Source: http://wen.org.cn/modules/article/view.article.php/3199
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 02:28:31+00:00

Document:
资料来源： Maddison 2001: 90, 表 2-22a; Maddison 2001: 304, 表 C3-c; 2003 数据来自 Maddison 2007: 44, 表 2.1.
中国的经验和时下有一定影响的"东亚模式"理论也不同 。所谓的东亚模式，主要是两种意见。一种意见认为，东亚模式是结合家庭农业和政府干预的特殊资本主义发展模式，其具体代表是日本、韩国和中国台湾地区。在他们看来，改革后的中国也符合这种模式（晖峻众三2011; 亦见张玉林2011）。另一种意见则认为，东亚模式主要代表"劳动密集型的工业化"（labor intensive industrialization），和西方（尤其是英美）的"节省劳动的、资本密集的、资源密集的工业化"（labor saving, capital intensive and resource intensive industrialization）很不一样。杉原薰（和依靠他的论点的阿里吉Giovanni Arrighi）把前者称作"勤勉的革命"模式，借以区别于西方（特别是欧美）的工业革命。他认为，这是一个源自土地（相对人口）稀缺以及农业与手工业顽强结合的模式，完全适用于中国。（Sugihara 2003; Arrighi 2007）.
Amsden, Alice H. 1979. "Taiwan's Economic History: A Case of Etatisme and a Challenge to Dependency Theory," Modern China, v. 5, no. 3 (July): 341-379.
Arrighi, Giovanni. 2007. Adam Smith in Beijing: Lineages of the Twenty-First Century. New York: Verso.
Ban, Sung Hwan. 1979. "Agricultural Growth in Korea, 1918-1971," in Hayami, Ruttan and Southworth eds. 1979: 90-116.
Chayanov, A. V. 1986  The Theory of Peasant Economy. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
H. Schmal ed. Patterns of European Urbanization, Since 1500, pp. 77-109. London: Croom Helm.
Dev, S. Mahendra. 2006. "Agricultural Wages and Labor since 1950," in Stanley Wolpert ed. 2006. Encyclopedia of India, v. 1: 17-20. Detroit: Thomson Gale.
Hanley, Susan B. and Kozo Yamamura. 1977. Economic and Demographic Change in Preindustrial Japan, 1600-1868. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press.
Hayami, Yujiro, Vernon W. Ruttan and Herman M. Southworth. 1979. Agricultural Growth in Japan, Taiwan, Korea, and the Philippines. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Huang, Philip C. C.黄宗智. 2002. "Development or Involution? 18th Century Britain and China," Journal of Asian Studies, v. 61, no. 2 (May): 501-38.
Kang, Kenneth and and Vijaya Ramachandran. 1999. "Economic Transformation in Korea: Rapid Growth without an Agricultural Revolution?" Economic Development and Cultural Change, v. 47, No. 4 (July): 783-801.
Lee, Teng-hui and Yueh-eh Chen. 1979. "Agricultural Growth in Taiwan, 1911-1972," in Hayami, Ruttan and Southworth eds. 1979, pp. 59-89.
Lenin, V. I. 1956 . The Development of Capitalism in Russia. Moscow: Foreign Languages Press.
Edition, Revised and Updated: 960-2030 A.D. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
Maddison, Angus. 2001. The World Economy: a Millenial Perspective. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Develeopment (OECD).
Medick, Hans. 1976. "The Proto-industrial Family Economy: the Structural Function of Household and Family During the Transition form Peasant Society to Industrial Capitalism," Social History, 3 (Oct.): 291-315.
Mendels, Franklin F. 1972. "Proto-industrialization: the First Phase of the Industrial Process," Journal of Economic History, v. 32, no. 1 (March): 241-61.
Perkins, Dwight and Shahid Yusuf. 1984. Rural Development in China. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Schultz, Theodore W. 1964. Transforming Traditional Agriculture. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
Smith, Thomas C. 1977. Nakahara: Family Farming and Population in a Japanese Village, 1717-1830. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Sugihara Kaoru杉原薰 (2003) "The East-Asian Path of Economic Development: a Long-Term Perspective," in Giovanni Arrighi, Takeshi Hamashita and Mark Selden, eds., The Resurgence of East Asia, 500, 150 and 50 Year Perspectives, pp. 78-123. New York: Routledge.
Wrigley, E. A. and R. S. Schofield. 1989 . The Population History of England, 1541-1871: a Reconstruction. 2nd ed. Np.
the Family or the Individual?
Abstract: In China's economic history, the family unit, not individuated hired laborers, was always the basic economic unit; to a considerable extent, this is still true today. Looking back at Chinese economic history since the Ming and Qing, the family as an economic unit has in fact long been competing against large-scale production based on hired labor. China's experience is different from England and Western Europe, and also from India and the "East Asian model." Neither neo-classical or Marxist economics, nor the "East Asian model," has faced up to the fundamental Chinese reality of the great persistence of its family economy. Only if one grasps the special position the family unit has occupied in China's economy and society can one imagine a past and future for China that is different from the West.

References: v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v.