North and SouthThe first two reading choices for Economics 344 make notable observations about the growth and development of emerging economies. In Engerman and Sokoloff's chapter titled “Factor Endowments, Institutions, and Differential Pathways to Growth Among New World Economies,” the authors compare the levels of economic growth in the North American colonies to those in the Latin American colonies. Then, in “Tracking the Economic Divergence of the North and the South”, Peter Coclanis notes the different economic trajectories taken by these two distinct regions of the United States. Overall, these two trials are similar in nature: they make similar comparisons between two regions using similar criteria. The readings, however, differ radically in their subject matter and in the scope of the comparisons. In the first reading, Stanley Engerman and Kenneth Sokoloff attempt to explain what factors contributed to the different levels of economic development between the North American colonies and Latin American countries. American colonies. They hypothesize that the United States and Canada were able to maintain economic growth due to higher factor endowments than Central and South America. Characteristics such as climate, soil, and native population density, they say, predisposed certain colonies to achieve economic growth. Government institutions and policies such as land policies and trade regulations have also been important determining factors, but to a lesser extent than factor endowments. After comparing prosperous to less prosperous colonies, the authors then briefly outline the differences within the American colonies with respect to economic growth. Many differences in the economic models of the North and South are highlighted – indeed, in many ways the South resembled these less successful colonies. Despite these distinctions, the authors ultimately conclude that, overall, "the Southern economy was a unique case and ultimately achieved a growth record similar to that of the northern United States or Canada." The second article compares economic growth models. experienced by the North and the South. Coclanis points out many variations in the economies of the two regions from the 17th century and beyond two hundred years. Factor endowments are also mentioned here, while political factors play a lesser role. Overall, the author concludes that the economic divergence between the North and South was quite large and that the differences clearly outweigh the similarities. The two readings share both remarkable similarities and marked differences..