Unlimited Supplies of Labor

Author(s):  
Robert L. Tignor

This chapter evaluates W. Arthur Lewis's article “Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labour,” which the journal Manchester School had published in its 1954 issue and won the Nobel award in 1979. It was unquestionably his outstanding scholarly achievement. The article galvanized the new field of development economics, providing it with a legitimacy that it had not previously enjoyed. Moreover, nearly all of his later studies in economic history bore the imprint of the article. Lewis was not merely the most rigorously trained economist from the less developed world. His publications focused sharply on the critical issues of poverty and development. His ideas were persuasive and compelling, his arguments powerful, and the corpus of his writings suffused with the optimism that marked this era of political decolonization. Of the pioneers of development economics, he was the best synthesizer, the best able to handle multicausal relationships. His book The Theory of Economic Growth masterfully merged economic theory with social and political analysis.

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cosmin Marinescu

The last few decades have seen a significant growth of economists’ interest in studying institutions. They are generally preoccupied with explaining institutions using instruments that are specific for an economist, and especially with discerning the significance of institutions for both economic development and development economics. Therefore, the integration of institutions into economic theory is an essential step in our continuous attempt to refine and improve scientific explanations. The neoclassical theory of economic growth only identifies the conditions needed for material production growth, such as capital accumulation and technical progress. In order to explain ‘why’ people save, invest, learn and seek useful knowledge, special attention must also be paid to institutional and value systems.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-268
Author(s):  
Dmitry Yu. Karasev

Introduction. The scope of regional economic inequality, its causes and consequences are relevant issues in the economic history. High regional inequality impedes representative estimation of national economic development and international comparison. The end of 19th and beginning of 20th centuries was the time when industrialization, states’ economic and political integration led to their regional divergence/convergence. Methods. The main challenge of measuring and accounting for 19th century regional economic growth is a scarcity of regional historical and economic statistics. Thus, the paper concerns with historiographical analysis of successful attempts to face this challenge in economic history. Results. It can be distinguished three approaches to historical regional economies accounting depending of relevant statistics availability: 1) for countries with high regional-data integrity, GRP can be estimated as a sum of its residents’ incomes (R. Easterling’s method); 2) for countries with moderate regional statistics being saved, it is possible to estimate GRP through distributing known GDP totals across regions on the basis of indicators of regional sectors’ shares (Geary-Stark method); 3) for countries with poor regional historical statistics it fits only short-cut approach on the basis of indirect regional economic indicators (Crafts’ approach and Good–Ma method). Furthermore, the paper deals with following methods and models used in quantitative explorations of unequal regional economic development: shift-share analysis, β and σ-convergence. Discussion. It appears that historical statistics from the Governors reports makes possible to distribute known national values added in the first and secondary sectors across provinces of the late-nineteenth century Russian Empire in the line with Geary–Stark methodology. The contribution of tertiary sector to the provinces’ economic growth could be estimated on the basis of indirect indicators from the same historical source and the other sources, following Good–Ma methodology. Finally, the cross-checking of the GRP to be calculated is possible through comparison with A. Markevich estimates for 1897.


2018 ◽  
pp. 55-89
Author(s):  
Şevket Pamuk

This chapter looks at the role of institutions in economic development and the evolution of Ottoman institutions before the nineteenth century. It argues that while institutions are not the only things that matter, it is essential to examine their role in order to understand Turkey's experience with economic growth and human development during the last two centuries. The economics and economic history literature has been making a related and important distinction between the proximate and deeper sources of economic growth. The proximate causes refer to the contributions made by the increases in inputs, land, labor, and capital and the productivity increases. The deeper causes refer to the social, political, and economic environment as well as the historical causes that influence the rate at which inputs and productivity grow.


Author(s):  
G.P. Manish ◽  
Benjamin Powell

This chapter provides a summary of the lessons that the Austrian theory of capital holds for the field of development economics. It provides an introduction to the concepts of the structure of production and time preference and a brief overview of how the rate of time preference limits both the available pool of savings and the extent of capital formation. The implications that this uniquely Austrian insight holds for the theory of economic growth are spelled out, in particular the fact that what constrains the growth of developing countries is not the availability of technology but the availability of savings to undertake investment. The chapter also provides a brief exposition of the concept of capital heterogeneity and its implications for the impossibility of economic calculation under a system of central planning. A critique of some popular models that advocate planning as a means of economic development is also provided.


1957 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 554-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia L. Thrupp

Our conference today on comparative economic history is in some clanger of rushing into the wide-open spaces of ambiguity, for the term is new, and to agree too quickly on its meaning and implications may not even be desirable. In order to avoid engaging in a mere game of definitions, this paper will deal first with three general types of comparison in relation to their bearing on problems of evidence. It will then review some of the chief uses to which these types of comparison have been put in building up our body of knowledge about Western economic history. The survey will close with particular reference to our own preindustrial stages of economic growth, when western Europe was, in our uncomplimentary phrase, an underdeveloped or backward area.


1968 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 632-635
Author(s):  
Joseph J. Stern

The title of this book unfortunately is misleading, referring only to half the papers presented at the Manchester Conference on Teaching Economic Development, and the least interesting half at that. The first, and by far the most challenging part of the book, consists of Seers' previously published article, "The Limitations of the Special Case". This is followed by a list of twenty 'leading questions' on teaching economics by the same author, and papers by Myint, Hagen, Streeten and Balogh, dealing with various aspects of economic theory and its application to development planning. The last ninety pages of the book are devoted to the discussions which took place at the conference. As might have been expected, these read like a pale imitation of what probably was an interesting exchange of views. Few readers, one suspects, will be sufficiently motivated to work their way through these verbal arguments.


1951 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-346 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. M. Postan

I was asked to illustrate the effects of the economic leadership of adAvanced nations by an example drawn from English economic history in the Middle Ages. I have accordingly chosen the subject of Italian contribution to the economic development of medieval England. What prompted this choice was not only the contribution that the Italians in fact made but also the contribution that they are reputed to have made. Indeed their reputation for economic leadership interests me as much as their achievement. For if their reputation and their achievement are collated, something more interesting than a mere illustration of economic leadership may emerge. The illustration may well turn into a cautionary example. I hope I shall not appear immodest or perverse if I suggest that the Italian example may help to circumscribe the historical and the logical validity of the entire concept of economic leadership. For the concept that appears to mean something in historical accounts of economic forms is apt to dissolve as soon as we reach out to the fundamental forces and processes of economic growth.


1971 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-569 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Klingaman

Scholars are gradually piecing together the puzzle of the economic development of the American colonies through quantitative studies designed to clarify and measure economic variables having theoretical relevance for the wider process of economic growth and development. Recently, researchers such as Jones, Land, Shepherd, Walton, and Thomas have been helping others to build a base that one day may permit the writing of a comprehensive study of the process of early American economic development which may even include reliable estimates of economic growth and living standards. The data problems for the colonial period of American economic history are severe, and much of the research has tended to concentrate on the important role of international trade, where the extant data sources are capable of yielding rich lodes of quantitative information. Customs 16/1, entitled the Ledger of Imports and Exports for America, 1768–1772, has been the most valuable source of trade data, since it is the only comprehensive document which shows the trade of the American colonies with all parts of the world and not just with the British Isles. Still yet to be mined are the rich sources of data buried in the naval office lists for the various colonies. These sources also give the trade of each colony with all parts of the world although they are more tedious to work with than the better collated Customs 16/1.


1975 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 3-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard L. Rudolph

The wealth of literature published in the last twenty-five years on economic growth, economic development, and comparative economic history contains little information about Austria-Hungary. Fortunately, this situation shows signs of improving as the few recent articles and monographs on the subject are beginning to be utilized in the more general literature. Although the general lack of attention to Austria-Hungary clearly indicates that serious analytical work on the economic history of the area is still in a very early stage, the relatively few studies published on the subject have already changed the views of scholars on economic developments in the Habsburg lands.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document