Research in Economic History: Volume 27

Subject:

Table of contents

(12 chapters)

Volume 27 is the last of 12 volumes of Research in Economic History I will edit. It includes six papers, evenly divided, as has been the case in the past, between European and North American topics. The lead paper, by Dan Bogart and Gary Richardson, opens up a new area of research in British economic history. Estate Acts were Parliamentary bills allowing landowners to relax restrictions on the sale, division, lease, or development of real property. These acts, which may have been as important as the more well-known Enclosure Acts, facilitated the move of real property to more productive uses as economic conditions changed.

A manuscript copy of the paper by William Parker was given to John Komlos by Robert Gallman in 1985 while they temporarily overlapped at the University of North Carolina. Komlos was in the process of estimating food consumption trends in the United States in the antebellum period for his paper on the “Height and Weight of West Point Cadets” which was eventually published in the Journal of Economic History. Parker's paper had handwritten annotations for a talk that he must have given in 1956 or 1957. It occurred to Komlos – several decades later – that it would be a pity if the study remained unpublished and Komlos contacted me about the possibility that the paper might appear in Research in Economic History.

A new database demonstrates that between 1600 and 1830, Parliament passed thousands of acts restructuring rights to real and equitable estates. These estate acts enabled individuals and families to sell, mortgage, lease, exchange, and improve land previously bound by landholding and inheritance laws. This essay provides a factual foundation for research on this important topic: the law and economics of property rights during the period preceding the Industrial Revolution. Tables present time-series, cross-sectional, and panel data that should serve as a foundation for empirical analysis. Preliminary analysis indicates ways in which this new evidence may shape our understanding of British economic and social history. The data demonstrate that Parliament facilitated the reallocation of resources to new and more productive uses by adapting property rights to modern economic conditions. Reallocation surged in the decades following the Glorious Revolution and was concentrated in areas undergoing urbanization and industrialization. The process was open to landowners of all classes, not just the privileged groups who sat in the Houses of Lords and Commons. Parliament's rhetoric about improving the realm appears to have been consistent with its actions concerning rights to land and resources.

Estimates are developed of the major macroeconomic aggregates – wages, land rents, interest rates, prices, factor shares, sectoral shares in output and employment, and real wages – for England by decade between 1209 and 2008. The efficiency of the economy in the years 1209–2008 is also estimated. One finding is that the growth of real wages in the Industrial Revolution era and beyond was faster than the growth of output per person. Indeed until recently the greatest recipient of modern growth in England has been unskilled workers. The data also create a number of puzzles, the principal one being the very high levels of output and efficiency estimated for England in the medieval era. These data are thus inconsistent with the general notion that there was a period of Smithian growth between 1300 and 1800 which preceded the Industrial Revolution, as expressed in such recent works as De Vries (2008).

New series of Spain's capital stock and input are provided for the last one and a half centuries for the first time. Capital stock and input grew at average rates of 3.5 and 3.7 percent per year, respectively, but not at a steady pace since rates accelerated dramatically during the “Golden Age.” Two major structural changes accompanied this process. The composition of the capital stock and returns to it changed gradually as the contribution of producer durables rose while that of structures declined. Capital deepening took place in the long run. Although the capital–output ratio increased over time, in phases of accelerated growth the productivity of capital rose.

This paper investigates the extent to which U.S. trade policies during 1922–1962 impacted the Pacific Rim economies differently from the rest of the world. Empirical analysis demonstrates that U.S. trade with the Pacific Rim had consistently higher tariff barriers than U.S. trade with the rest of the world among import-competitive manufactures. This paper then analyzes the reasons behind this phenomenon from both a political economy and a historical perspective. On both fronts, the Pacific Rim was at a disadvantage, and its higher barrier to trade with the United States was by no means historically accidental.

Studies of Depression-era financial remediation have generally focused on federal deposit insurance and the provision of equity to banks by the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC). This paper broadens the concept of financial remediation to include other programs – RFC lending, federal guarantees of farm and home mortgages, and the elimination of interest on demand deposits – and other intermediaries – savings and loans, mutual savings banks, and life insurance companies. The benefits of remediation or the amounts potentially at risk to the government in these programs are calculated annually and allocated to the various intermediaries. The slow remediation of real estate loans (two-thirds of these intermediaries' loans) needs further study with respect to the slow economic recovery. The paper compares Depression-era remediation with efforts during the 2008–2009 crisis. Today's remediation contrasts with the 1930s in its speed, magnitude relative to GDP or private sector nonfinancial debt, the share of remediation going to nonbanks, and emphasis on securities markets.

The main trends in food consumption per capita unearthed so far from the Census and other material may be briefly summarized. Only for the meats – pork, beef, and veal – have the estimates been carried back to 1840. It seems not impossible that wheat flour may be extended before 1880, and possibly even the series for dairy products before 1870. In these cases, however, prudence has to date prevailed.

DOI
10.1108/S0363-3268(2010)27
Publication date
Book series
Research in Economic History
Editor
Series copyright holder
Emerald Publishing Limited
ISBN
978-1-84950-770-7
eISBN
978-1-84950-771-4
Book series ISSN
0363-3268