Why Italy and not Spain? Comparing two industrialization processes from a dissagregate time series perspective
In 1996 and 1997 Economic History Review published two appraisals of recent contributions on the contemporary economic development of Spain and Italy prior to the Second World War. In his study of Spain, James Simpson described the situation as one of slow growth. By contrast, Giovanni Federico entitled his study Italy, 1860-1940: a little known success story. The assessments of these two authors were based on the growing quantitative evidence of the healthy growth experienced in the Italian economy during the giolittiano period, in contrast to the relative stagnation of the Spanish economy during the second half of the nineteenth century, especially during the Restoration of the Bourbon monarchy. A comparison of the evolution in industrial output shows that this situation is the result of marked differences in the rate of industrial development. The indices of industrial output that are available support the opinions presented in seminal historiographical studies of the development of nineteenth century Spain and Italy. In 1975, Nadal considered that industrialization in Spain had failed to take a strong foothold; after a promising early start, the sector lost momentum as the last thirty years of the nineteenth century wore on. In contrast, the pioneer works of Gerschenkron stated that only during the final decade of the nineteenth century did a break occur in the behaviour of Italian industry, which was to represent the beginning of the process of industrialization.
|Date of creation:||2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.ere.ub.es
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- N. Gregory Mankiw & David Romer & David N. Weil, 1990.
"A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth,"
NBER Working Papers
3541, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Robert G. King & Charles I. Plosser & James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 1991.
"Stochastic trends and economic fluctuations,"
Working Paper Series, Macroeconomic Issues
91-4, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
- Osterwald-Lenum, Michael, 1992. "A Note with Quantiles of the Asymptotic Distribution of the Maximum Likelihood Cointegration Rank Test Statistics," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 54(3), pages 461-72, August.
- Sergio T. Rebelo, 1990.
"Long Run Policy Analysis and Long Run Growth,"
NBER Working Papers
3325, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Greasley, David & Oxley, Les, 2000. "British Industrialization, 1815-1860: A Disaggregate Time-Series Perspective," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 98-119, January.
- Norrbin, S. C., 1995. "Disaggregate stochastic trends in industrial production," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(3-4), pages 327-333, March.
- David Greasley & Les Oxley, 1994. "Rehabilitation sustained: the industrial revolution as a macroeconomic epoch," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 47(4), pages 760-768, November.
- Johansen, Soren, 1995. "Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198774501.
- Young, Alwyn, 1993. "Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 443-72, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bar:bedcje:200395. 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: (Espai de Recerca en Economia)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.