However, the ability to do this was not restricted to Europe. It is known that early civilisations in China, South America and Africa were doing this at the same time.

Indeed, I think that it is fair to say that, before around 1500, the most advanced civilisations in the world were to be found in Asia, not Europe.

By that time, the Chinese had already mastered metallurgy, they had built cannons, invented gun powder, produced exquisite ceramics, sent exploratory fleets across the world, had a sophisticated form of government and were highly literate.

A study of Chinese history shows that despite these tremendous achievements, their society became progressively more sclerotic and reactionary, due largely to the attitudes of the ruling elite which, convinced of its superiority over other civilisations, chose to close itself off from foreign influences.

After all, it was reasoned, what could we possibly learn from uncivilised and contemptible foreign devils.

Europe, on the other hand, accelerated its development because of the scientific revolution that commenced in the early 16th century. Amongst other things, that revolution was based upon being receptive to new ideas and inquisitive about the wider world.

There was a resurgence of interest in the learning of the ancient Greeks and Romans which, in turn, seems to have triggered a cascade of scientific insights, discoveries and re-discoveries that gathered speed despite increasingly desperate efforts by both church and state to stifle them.

Part of the explanation for this was that there was, by then, a critical mass of literate, educated and wealthy people who had both the time and inclination to take an interest in learning for its own sake. This process was aided by the invention of the printing press to disseminate information and ideas in a way that had not previously been possible.

The impact of this period, and the following "Age of Enlightenment", can hardly be exaggerated: in essence, an avalanche of knowledge and invention swept away the old established European order.

Of great importance was the curbing, and then the destruction of, the temporal power of the Church and its accompanying rigid, frequently anti-intellectual, religious dogma.

In Papua New Guinea, the people did not accumulate sufficiently large food surpluses to create the leisured class or the division of labour required to set in train developments such as those that occurred in Europe, China and South America.

Many historians argue that this was because people inhabiting the tropics live in climatic conditions that provide ample fresh water, combined with prodigious plant growth and animal life.

Consequently, while living in a tropical climate is not without its challenges, its relatively benign nature tends to be less harsh than conditions in the more temperate zones. In short, a relatively comfortable life is possible with less effort.

I wish to stress that I am not saying or implying that people living in the tropics became or are inherently lazy or unintelligent: they are neither.

It is simply that humans and other animals adapt to their environment and, in doing so, usually expend only as much energy as they need to in order to survive and procreate: this is nature's plan, not a political or philosophical stance.

Europeans, Chinese and others living outside the tropical zone, had to adapt to a sometimes ferocious climate which was subject to very marked seasonal variations in the availability of food and water.

It is a matter of record that death from starvation remained a real threat in Europe, Central Asia and China until into the mid-19th century at least.

For example, the famine in Ireland during the 1840's resulted in the deaths of at least one million people as well as mass migration to the United States, Canada and Australia. The population of Ireland halved in a decade.

Thus there was a major incentive to invent systems and technologies that enabled progressively more efficient means of food production, storage and distribution, which manifested itself in the agricultural revolution that, directly and indirectly, fuelled the accompanying industrial revolution in 19th century Britain and Europe.

It therefore might reasonably be argued that civilisation is an accidental by product of the basic human drive to survive long enough to procreate and perpetuate the species.

Irrespective of the reasons for Europe's and the USA's current cultural pre-eminence, PNG now finds itself being hurtled through an accelerated development process of unprecedented speed and disruptive force, with which even the developed world is struggling to cope.

History suggests that all we can say with certainty is that, for Papua New Guineans and humanity as a whole, this is going to continue to be a wild ride. Where it will take us, no-one can say.