Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T20:49:49.073Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Vive la différence: Disaggregation of the productivity convergence process*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2010

S. N. Broadberry
Affiliation:
University of Warwick

Abstract

This paper examines the convergence process at a disaggregated level in a historical context. A three-way disaggregation of the national accounts by output, income and expenditure reveals a wealth of diversity, bom over time and across countries, i.e. history and geography matter. Countries can specialise according to comparative advantage, and convergence at the aggregate level can occur through changes in structure as well as through convergence at the micro level. Similarly, changes in factor proportions may lead to convergence of aggregate incomes without requiring convergence of all factor prices at the micro level. Also, differences in preferences may persist, so that individual components of expenditure do not need to converge in line with aggregate expenditure. Convergence at the aggregate level, dren, does not necessarily lead to uniformity. Vive la différence!

Resumen

Este trabajo examina el proceso de convergencia en perspectiva histórica a nivel desagregado. Tomando en consideración la producción, la renta y el gasto este trabajo muestra una gran diversidad geográfica y temporal. Cada país se especializó según su ventaja comparativa y la convergencia se produjo tanto a través de cambios en su estructura productiva, como a niveles microeconómicos. Asimismo, variaciones en la proporción de las facturas condujo a una mejor convergencia de la renta sin necesidad de una mayor aproximación de los precios de los factores. El trabajo demuestra también que persistieron importantes diferencias en las preferencias de los consumidores. Así pues, el proceso de convergencia a nivel agregado no condujo necesariamente a la uniformidad de las economías. ¡Vive la differénce!

Type
Artículos
Copyright
Copyright © Instituto Figuerola de Historia y Ciencias Sociales, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abramovitz, M. (1979): «Rapid Growth Potential and its Realisation: The Experience of the Capitalist Economies in the Postwar Period», in Malinvaud, E. (ed.), Economic Growth and Resources, Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress of the International Economic Association, Vol.1, London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramovitz, M. (1986): «Catching-Up, Forging Ahead and Falling Behind», Journal of Econo mic History, 46, pp. 385406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altman, M. (1987): «A Revision of Canadian Economic Growth: 1870–1910 (A Challenge to the Gradualist Interpretation)», Canadian Journal of Economics, 20, pp. 86113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ames, E. and Rosenberg, N. (1968): «The Enfield Arsenal in Theory and History», Economic Journal, 78, pp. 827942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anglo-American Council on Productivity (1952): Final Report, London: AACP.Google Scholar
Ark, van B. (1993): «International Comparisons of Output and Productivity: Manufacturing Productivity Performance of Ten Countries from 1950 to 1990», (Groningen Growth and Development Centre Monograph Series, no. 1).Google Scholar
Ark, van B. (1994): «Comparative Output and Productivity in Spanish Manufacturing, 1950–1989», (unpublished, University of Groningen).Google Scholar
Barro, R. J. and Sala-I-Martin, X. (1991): «Convergence Across States and Regions», Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, pp. 107182.Google Scholar
Baumol, W. J. (1986): «Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: What the Long Run Data Show», American Economic Review, 76, pp. 10721159.Google Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1993): «Manufacturing and the Convergence Hypothesis: What the Long Run Data Show», Journal of Economic History, 53, pp. 772795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1994a): «Technological Leadership and Productivity Leadership in Manufacturing since the Industrial Revolution: Implications for the Convergence Debate», Economic Journal, 104, pp. 291302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1994b): «Comparative Productivity in British and American Manufacturing During the Nineteenth Century», Explorations in Economic History, 31, pp. 521548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1995): «Comparative Productivity Levels in Manufacturing since the Industrial Revolution: Lessons from Britain, America, Germany and Japan», Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 6, pp. 7195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1996): «Convergence: What the Historical Record Shows», in van Ark, B. and Crafts, N.F.R. (eds.), Quantitative Aspects of Postwar European Economic Growth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 327346.Google Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1997a): The Productivity Race: British Manufacturing in International Perspective, 1850–1990, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1997b): «Forging Ahead, Falling Behind and Catching-Up: A Sectoral Analysis of Anglo-American Productivity Differences, 1870–1990», Research in Economic History, 17, pp. 137.Google Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. (1997c): «Anglo-German Productivity Differences 1870–1990: A Sectoral Analysis», European Review of Economic History, 1, pp. 247267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broadberry, S. N. and Wagner, K. (1996): «Human Capital and Productivity in Manufacturing During the Twentieth Century: Britain, Germany and the United States», in van Ark, B. and Crafts, N. F. R. (eds.), Quantitative Aspects of Postwar European Economic Growth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 244270.Google Scholar
Chandler, A. D. Jr (1990): Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism, Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, C. (1940): The Conditions of Economic Progress, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cornwall, J. (1977): Modern Capitalism: Its Growth and Transformation, London: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
Crafts, N. F. R. (1985): British Economic Growth During the Industrial Revolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Daly, A., Hitchens, D. M. and Wagner, K. (1985): «Productivity, Machinery and Skills in a Sample of British and German Manufacturing Plants», National Institute Economic Review, 111, pp. 4861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
David, P. A. (1975): Technical Choice, Innovation and Economic Growth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
De Long, J. B. (1988): «Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: Comment», American Economic Review, 78, pp. 11381154.Google Scholar
Dumke, R. (1990): «Reassessing the Wirtschaftswunder: Reconstruction and Postwar Growth in West Germany in an International Context», Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52, pp. 451491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durlauf, S. N. and Johnson, P. A. (1992): «Local versus Global Convergence Across National Economies», (Working Paper no. 3996, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinstein, C. H. (1988): «Economic Growth since 1870: Britain's Performance in International Perspective», Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 4(1), pp. 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinstein, C. H. (1990): «Benefits of Backwardness and Costs of Continuity», in Graham, A. and Seldon, A. (eds.), Government and Economies in the Postwar World: Economic Policies and Comparative Performance, 1945–85, London: Roudedge, pp. 284293.Google Scholar
Frankel, M. (1957): British and American Manufacturing Productivity, Urbana: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Franko, L. G. (1976): The European Multinationals: A Renewed Challenge to American and British Big Business, London: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Gemmell, N. and Wardley, P. (1990): «The Contribution of Services to British Economic growth, 1856–1913», Explorations in Economic History, 27, pp. 299321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giersch, H., Paqué, K. H., and Schmieding, H. (1992): The Fading Miracle: Four Decades of Market Economy in Germany, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomulka, S. (1971): Inventive Activity, Diffusion and the Stages of Economic Growth, Aarhus: Institute of Economics.Google Scholar
Griliches, Z. (1994): «Productivity, R&D and the Data Constraint», American Economic Review, 84, pp. 123.Google Scholar
Habakkuk, H. J. (1962): American and British Technology in the Nineteenth Century, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hannah, L. (1995): «The American Miracle, 1875–1950, and After: A View in the European Mirror», Business and Economic History, 24, pp. 197220.Google Scholar
Harley, C. K. (1974): «Skilled Labour and Choice of Technique in Edwardian Industry», Explorations in Economic History, 2, pp. 391414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennings, K. H. (1982): «West Germany», in Boltho, A. (ed.), The European Economy: Growth and Crisis, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 472501.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, W. G. (1965): Das Wachstum der deutschen Wirtschaft seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts, Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, E. L. (1968): The Development of English Agriculture, 1815–1873, London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, J. W. (1961): Productivity Trends in the United States, Princeton: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Krugman, P. (1987): «The Narrow Moving Band, the Dutch Disease, and the Competitive Consequences of Mrs. Thatcher», Journal of Development Economics, 27, pp. 4155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C. H. (1986): The British Economy Since 1700: A Macroeconomic Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University press.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. P. (1965): Building Cycles and Britain's Growth, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Maddison, A. (1964): Economic Growth in the West, London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Maddison, A. (1982): Phases of Capitalist Development, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maddison, A. (1991): Dynamic Forces in Capitalist Development, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maddison, A. (1992): «A Long-Run Perspective on Saving», Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 94, 181196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddison, A. (1995): Monitoring the World Economy, 1820–1992, Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.Google Scholar
Melman, S. (1956): Dynamic Factors in Industrial Productivity, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. (1990): «The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy and Organisation», American Economic Review, 80, pp. 511528.Google Scholar
Nelson, R. R. and Wright, G. (1992): «The Rise and Fall of American Technological Leadership: The Postwar Era in Historical Perspective», Journal of Economic Literature, 30, pp. 19311964.Google Scholar
Paige, D. and Bombach, G. (1959): A Comparison of National Output and Productivity of the United Kingdom and the United States, Paris: Organisation for European Economic Cooperation.Google Scholar
Piore, M. J. and Sabel, C. F. (1984): The Second Industrial Divide: Possibilities for Prosperity, New York: Basic.Google Scholar
Pratten, C. F. (1990): Applied Macroeconomics, (2nd edn.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, N. (1969) (ed.), The American System of Manufactures, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Rostas, L. (1948): Comparative Productivity in British and American Industry, Cambridge: National Institute of Economic and Social Research.Google Scholar
Rubinstein, W. D. (1993): Capitalism, Culture and Economic Decline in Britain, 1750–1990, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Thomas, B. (1973): Migration and Economic Growth: A Study of Great Britain and the Atlantic Economy, (2nd edn.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, J. G. (1995): «The Evolution of Global Labor Markets since 1830: Background Evidence and Hypotheses», Explorations in Economic History, 32, pp. 141196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, J. G. (1996): «Globalization, Convergence, and History», Journal of Economic History, 56, pp. 277306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar