Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Alternative GDP Estimates
Topic Started: Jan 3 2017, 09:39 PM (111 Views)
Basil Fawlty
Member Avatar
Post Tenebras Lux
http://e-archivo.uc3m.es/bitstream/handle/10016/6177/wh986405.PDF?sequence=1

An interesting source of alternative GDP estimates for 1820-1990. Similar to Angus Maddison's data, this paper uses a slightly different methodology to calculate past GDP/capita for major nations, all based on contemporary borders. It is comparable in scope to Maddison, Broadberry and Bairoch's works, but claims to be more accurate. Figures are indexed to the USA's (=1000) for each year.

Several interesting conclusions:

- Great Britain never had a GDP/capita higher than the USA's since 1820. This implies the USA overtook Britain as the largest economy among industrial nations sometime in the 1850s.
- Maddison's estimates for French GDP are higher for 1820-60, but this paper suggests better performance than Maddison supposes thereafter until 1929.
- German GDP is lower across the board. It is especially noteworthy prior to 1880, with some years around 2/3rds of Maddison's levels.
- Russian estimates of GDP are slightly higher across the board, at least until the data runs out after WWI.
- Australia has some wide divergences, with these estimates putting its GDP/capita at almost half the Maddison level in 1850/60. The same is true of Austria.
- He suggests the periphery enjoyed higher standards than Maddison implies, with Spain, Portugal, and the Scandinavian countries having higher estimates after 1860.
- Belgian and Dutch GDP/capita are significantly lower, most noticeably in the period around the First Industrial Revolution in the early 19th century.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Petar
Member Avatar
The General
It is both more and less accurate, depending on what you want to analyse. As far as I can see, this paper is based on the Purchasing Power Parity GDP, which is vastly different than nominal GDP. It is much better for use in an analysis of quality of life, but would not be appropriate for other uses.

However, it is an interesting paper nonetheless. Nice catch!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Basil Fawlty
Member Avatar
Post Tenebras Lux
Maddison's and Broadberry's figures are also PPP.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Petar
Member Avatar
The General
Basil Fawlty
Jan 4 2017, 01:24 AM
Maddison's and Broadberry's figures are also PPP.
Oh? Well, that is interesting, then. I'll give the paper a more detailed look tomorrow. :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Simon Darkshade
Member Avatar
Nefarious Swashbuckler
It is useful as a point of comparison; Maddison's data tends to follow along with a lot of supporting historical evidence for various trends, such as 19th century Australian wealth and Britain's lead over America at the height of the mid 19th century. A good find.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Basil Fawlty
Member Avatar
Post Tenebras Lux
It would be interesting to use the GDP/capita levels provided and work out actual GDPs. I'd have to read it more closely to do that, however, because even though it's pegged to the USA's per capita level, I'm not sure if his estimate of American income is different from Bairoch's or Maddison's. I could probably tell by close internal comparison.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · History · Next Topic »
Add Reply