When you think of
prosperity and a good life, what’s the first thing that comes to your mind?
Is it a home in a
desert? Or a home in the hills?
I am sure for most,
it’s the latter.
Why is this the case?
Why has prosperity long been associated with countries with a favorable
climate?
Usually countries
like USA, UK, Germany and Norway come to our minds when we think of rich and
developed countries. Whereas, African and Asian countries that are closer to
the equator are relatively underdeveloped and poorer.
This is vindicated by
the World Happiness Index, which finds Finland right at the top while
countries like Sudan and Afghanistan are right at the bottom.
Statistics:
A study showed that
for every 1 degree fall in average temperature, the GDP per capita rises by
$762
Thus, as we advance
towards the north, the standard as well as the cost of living goes up. Whereas
if you were to settle down south, you’d find places relatively inexpensive with
a lower standard of living.
Example: Switzerland
is the most expensive nation to live in, followed by Norway, Iceland, Japan and
Denmark. All these countries are located in the northern hemisphere, much above
the equator.
Theory 1:
Thousands of years
ago, the hotter regions were the most prosperous and lucrative places to live
in due to appropriate weather conditions, fertile soil and plenty of water for
agriculture.
In contrast, people
up north had it way harder, they faced severe conditions. They had to come up
with innovative and more efficient ways to farm and sustain themselves.
These countries
fought tooth and nail to bring prosperity to themselves and have over the years
become self-sustaining successful nations of the world.
After the industrial
revolution, farming and agriculture were no longer deciding factors of a
nation’s prosperity, it was mechanization of process.
The warmer countries
fell way behind the colder countries because they lacked innovation and were
yet dependent on their conducive climatic conditions. They were technologically
and innovatively handicapped whereas the colder regions had learned to beat
their fate the harder way and had emerged victorious
The colder regions
thus have been way ahead of their warmer counterparts ever since. Sadly, the
complacent warmer countries haven’t been able to cover this gap even years
after the industrial revolution.
Theory 2:
Another reason, could
have been that during the formative years of society, the main and only source
of food was hunting and gathering.
People in colder
places would need much higher level of planning and cooperation to prepare for
the winters or they would perish in the cold.
In tropical climates,
there is a lesser need to store food year-round, because the temperatures are
more or less the same throughout the year. Thus, no planning went into
stockpiling, storing, building or judicial use of limited resources.
The farsightedness of
the people of the colder regions has now compounded over the years and is
firmly ingrained in their culture.
This has converted
into the practice of valuing capital goods so that society now has it easier
throughout it’s existence.
Exceptions:
An exception to the
above statistics, are the countries of Singapore and UAE.
In the last few
years, India has witnessed a larger brain drain to the countries of Dubai and
Singapore, owing to better opportunities and development in these regions.
Despite being
extremely close to the equator, these countries have grown to be economically
better off than the rest of their neighbors, chiefly because they serve as an
important trade route connecting the west with the east.
Written By - Tushna
Choksey
.jpeg)
0 Comments