Clark's Malthus delusion: response to â€˜Farming in England 1200â€“1800â€™
Stephen Broadberry (),
Bruce M. S. Campbell,
Mark Overton and
Bas van Leeuwen
Economic History Review, 2018, vol. 71, issue 2, 639-664
Clark's claims about the scale of English agricultural output from the 1200s to the 1860s flout historical and geographical reality. His incomeâ€ based estimates start with the daily real wages of adult males and assume that days worked per year were constant. Those advanced in British economic growth make no such assumption and instead are built up from the output side. They correlate better with population trends and are consistent with an economy slowly growing and becoming richer. Clark's denial that such growth occurred, his assertion that substantially more land must have been under arable cultivation, his belief that conditions of full employment invariably prevailed in the countryside at harvest time, his concern that the wage bill would have exceeded the value of output in British economic growth, his refusal to consider the possibility that the working year was of variable length, and his assertion that output per acre must have been equalized across arable and pasture are all shown to be figments of his â€˜Malthus delusionâ€™.
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ehsrev:v:71:y:2018:i:2:p:639-664
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0013-0117
Access Statistics for this article
Economic History Review is currently edited by Stephen Broadberry
More articles in Economic History Review from Economic History Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().