Unified Growth Theory Contradicted by the GDP/cap Data

Ron W Nielsen

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Mathematical properties of the historical GDP/cap distributions are discussed and explained. These distributions are frequently incorrectly interpreted and the Unified Growth Theory is an outstanding example of such common misconceptions. It is shown here that the fundamental postulates of this theory are contradicted by the data used in its formulation. The postulated three regimes of growth did not exist and there was no takeoff at any time. It is demonstrated that features interpreted as three regimes of growth represent just mathematical properties of a single, monotonically-increasing distribution, indicating that a single mechanism should be used to explain the historical economic growth. It is shown that using different socio-economic conditions for different perceived parts of the historical GDP/cap data is irrelevant and scientifically unjustified. The GDP/cap growth was indeed increasing slowly over a long time and fast over a short time but these features represent a single, uniform and uninterrupted growth process, which should be interpreted as whole using a single mechanism of growth.

Date: 2015-09, Revised 2015-12
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-fdg, nep-gro and nep-his
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.09323 Latest version (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:arx:papers:1511.09323

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().