Factor markets of sorts did exist in the more highly developed areas of early modern Southeast Asia, and they became more efficient in the course of time (although not in a linear process). However, in other more remote areas land was hardly ever sold, labour could not be hired and money was rare. Neither was the institutional framework conducive to economic growth, mainly because the rule of law did not apply where the ruler was concerned. This state of affairs goes a long way to explain why levels of economic growth were lower in Southeast Asia than they were in Western Europe at the same time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peter Boomgaard (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: