How can the layout of the passage be described?

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
While historians focus mainly on the macro events that cause perceptible changes, the economists are more concerned with the minute details. It is a well known fact that many a time in history, the act of a single person has been responsible for a paradigm shift in the way the story is told. The economists go into the most exiguous detail possible to reach a conclusion. Also, the history is written by the victor, but economics thrives on various theories put forth by a multitude of experts. It therefore comes as no surprise that, even on an event of the magnitude of the Great Depression, the experts in the two subjects have conflicting views.
While the historians ascribe the meltdown to a host of macro factors like the cataclysmic crash of the stock market, the failure of the banks, and unemployment, the economists are more intent on finding the nuances and the recondite riff surrounding the turn of events. According to them, the rot in the system started much before and the Great Depression was actually a culmination of causative events rather than the starting point itself. They point towards the deflationary actions of the Federal Reserve, including regulating the currency in circulation in accordance to the Gold Standard and increasing the interest rates as some of the principal causes behind the fiasco. Also, the fact that Great Britain went back to pre World War Gold Standard also set in motion a set of protectionist policies that killed off trade between nations and added fuel to the fire. Although government spending, or rather the lack of it, is blamed for the crisis, a casual perusal of government spending in 1930 clearly points out that the governmental spending actually increased year on year in an effort to revive the economy. However, in a case of too little, too late, the actions failed to yield the desired results.
The historians cite bank failures and the reluctance of banks to lend money as a key factor. Blaming the lack of foresight by the financial regulators and the government, the economists contend that the stock market crash so frightened the common citizens that the they stopped spending. The decreased spending triggered off a chain of events that had far reaching repercussions. Businesses struggling to keep their heads above the water laid off employees to cut costs. This in turn, resulted in further reduction in consumer spending.
It is in our best interest if reconciliation between these two fields of study can be effected. It will allow us to sum up the findings with a degree of consensus that appeals not only to the scholars of economics but also to the historians who look for patterns in history.