing or service route is best for India. All I meant was having right amount of resources will be significant factor going ahead.
我不确定你的评论与我的评论有什么关系。我不是在争论制造业还是服务业路线对印度来说是最好的。我的意思是，拥有适当数量的资源将是未来的重要因素。
You say “when the industrial revolution came” like it was a natural phenomena or something, and not a product of the minds, culture and innovation of one of those cold countries, Great Britain. Why did a cold country gift humanity the industrial revolution? Your answer fails to tackle this important question . . .
你说"当工业革命到来时"，好像它是一种自然现象或什么，而不是那些寒冷国家之一英国的思想、文化和创新的产物。为什么一个寒冷的国家会给人类带来工业革命？你的回答没有解决这个重要的问题......
They got the gift by colonising the largest economy by GDP of that time. The colonisation could cripple India’s textile industry — the world’s largest of that time — allowing English industrial revolution to happen.
这是他们通过对当时国内生产总值最大的经济体（印度）进行殖民得到的礼物。殖民化可以削弱印度的纺织业--当时世界上最大的纺织业--使英国工业革命得以发生。
Thats not true the invention of the steam engine was due to the intelligence of one or two people who had a eureka moment. Things do not magically invent themselves because of external forces.
并非如此。蒸汽机的发明是由于一两个人的聪明才智，他们有一个灵光乍现的时刻。事物不会因为外力而神奇地发明自己。
So the country with low population and abundant resources wins!
No matter how hard we try to convince ourselves, the word 'largest' in 'the world's largest democracy' isn't something to be really proud of.
所以说人口少、资源丰富的国家获胜!
无论我们如何努力说服自己，"世界上最大的民主国家"中的"最大"一词并不是真正值得骄傲的事情。
>> So the country with low population and abundant resources wins!
I said it was specific to those couple of centuries. In all other centuries regions with dense population won. In 21st century we are once again talking about densely populated nations.
>> 所以说人口少、资源丰富的国家获胜!
我说这是针对那几个世纪的。在其他所有的世纪，人口密集的地区都赢了。在21世纪，我们再次重视人口稠密的国家。
I am not sure what we are considering as winning for densly populated countries.
Even now also, even if it's Indian minds are mainstream in world they are based out of US. And what about quality of living, I bet it has gone downhill in most of the old traditional big cities as compared to 20-30 years back. All of the north Indian cities are “khichdi” of city+chaotic+village migratory population and feels like “dust mines” . I have not seen any technical advancement in civic sense, civic services or attitude of people towards their own life. It's only the virtual world of Internet, telecom where we see the advancement and assume that “our great India is going to shine again” .
我不确定我们所说的人口稠密的国家将再次获胜是什么意思。
即使是现在，即使是印度人的思想是美国之外的世界的主流。而生活质量呢，我敢打赌，与20-30年前相比，大多数传统大城市的生活质量已经走下坡路了。所有的北印度城市都是城市+混乱+乡村移民人口的 "大杂烩"，感觉就像"粉尘矿"。我没有看到公民意识、公民服务或人们对自己生活的态度有任何技术上的进步。只有在互联网的虚拟世界中，我们看到了进步，并认为"我们伟大的印度将再次闪耀"。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Maybe another reason is that hotter weather makes people lazy or even sleepy and don't want to do a lot of work, while colder weather makes people alx and awake. They tend to stay indoor cause it's too cold outside, so they have plenty of time doing research, thus develop
more advanced technology and stay ahead of others up to now.
This is purely my guesses:)
也许另一个原因是，较热的天气使人们变得懒惰，甚至昏昏欲睡，不想做大量的工作，而较冷的天气使人们警觉和清醒。他们倾向于呆在室内，因为外面太冷了，所以他们有足够的时间做研究，从而开发出更先进的技术，并领先于其他人。
这纯粹是我的猜测:)
That was the traditional theory on why colder climate people are more successful than their warmer counterpart..... On today's times though that doesn't really matter much anyway as just about every decent buildings on tropical area are air-conditioned.
这是关于为什么气候寒冷的人比气候温暖的人更成功的传统理论.....在今天这个时代，这其实并不重要，因为热带地区几乎所有像样的建筑物都装有空调。
There's actually a research about hotter temperature makes people “dumber” or less productive than people who live in colder temperature.
Hot temperature makes our brain dehydrated more often thus requires more energy to think, making it more difficult to focus and be more productive.
实际上，有一项研究表明，温度较高的人比生活在低温环境中的人更"笨"，或更缺乏生产力。
炎热的温度使我们的大脑更经常地脱水，因此需要更多的能量来思考，使我们更难集中精力来提高工作效率。
Actually you got your history very wrong. European colonialism was well along before the industrial revolution or the enlightenment. 1492 is probably the best starting point for colonialism. Europeans began colonizing the Americas shortly after with varying degrees of success. I thing the hypotheses in Jared Diamond's book 'Germs, Guns and Steel' are much more compelling.
事实上，你的历史论据是非常错误的。欧洲的殖民主义在工业革命或启蒙运动之前就已经开始了。1492年可能是殖民主义的最佳起点。欧洲人在不久之后开始对美洲进行殖民，并取得了不同程度的成功。我认为杰瑞德戴蒙德的《细菌、枪炮和钢铁》一书中的假说更有说服力。
germs, guns and steel and the discovery of antibiotics and vaccines- these are the signs of industrialisation, at least the beginning
病菌、枪炮和钢铁以及抗生素和疫苗的发现，这些都是工业化的标志，至少是开始。
I think a more accurate date would be 1415, when the Portuguese took the city of Ceuta in Morrocco. This was the starting point of Portuguese exploration around the African coast, surpassing and renaming the Cape of Good Hope in 1488 and finally reaching India in 1498, breaking the moorish and venetian spice monopoly, thus creating the first European Global Empire.
我认为更准确的日期应该是1415年，当时葡萄牙人占领了摩洛哥的休达城。这是葡萄牙人围绕非洲海岸探索的起点，在1488年越过了好望角并将其重新命名，最后在1498年到达印度，打破了摩尔人和威尼斯人的香料垄断，从而建立了第一个欧洲全球帝国。
The date you propose is fine. The point was however that Western expansion and colonialism started well before the industrial revolution. Your suggested date is earlier than the one I proffered, which makes my point.
你提出的日期很好。然而，我的观点是，西方的扩张和殖民主义远在工业革命之前就开始了。你提出的日期比我提出的日期还要早，这就说明了我的观点。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
But what about Deccan and SE Asia? the latter was developed despite being close to equator, same goes about Ethiopia.
但是德干和东南亚呢？后者虽然靠近赤道，但却很发达，埃塞俄比亚也是如此。
Brilliant Answer!
I would just like to add another point: The countries in the colder region had signifinactly less number of diseases because bacterias generally become dormant at cold temperature.
On the other hand, the tropical regions provided a breeding ground for number of diseases.
Thus more healthy workforce in colder regions, and thus more development.
Let me know if I am wrong. Thanks!
精彩的回答!
我只想补充一点。寒冷地区国家的疾病数量明显较少，因为细菌在低温下通常会休眠。
另一方面，热带地区为许多疾病提供了滋生的土壤。
因此，在寒冷地区有更多健康的劳动力，因此也有更好的发展。
如果我说错了，请告诉我。谢谢!
Industrialization just works better in cooler climates. Would you want to work in a steel mill in Panama or in Michigan? Factory work is mostly a hot job so if it's 40F outside the factory is cooler than if it's 120F outside. Making stuff is what drives development in this era, so cooler wins, but not too cool as then getting to work becomes a problem as does finding people who will tolerate the 10 month winters unless the government make them work there (see Siberia) .
工业化在凉爽的气候条件下运作得更好。你想在巴拿马的钢铁厂工作还是在密歇根的钢铁厂工作？工厂工作大多是高温工作，所以如果外面是40华氏度，工厂就比外面是120华氏度要凉快。在这个时代，制造东西是发展的动力，所以凉爽的地方会赢，但不能太凉，因为那样的话，去工作就成了一个问题，除非政府让他们在那里工作，否则就要找到能忍受10个月冬天的人（见西伯利亚）。
Thanks for explaining this! I have similar confusion in my head for a long time. I am from China, which had/has been a country based on farming economy for a long long time. Thus, you can even see its impact today. The wealthiest part of China, (without Beijing since it is the capital) are almost all in the south with warm/hot humid weather. It is such a pleasure to live there since I found an immediate improvement on my skin (girlish I know) after I moved there. Also there are a larger variety of vegetables and fruits and they are definitely fresher than those in the north. However, after I moved to the US, I found that people just don’t gather around places with good weather. States in the northeast are as cold as my hometown, California is too dry. For the states with good weather, it is really hard to find a good university and a good job. I am astonished at this. I mean human are not robots, we are creatures of the nature. If I can choose, I definitely prefer a place where trees and flowers grow easily, because I think this also indicates that I will have a comfortable life there. Sadly, where I live basically is due to economic factors…
谢谢你的解释! 我的脑子里也有类似的困惑已经很久了。我来自中国，在很长一段时间里，中国曾经/一直是一个以农业经济为基础的国家。因此，你甚至在今天都可以看到它的影响。中国最富裕的地区（不包括北京，因为它是首都）几乎都在南方，气候温暖/炎热潮湿。在那里生活是一件非常愉快的事情，因为我发现在我搬到那里之后，我的皮肤立即得到了改善（我知道这是女孩子的想法）。另外，那里的蔬菜和水果种类更多，而且肯定比北方的更新鲜。然而，在我搬到美国后，我发现这里的人们就是不在有好天气的地方聚集。东北部各州和我的家乡一样寒冷，加利福尼亚太干燥。对于天气好的州来说，却很难找到一所好的大学和一份好的工作。我对此感到很惊讶。我的意思是，人不是机器人，我们是自然界的生物。如果我可以选择的话，我肯定会选择一个树木和花朵容易生长的地方，因为我认为这也表明我在那里会有一个舒适的生活。可悲的是，我住的地方基本上是由经济因素造成的......
I beg to differ .I think people in tropics live in a very warm climate making their needs of housing ,clothing much less .with a hut & no shirt ,a man in cold climate is likely to die .So people in cold climates work much harder just to survive
while those in tropics are lazy .see in India how hilly people & those in Punjab etc migrate to warmer areas & have a much superior living standards .With passage of living in warm area will make them lazy too .
我不同意。我认为热带地区的人生活在非常温暖的气候中，他们对住房和衣服的需求要少得多。在寒冷的气候中，如果只有一间小屋，没有衣衫，人很可能会被冻死。
看看印度的山地人和旁遮普省的人是如何迁移到温暖的地区并拥有更高的生活标准的。
I’m not so sure that low population density is an advantage. Until the mid-20th Century, Sub-saharan Africa had a low population density, and South America still has a low density. On the other hand when England and the Netherlands industrialized, they had relatively high population densities.
I can’t say I know why the north industrialized first though. Maybe the mature subtropical states were an impediment to industrial development, since those states are good at defending the status quo.
我不太确定低人口密度是一种优势。直到20世纪中期，撒哈拉以南非洲的人口密度都很低，南美洲的人口密度仍然很低。另一方面，当英格兰和荷兰实现工业化时，他们的人口密度相对较高。
我不能说我知道为什么北方首先实现工业化。也许成熟的亚热带国家是工业发展的一个障碍，因为这些国家更善于维护现状。
There seems to be a myth that the UK and Europe have a low population density, when I travel in Asia I'm often told that the fact they have much more people compared to the UK is the reason for their infrastructure problems and overcrowding. However the UK has a higher population density than many countries in SE Asia (and if you look at England by itself its even higher almost the highest in the world) but it just feels alot less crowded here due to most people living in suburbia.
似乎有一个神话，即英国和欧洲的人口密度低，当我在亚洲旅行时，我经常被告知，与英国相比，他们的人口要多得多，这就是他们的基础设施存在问题和过度拥挤的原因。然而，英国的人口密度比东南亚的许多国家都要高（如果你看一下英格兰本身，它的人口密度甚至更高，几乎是世界上最高的），但由于大多数人住在郊区，所以这里感觉不那么拥挤。
The population density is small in colder climate not because people prefer warmer winters but because the fields produce much more grain in a warmer climate. Here in Finland, in the extreme north, a hectare of wheat field produces 2 tons of grain. In Germany 4 tons and in southern France even more. The same goes for fruits etc. The people who are used to snow have no big interest in moving to warmer places. For example, the immigrants who moved to USA from Scandinavia chose about similar places in North-America. They could have moved to Florida and California, instead they chose Montana and Canada.
The technological advances in Europe probably were caused by the ground work done by ancient Egypt, Rome and Greece. Without that Europe would have been in a much weaker position to develop technology.
在寒冷的气候下，人口密度小，不是因为人们更喜欢温暖的冬天，而是因为在温暖的气候下，田地生产的粮食要多得多，也就能供给更多的人。在芬兰的极北地区，一公顷的麦田生产2吨粮食。在德国是4吨，在法国南部甚至更多。水果等也是如此。习惯于冬天下雪的人对于搬到温暖的地方并不是很感兴趣。例如，从斯堪的纳维亚半岛移居美国的移民在北美选择了差不多的地方。他们本可以搬到佛罗里达和加利福尼亚，但他们却选择了蒙大拿和加拿大。
欧洲的技术进步可能是由古埃及、罗马和希腊的基础工作造成的。如果没有这些工作，欧洲在发展技术方面将处于更弱势的地位。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
The cold temperature anyway led to a more tight knit socal structure as people had to rely more on their neighbors during the cold winters. And it required more planning in advance as there is no food available for months and also no travel possible.
Qualities which in the end helped to develop an industrial society which is based on cooperation and planning.
无论如何，寒冷的气温导致了更紧密的本地结构，因为人们在寒冷的冬天不得不更多地依赖他们的邻居。由于几个月都没有食物，也不可能旅行，因此需要提前进行更多的计划。
这些特点最终有助于发展一个基于合作和规划的工业社会。
Apart from the effect of lower population density mentioned in other answers, another reason is that harsh weather directly ensures nobody is extremely poor. People in these countries cannot afford to stay poor, it is not an option unlike in tropical countries.
A well built house with heating and warm clothing is not a luxury but a basic requirement to stay alive. This sets the bar high for minimum standard of living and what we call 'basic amenities of life'. The harsh conditions acts as a tough taskmaster.
So, when even the poorest citizen of these countries have a house to live in with decent standard of living (there are exceptions) they can surely afford to provide education to their kids. When the literacy rate is almost 100 percent, a nation will have no reason to be under developed.
除了其他答案中提到的人口密度较低的影响外，另一个原因是恶劣的天气直接保证了没有人是非常贫穷的。这些国家的人们无法禁受贫穷，这与热带国家不同，这不是一种选择。
在寒冷地区。拥有一所建好的有暖气的房子和温暖的衣服不是奢侈品，而是维持生命的基本需求。这为最低生活标准和我们所说的"基本生活设施"设定了很高的标准。严酷的条件就像一个严厉的任务主管。
因此，当这些国家最贫穷的公民也有房子住，有体面的生活标准时（也有例外），他们肯定有能力为他们的孩子提供教育。当识字率几乎达到100%时，一个国家就没有理由不发达了。