IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cge/wacage/393.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The introduction of serfdom and labor markets

Author

Listed:
  • Jensen, Peter Sandholt

    (University of Southern Denmark)

  • Radu, Cristina Victoria

    (University of Southern Denmark)

  • Severgnini, Battista

    (Copenhagen Business School)

  • Sharp, Paul

    (University of Southern Denmark, CAGE, CEPR)

Abstract

We provide evidence of how restrictions on labor mobility, such as serfdom and other types of labor coercion, impact labor market outcomes. To do so, we estimate the impact of a large negative shock to labor mobility in the form of the reintroduction of serfdom in Denmark in 1733, which was targeted at limiting the mobility of farmhands. Using a unique data source based on the archives of estates from the eighteenth century, we test whether serfdom affected the wages of farmhands more strongly than other groups in the labor market, and results based on a differences-in-differences approach reveal evidence consistent with a strong negative effect following its introduction. We also investigate whether one mechanism was that boys with rural backgrounds were prevented from taking up apprenticeships in towns, and find suggestive evidence that this was indeed the case. Thus, our results suggest that serfdom was effectively reducing mobility.

Suggested Citation

  • Jensen, Peter Sandholt & Radu, Cristina Victoria & Severgnini, Battista & Sharp, Paul, 2018. "The introduction of serfdom and labor markets," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 393, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
  • Handle: RePEc:cge:wacage:393
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/centres/cage/manage/publications/393-2018_sharp.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aea:aecrev:v:108:y:2018:i:4-5:p:1074-1117 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226549507 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. John Whalley & Shunming Zhang, 2011. "A Numerical Simulation Analysis Of (Hukou) Labour Mobility Restrictions In China," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: China's Integration Into The World Economy, chapter 11, pages 295-324 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Davide Cantoni & Simon Johnson & James A. Robinson, 2011. "The Consequences of Radical Reform: The French Revolution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 3286-3307, December.
    5. A. Colin Cameron & Jonah B. Gelbach & Douglas L. Miller, 2008. "Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(3), pages 414-427, August.
    6. Bobonis, Gustavo J. & Morrow, Peter M., 2014. "Labor coercion and the accumulation of human capital," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 32-53.
    7. Peter Sandholt Jensen & Markus Lampe & Paul Sharp & Christian Volmar Skovsgaard, 2018. "‘Getting to Denmark’: the Role of Elites for Development," Working Papers 0125, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    8. Domar, Evsey D., 1970. "The Causes of Slavery or Serfdom: A Hypothesis," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 18-32, March.
    9. Radu, Cristina Victoria, 2019. "Real wages, labour conditions and the standard of living in Denmark: 1500-1900," Discussion Papers of Business and Economics 2/2019, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Business and Economics.
    10. repec:eee:deveco:v:127:y:2017:i:c:p:431-439 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Domar, Evsey D. & Machina, Mark J., 1984. "On the Profitability of Russian Serfdom," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 919-955, December.
    12. repec:taf:rehdxx:v:27:y:2012:i:1:p:1-37 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Andrei Markevich & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya, 2018. "The Economic Effects of the Abolition of Serfdom: Evidence from the Russian Empire," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(4-5), pages 1074-1117, April.
    14. Ogilvie, Sheilagh & Edwards, Jeremy, 2000. "Women and the “Second Serfdom†: Evidence from Early Modern Bohemia," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(4), pages 961-994, December.
    15. Daron Acemoglu & Alexander Wolitzky, 2011. "The Economics of Labor Coercion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 555-600, March.
    16. Mikołaj Malinowski, 2016. "Editor's choice Serfs and the city: market conditions, surplus extraction institutions, and urban growth in early modern Poland," European Review of Economic History, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 123-146.
    17. Alexander Klein & Sheilagh Ogilvie, 2016. "Occupational structure in the Czech lands under the second serfdom," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 69(2), pages 493-521, May.
    18. Genicot, Garance, 2002. "Bonded labor and serfdom: a paradox of voluntary choice," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 101-127, February.
    19. Suresh Naidu, 2010. "Recruitment Restrictions and Labor Markets: Evidence from the Postbellum U.S. South," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(2), pages 413-445, April.
    20. Gregory Clark, 2007. "Introduction to A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World," Introductory Chapters,in: A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World Princeton University Press.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jensen, Peter Sandholt & Radu, Cristina Victoria & Sharp, Paul Richard, 2019. "Days Worked and Seasonality Patterns of Work in Eighteenth Century Denmark," Discussion Papers of Business and Economics 10/2019, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Business and Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Serfdom; labor mobility; coercion JEL Classification: J3; N33; P4;

    JEL classification:

    • J3 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs
    • N33 - Economic History - - Labor and Consumers, Demography, Education, Health, Welfare, Income, Wealth, Religion, and Philanthropy - - - Europe: Pre-1913
    • P4 - Economic Systems - - Other Economic Systems

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cge:wacage:393. 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: (Jane Snape). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dewaruk.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.