The devil is in the details: assessing early industrial performance across international borders using late nineteenth century North American manufacturers as a case study
Was the average late nineteenth century Canadian manufacturer a hopelessly inefficient laggard when compared to his American counterparts just on the other side of the international border? Could it have been that Canadian producers were really productivity leaders so early in their industrialization process? To answer these fundamental questions about the performance of a small open economy at a key juncture in its industrial development we need a quantitative comparison of Canadian relative to US productivity. Unfortunately, the approach we adopt with respect to data compilation, methodological choice, and the identification of inputs, outputs, input weights, and prices has both quantitative and qualitative effects on any performance assessment we may undertake. To illustrate the severity of these effects we use manuscript census data from 1870/1871 to derive a series of total factor productivity (TFP) comparisons for a sample of manufacturing establishments located immediately to the north and south of the Canada–US border. Even with some of the most common and defensible variable definitions, we find dramatic differences between the most optimistic and most pessimistic assessments of late nineteenth century Canadian performance. Our case study suggests to us that those interested in the assessment of long run performance differentials should appreciate the sensitivity of these assessments and they should carefully consider the approach that has been taken toward data preparation, methodological choice, and variable definitions in their construction.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 2 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 (July)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.cliometrie.org|
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:afc:cliome:v:2:y:2008:i:2:p:85-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.