To adequately respond to crises, adaptive governance is crucial, but sometimes institutional adaptation is constrained, even when a society is faced with acute hazards. We hypothesize that economic... Show moreTo adequately respond to crises, adaptive governance is crucial, but sometimes institutional adaptation is constrained, even when a society is faced with acute hazards. We hypothesize that economic inequality, defined as unequal ownership of wealth and access to resources, crucially interacts with the way institutions function and are adapted or not. Because the time span for societal responses may be lengthy, we use the historical record as a laboratory to test our hypothesis. In doing so, we focus on floods and water management infrastructure. The test area is one where flood hazards were very evident—the Low Countries (present-day Netherlands and Belgium) in the premodern period (1300–1800)—and we employ comparative analysis of three regions within this geographical area. We draw two conclusions: first, both equitable and inequitable societies can demonstrate resilience in the face of floods, but only if the institutions employed to deal with the hazard are suited to the distributive context. Institutions must change parallel to any changes in inequality. Second, we show that institutional adaptation was not inevitable, but also sometimes failed to occur. Institutional adaptation was never inevitably triggered by stimulus of a hazard, but dependent on socio-political context. Even when vital for the community under threat, adaptation only tended to occur when the vested interests of those with wealth, resources, and power were directly hit. Show less
From Filament Bulb to Agneta Park: Dutch Capitalism in the Twentieth CenturyIn this review article, Jeroen Touwen discusses a series of seven books published between 2008 and 2015 under the title... Show moreFrom Filament Bulb to Agneta Park: Dutch Capitalism in the Twentieth CenturyIn this review article, Jeroen Touwen discusses a series of seven books published between 2008 and 2015 under the title Bedrijfsleven in Nederland in de Twintigste Eeuw (Business in the Netherlands in the Twentieth Century), and the edited volume in English that contains the major conclusions and has some further reflections on the characteristics of Dutch capitalism. To which extent does the series meet recent demands of business history? Is the narrative connected with the characteristics of the national business system and the origins and development of economic growth? And does this business history transcend the microeconomic history of the individual company? This review article positions the series, with its wide and colourful range of facts and events, in the context of recent literature on business history. It particularly examines the conclusions on comparative capitalism. Show less
