IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/restud/v84y2017i2p613-649..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Industrialization and Economic Development of Russia through the Lens of a Neoclassical Growth Model

Author

Listed:
  • Anton Cheremukhin
  • Mikhail Golosov
  • Sergei Guriev
  • Aleh Tsyvinski

Abstract

This article studies the structural transformation of Russia in 1885–1940 from an agrarian to an industrial economy through the lens of a two-sector neoclassical growth model. We construct a data set that covers Tsarist Russia during 1885–1913 and Soviet Union during 1928–1940. We develop a methodology that allows us to identify the types of frictions and economic mechanisms that had the largest quantitative impact on Russian economic development. We find that entry barriers and monopoly power in the non-agricultural sector were the most important reason for Tsarist Russia’s failure to industrialize before World War I. Soviet industrial transformation after 1928 was achieved primarily by reducing such frictions, albeit coinciding with a significantly lower performance of productivity in both agricultural and non-agricultural sectors. We find no evidence that Tsarist agricultural institutions were a significant barrier to labour reallocation to manufacturing, or that “Big Push” mechanisms were a major driver of Soviet growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Anton Cheremukhin & Mikhail Golosov & Sergei Guriev & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2017. "The Industrialization and Economic Development of Russia through the Lens of a Neoclassical Growth Model," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(2), pages 613-649.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:84:y:2017:i:2:p:613-649.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdw026
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:restud:v:84:y:2017:i:2:p:613-649.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/restud .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.