Continued from Part 1 ...
Personally, I don't deny the dates Adam Smith and Frank states bare insignificance to economic history, as it can be argued it massively helped the transfer of technology and biology on a large scale, just the immediate impacts of these events on trade and globalisation is non related matter. The Heckscher-Ohlin trade theory suggests if globalisation doesn't affect wage rental ratios with relative returns to sector capital and other forms of income distribution measures it can't have a impact on the structure of economic welfare, suggesting the nineteenth century economy was globalised more than ever. There was little evidence to suggest there was a widespread transportation system before 1800 or any inter-related commodity price convergence, certain price data suggests a discontinuity in early 19th century and a rise of trade liberalisation. Little price convergence occurred before then, and after 1800 it soon rose. Issue of if globalisation is strong enough to have a effect on income distribution, then political battles over trade policy shall occur, which was certainly evident in the 19th century, with free trading slave and land owners in cotton south opposed capitalists of the North etc., holding evidence in itself. Hence political trade changed after the year 1800, nations would conflict with other nations rather than within itself. To me globalisation didn't start 5,000, or even 500 years ago, it was within the early 19th century and in relative terms that is 'new', however today's society seem to think they invented it recently. To me the next logical question is, what features actually occurred in the nineteenth century which were caused by globalisation? Economists have suggested that the increasing trade of commodities, movement of people, transferring of capital and information between the world etc.,are all prominent features resulting from globalisation. I believe In the nineteenth century two specific types of inventions were vital to the birth of globalisation, one being transportation technology (rail way, steam boat etc.) benefiting trade of commodities and ideas with the reduction of costs and freedom. Then that of the telegraphy with the transference of information, both contributing to mass integration. A feature to analyse is trade, its internationally integrated growth occurred for many reasons. Such as the issue of decreasing international freight rates due to continuing process of advancements in technology, for example the increased speed and quantity of, steamships, signalled 1869 Suez canal, accessible by only steamships. Overland transport was more expensive than transportation over water, so the development of rail roads were detrimental., as this example shows "Chicago, wheat price to New York, dropped by almost 12% in land transport, then the water transportation costs to Liverpool dropped by just under 7%." (Findlay and O'Rourke 2007 - cited in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe Volume II). There was also the reduction in trade barriers, inclusion of more currencies and increased protection of property rights. There is also the exchanging of ideas, technology and techniques etc. It transferred quite freely, an example being that of textile machines around the world were similar, some regulations were in place such as Britain's law against the emigration of skilled workers and machinery exports, these were however later repealed within the same century.
Please continue to Part 3.