What Makes Maddison Right

Jan Luiten van Zanden and Debin Ma

World Economics, 2017, vol. 18, issue 3, 203-214

Abstract: The ‘Great Divergence debate' in economic history relates to the question of when China fell behind the levels of well-being in Western Europe. A recent paper published in this journal argues that existing historical data cannot answer this question and criticizes estimates of Angus Maddison of GDP per capita based on limited evidence. The authors believe, in contrast, that critiques, assessments and summaries on the state of the Great Divergence debate even if flawed are in the original spirit of the Maddison research. Maddison's work is less about right or wrong than about trying to achieve better or best estimates by overcoming the current constraint on data and methodologies over time.

Date: 2017
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.worldeconomics.com/Journal/Papers/Article.details?ID=681 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wej:wldecn:681

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in World Economics from World Economics, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Ed Jones ().