Christian Vedel
@christianvedel.bsky.social
Assistant Professor at @sdueconhist.bsky.social, University of Southern Denmark. Interested in Economic Geography, Machine Learning and Causal Inference in Economic History.
https://sites.google.com/view/christianvedel
https://sites.google.com/view/christianvedel
PS: You can already use the updated model by cloning the 'dev' branch rather than the 'main' branch (usual disclaimers for dev versions of things). Updated paper in the pipeline. Stay tuned!
September 11, 2025 at 3:53 PM
PS: You can already use the updated model by cloning the 'dev' branch rather than the 'main' branch (usual disclaimers for dev versions of things). Updated paper in the pipeline. Stay tuned!
So now it's a "gotcha"? I am sorry for assuming arguments in good faith. I'd love learn something new. That's why I engage in things like this. I am not interested if this is just some game to you. Your point is mildly interesting but semantic and trivially not important. But thanks for the interest
June 20, 2025 at 6:51 PM
So now it's a "gotcha"? I am sorry for assuming arguments in good faith. I'd love learn something new. That's why I engage in things like this. I am not interested if this is just some game to you. Your point is mildly interesting but semantic and trivially not important. But thanks for the interest
What stands is this: There is a conventional definition of First Nature Geography on which this fits. And here is a case, where this suddenly changes, and we can observe how the economy reacts to it. And I am pleased to take that this apparently piqued your interest enough to have a long debate(3/3)
June 20, 2025 at 5:21 PM
What stands is this: There is a conventional definition of First Nature Geography on which this fits. And here is a case, where this suddenly changes, and we can observe how the economy reacts to it. And I am pleased to take that this apparently piqued your interest enough to have a long debate(3/3)
interesting debate that probably deserves a sepperate treatment. Almost everything is theoretically not immutable. (Just as only very few things are truly 'free' in a very strict sense.)
(2/3)
(2/3)
June 20, 2025 at 5:21 PM
interesting debate that probably deserves a sepperate treatment. Almost everything is theoretically not immutable. (Just as only very few things are truly 'free' in a very strict sense.)
(2/3)
(2/3)
Thanks. This is not a point that anyone has raised before. But without repeating previous points (that I still stand by), I'd like to be a bit constructive and say this: The relationship between first and second nature and the extend to which we can even define anything as first nature is an (1/3)
June 20, 2025 at 5:21 PM
Thanks. This is not a point that anyone has raised before. But without repeating previous points (that I still stand by), I'd like to be a bit constructive and say this: The relationship between first and second nature and the extend to which we can even define anything as first nature is an (1/3)
I'm aware. But in the West Limfjord they did not have the technology, manpower, finances or any relevant combination thereof to dig and maintain a channel against the forces of the northsea. For all practical purposes, it was a given; it was immutable.
June 20, 2025 at 4:24 PM
I'm aware. But in the West Limfjord they did not have the technology, manpower, finances or any relevant combination thereof to dig and maintain a channel against the forces of the northsea. For all practical purposes, it was a given; it was immutable.
I can safely say that digging through that isthmus was not an option they had in 1825. Any careful reading of the sources will make that clear.
(They were not Dutch of course ;-) )
(They were not Dutch of course ;-) )
June 20, 2025 at 3:55 PM
I can safely say that digging through that isthmus was not an option they had in 1825. Any careful reading of the sources will make that clear.
(They were not Dutch of course ;-) )
(They were not Dutch of course ;-) )
I don't think it is. In 19th century Denmark, the Agger Isthmus was pretty immutable. And so is much of first nature Geography still.
June 20, 2025 at 1:42 PM
I don't think it is. In 19th century Denmark, the Agger Isthmus was pretty immutable. And so is much of first nature Geography still.
And infrastructure is no simple feat. There are still infrastructure projects that are infeasible and trade-offs between one project or another. Geography is - and will be - an important source of limitations and opportunities.
June 20, 2025 at 8:41 AM
And infrastructure is no simple feat. There are still infrastructure projects that are infeasible and trade-offs between one project or another. Geography is - and will be - an important source of limitations and opportunities.
Thanks! You are right! I guess that is somehow an important related point: Altering what was once perceived immutable limitations is typically what we call 'infrastructure'.
June 20, 2025 at 8:39 AM
Thanks! You are right! I guess that is somehow an important related point: Altering what was once perceived immutable limitations is typically what we call 'infrastructure'.
The working paper has also recently been updated with a sharper focus on the contribution of the paper. Do check it out on arXiv if you are interested (3/3) arxiv.org/abs/2408.00885
A Perfect Storm: First-Nature Geography and Economic Development
In 1825 a storm cut a new channel through Denmark's Limfjord, providing an exogenous shock to first-nature geography. Difference-in-differences estimates show the channel increased trade immediately a...
arxiv.org
June 19, 2025 at 3:42 PM
The working paper has also recently been updated with a sharper focus on the contribution of the paper. Do check it out on arXiv if you are interested (3/3) arxiv.org/abs/2408.00885
Not only did I get to share numerous holiday pictures (which where somehow scientifically relevant) I also enjoyed insightful comments and questions (2/3)
June 19, 2025 at 3:42 PM
Not only did I get to share numerous holiday pictures (which where somehow scientifically relevant) I also enjoyed insightful comments and questions (2/3)
Thanks for reading. The paper can be found here in open access: doi.org/10.1080/0007...
Ireland in a Danish mirror: A microlevel comparison of the productivity of Danish and Irish creameries before the First World War
The relative success of the Danish and failure of the Irish dairy industries before the First World War is often contrasted. The traditional narrative assumes that the Irish failed because they wer...
doi.org
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
Thanks for reading. The paper can be found here in open access: doi.org/10.1080/0007...
12/ This is just one example. But it goes to show how important stability can be in ensuring sustained prosperity. Even if, you are better on average, it is no guarantee that you will succeed. I think that is a lesson worth remembering in today's world order.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
12/ This is just one example. But it goes to show how important stability can be in ensuring sustained prosperity. Even if, you are better on average, it is no guarantee that you will succeed. I think that is a lesson worth remembering in today's world order.
11/ So why did Denmark still capture the UK market? We’re still exploring that, but one explanation could be that Irish dairies had greater variation in efficiency, while Danish ones were more stable.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
11/ So why did Denmark still capture the UK market? We’re still exploring that, but one explanation could be that Irish dairies had greater variation in efficiency, while Danish ones were more stable.
10/ In Denmark, it took an average of 26.07 kg of milk to make 1 kg of butter, while in Ireland, it only took 25.26 kg. Irish co-operatives were more efficient in converting milk into butter.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
10/ In Denmark, it took an average of 26.07 kg of milk to make 1 kg of butter, while in Ireland, it only took 25.26 kg. Irish co-operatives were more efficient in converting milk into butter.
9/ Did Irish co-operatives fail because they were less efficient? The answer is “no.” Based on reports from 1898-1903 (541 dairies in Denmark and 171 in Ireland), we see that Danish dairies were actually less efficient.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
9/ Did Irish co-operatives fail because they were less efficient? The answer is “no.” Based on reports from 1898-1903 (541 dairies in Denmark and 171 in Ireland), we see that Danish dairies were actually less efficient.
8/ But we don’t just rely on interpretation – we have the microlevel data. We have digitized reports from the creameries themselves, allowing us to test these claims with modern statistical methods.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
8/ But we don’t just rely on interpretation – we have the microlevel data. We have digitized reports from the creameries themselves, allowing us to test these claims with modern statistical methods.
7/ Meanwhile, in Ireland, the milk soured – metaphorically speaking. Attempting to copy Denmark’s co-operative dairies didn’t work. The conclusion, both then and now, is that Danish technology and efficiency were simply superior.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
7/ Meanwhile, in Ireland, the milk soured – metaphorically speaking. Attempting to copy Denmark’s co-operative dairies didn’t work. The conclusion, both then and now, is that Danish technology and efficiency were simply superior.
6/ Steam-powered centrifuges fueled by coal from England provided a huge boost. By 1910, England imported half of its butter from Denmark, taking over a market that had previously been Irish.
April 28, 2025 at 10:02 AM
6/ Steam-powered centrifuges fueled by coal from England provided a huge boost. By 1910, England imported half of its butter from Denmark, taking over a market that had previously been Irish.