Between 1810 and 1940, a large GDP per capita gap appeared between the industrial core and the poor periphery, the latter producing, increasingly, primary products. Over the same period, the terms of trade facing the periphery underwent a secular boom then bust, peaking in the 1870s or 1890s. These terms of trade trends appear to have been exogenous to the periphery. Additionally, the terms of trade facing the periphery exhibited relatively high volatility. Are these correlations spurious, or are they causal? This Figuerola Lecture, to be given at Carlos III University (Madrid), argues that they are causal, that secular growth and volatility in the terms of trade had asymmetric effects on core and periphery. On the upswing, the secular rise in its terms of trade had powerful de-industrialization effects in the periphery. Over the full cycle 1810–1940, terms of trade volatility suppressed accumulation and growth in the periphery as well.

This paper discusses the economic performance of three Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay) from a comparative perspective, using as a benchmark a group of four developed countries (France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States). The focus is on the relative performance within the region and between the Latin American countries and the developed countries in the period 1900–1980. The paper argues that Argentina and Uruguay benefited from a privileged position in international markets at the beginning of the 20th century and this allowed them to converge. However, they failed to adjust to the major long-run change in the pattern of world trade brought about by World War I and the Great Depression, which implied a persistent decline of their export markets. On the other hand, Brazil, after having been much less successful until 1930, grew at higher rates thereafter based on rapid structural change and the building up of competitive advantages in new industrial sectors. The more vigorous Brazilian policy for industrialization and export diversification may explain why Brazil succeeded in changing its pattern of specialization, while Argentina and Uruguay were locked in to the old pattern. A typology of convergence regimes is suggested based on the growth experience of these countries.

In 1921 Mexico produced a quarter of the world's petroleum, making the country the second largest producer in the world, but by 1930 it only accounted for 3 per cent of production. To date, the debate surrounding this decline has relied mainly on events taking place in Mexico. Very little attention has been paid to developments elsewhere in the petroleum industry, except in Venezuela. Practically no attention has been paid to the reasons for the rise of oil output in Mexico. The massive changes which took place in the petroleum industry during the Great War years and its aftermath and especially the shortage of oil which occurred on world markets between 1918 and 1921 have been neglected. These events are crucial in order to understand the initial rise of the Mexican oil industry and help to understand the subsequent sudden decline.

The study of the Irati hydroelectric company aims to show some of the business strategies behind the first stages of the development of electricity in Spain and, in turn, pose new questions regarding the factors and conditioning elements of the country's regional industrialization processes. In fact, this firm represents one of the many possibilities electricity brought to non-industrialized Spanish regions at the start of the 20th century. The electricity generated by its falls explains the creation of Spain's largest integrated industrial complex built up around the initial processing of timber (saw-mills and chemical distilling) and its commercialization (railways), along with the sale of its energy surpluses on the most important market in the region of Navarre. Furthermore, the analysis of this latter activity allows us to offer an explanatory model that is both an alternative and a complement to the classical model —that provided by the largest firms—concerning the progressive incorporation of the traditional electrical markets into the integrated markets of the major Spanish companies.

Among the British travellers who travelled across Spain in the eighteenth century, Alexander Jardine and Joseph Townsend were those whose itineraries were the most complete and who paid more attention to socioeconomic analysis. Their identification of the specific economic problems coincides broadly with those of Spanish economists, and particularly with those of Campomanes, whose work is considered by them as a basic point of reference. However, there are discrepancies between the travellers and Spanish economists in respect to the general economic situation, the political system and certain government attitudes still based on a mercantilist approach. The reformist gradualism of Spanish economists clashed then with the proposals of the more profound socioeconomic reforms recommended by our travellers. Moreover, the optimism of Spanish economists about growth possibilities of the Spanish economy faced up to the negative overall view of British travellers.

This study looks at the international impact of leading economics journals published in Spain. For this purpose data were collected on the number of times that articles published in Spanish journals are cited in international journals on the ISI Journals lists. Constructing these kind of impact factor enables us to stablish a new ranking of Spanish leading journals arising from their international impact. This has been a neglected aspect in previous work that constructed impact factors for Spanish academic journals. Finally, the comparison of the results with those obtained for the leading Italian, French or German journals consents us to identify the basic elements which favour the internacionalization of these national economics journals.