What Explains Modern Economic Growth? New Evidence from a Comparison of China and Europe in the 18th Century

现代经济增长的解释是什么？

• 批准号: 0453040
• 负责人: Wolfgang Keller
• 金额: $ 26.62万
• 依托单位: National Bureau of Economic Research Inc
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Continuing Grant
• 财政年份: 2005
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2005-04-15 至 2013-03-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0453040&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: What; Explains; Modern; Economic; Growth

The sustained increase of per-capita income, modern economic growth, is a relatively recent phenomenon. The impact, nevertheless, has been profound. By most accounts, it startedin Britain in the mid-18th century and spread to a limited number of regions of the world, includingWestern Europe and North America. Explaining the causes of growth and identifying the factors that made it possible are among the most important unsolved questions facing economists today. This project pursues these issues by providing a detailed quantitative analysis of the economic conditions that prevailed in major economies in the 18th century at the turning point of modern economic growth. The focus is on China and Europe, two regions of the world that were both relatively advanced as of the mid- 18th century, and yet would start industrializing about 150 years apart. The project assesses economic development in these two regions in three major areas: commodity markets, labor markets, and the accumulation of worker skills (human capital). The PI's also provide a new benchmark for living standard comparisons for the mid-18th century. The database for this analysis is based on both primary and secondary sources, and it allows us to produce a quantitative picture for China in unprecedented detail. The first paper in this project examines the performance of commodity markets. Prevailing views place much emphasis on how efficient markets lead to optimal resource use and specialization. This paper presents evidence on the level of grain market integration in China and Europe over the 17th to 19th centuries. Preliminary findings suggest that differences in the relative levels of market efficiency in China and Western Europe were important. The performance of European markets of the 18th century was comparable to China's, but markets within Britain, the first industrial nation, were more integrated than anywhere else in the world. Continental Europe did not catch up with Britain until the mid-19th century.The PI's propose to relate their findings to theories about the Industrial Revolution and the timing of the spread of growth. The second paper confronts the great debate on relative living standards. Historic living standards provide the initial conditions of modern growth. The longstanding consensus going back to Smith and Malthus is that Western Europe was richer than China long before 1750. Recent revisionism has disputed that claim, but the question remains unsettled. With the large set of wages and prices assembled in this project, the PI's will be in the position to reassess the issue. For this comparison, they will employ new data on real wages in about 700 counties all over China, together with the available data for Europe. This paper also sheds light on the merits of theories that explain the post-1750 divergence in terms of technical change biased towards capital in Europe and towards labor in China, and differences in labor market efficiency.In the third paper, the PI's examine the role that skill abundance and human capital accumulation may have had for growth. With the innovations of the 18th century requiring a better trained labor force, did skilledlabor abundance give Europe a crucial advantage over China? Did Europe build on that to create a comparative advantage in skill-intensive products with higher growth potential? This paper addresses these questions by creating a new database on the skill premium in China and in Europe. In addition, the PI's also use the skill premium to calculate an implied interest rate for the prefectures of China. Together with interest rates computed from seasonal fluctuations in grain prices, the PI's then compare capital market integration in China and Europe both spatially and across (agricultural versus education) sectors.INTELLECTUAL MERIT: The PI's research on the sources of economic growth in history takes acomparative and multidisciplinary approach that helps to increase understanding of economicinteractions in other regions of the world and in the economy while showing how a better understanding of past events can inform analysis of contemporary economic issues.BROADER IMPACTS: In creating a public-use dataset from Chinese and European historical sources, the PI's will promote greater inter-cultural education and direct cooperation between researchers and organizations in North American, Europe, and China. In addition, both collaborators on this project teach undergraduate and graduate courses in Economic Development, and under their supervision students will be welcome to participate at all stages in this project. The PI's have presented work related to this project to audiences at the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, Statistics Canada, the National Bureau of Economic Research, and at academic seminars and conferences in North America and Europe.

人均收入的持续增长，现代经济的增长，是一个相对较新的现象。然而，其影响是深远的。根据大多数人的说法，它始于18世纪中期的英国，并蔓延到世界上有限的几个地区，包括西欧和北美。解释经济增长的原因并找出使增长成为可能的因素是当今经济学家面临的最重要的悬而未决的问题之一。本项目通过对18世纪主要经济体在现代经济增长转折点上普遍存在的经济状况进行详细的量化分析来探讨这些问题。重点放在中国和欧洲，这两个世界上的地区在18世纪中叶都是相对先进的，但它们开始工业化的时间相隔约150年。该项目评估了这两个地区在三个主要领域的经济发展：商品市场、劳动力市场和工人技能(人力资本)的积累。PI还为18世纪中期的生活水平比较提供了一个新的基准。这一分析的数据库基于一手资料和二手资料，它使我们能够以前所未有的详细程度为中国提供一幅量化的图景。该项目的第一篇论文考察了大宗商品市场的表现。主流观点非常强调有效的市场如何带来最佳的资源利用和专业化。本文对17-19世纪中国与欧洲的粮食市场一体化水平进行了实证研究。初步研究结果表明，中国和西欧市场效率相对水平的差异是重要的。18世纪欧洲市场的表现与中国相当，但英国作为第一个工业国，其内部市场的一体化程度高于世界其他任何地方。直到19世纪中叶，欧洲大陆才赶上英国。PI建议将他们的发现与工业革命和增长扩散的时间相关的理论联系起来。第二篇论文面对的是关于相对生活水平的大争论。历史上的生活水平为现代增长提供了初始条件。长期以来的共识可以追溯到史密斯和马尔萨斯，他们认为西欧早在1750年之前就比中国富裕得多。最近的修正主义对这种说法提出了异议，但这个问题仍然悬而未决。在这个项目中汇集了大量的工资和价格，PI将有能力重新评估这一问题。为了进行这种比较，他们将使用中国全境约700个县的实际工资的新数据，以及欧洲的现有数据。本文还揭示了解释1750年后欧洲技术变革偏向资本和中国偏向劳动力的理论的优点，以及劳动力市场效率的差异。在第三篇论文中，PI检验了技能丰富和人力资本积累可能对增长所起的作用。随着18世纪的创新需要训练有素的劳动力，熟练劳动力的丰富是否给欧洲带来了相对于中国的关键优势？欧洲是否以此为基础，在具有更高增长潜力的技能密集型产品上创造了比较优势？本文通过建立一个关于中国和欧洲技能溢价的新数据库来解决这些问题。此外，PI还使用技能溢价计算中国所在地区的隐含利率。然后，与根据粮食价格季节性波动计算的利率一起，国际和平研究所在空间和跨(农业与教育)部门比较中国和欧洲的资本市场一体化。情报优点：国际和平研究所对历史上经济增长来源的研究采取了比较和多学科的方法，有助于增加对世界其他地区和经济中的经济互动的理解，同时展示了对过去事件的更好理解如何有助于分析当代经济问题。布罗德影响：在创建来自中国和欧洲历史资料的公共使用数据集时，国际和平研究所将促进更大的跨文化教育以及北美、欧洲、还有中国。此外，该项目的两位合作者都教授经济发展的本科生和研究生课程，并在他们的指导下欢迎学生参与该项目的所有阶段。国际和平研究所在世界银行、国际货币基金组织、加拿大统计局、国家经济研究局以及北美和欧洲的学术研讨会和会议上向观众介绍了与该项目有关的工作。