IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpeh/9710001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Microeconomic Analysis of Slavery in Comparison to Free Labor Economies

Author

Listed:
  • Haluk I. Ergin

    (Bilkent University)

  • Serdar Sayan

    (Bilkent University)

Abstract

In addition to supervision costs, the labor cost of an enterprise (plantation) in the system of slavery consists of the cost of acquiring the slaves and the subsistence compensation given out to the slaves. In this paper, we leave aside the issue of supervision costs previously taken up in the theoretical literature on slavery, and focus on these two peculiar components of labor costs. We analyze the implications of this cost structure on the levels of profitability, efficiency and determination of equilibrium wages, and compare them to systems with free labor markets, along a continuum of demand side Cournotic competition. For this purpose, we first use a model characterized by a decreasing returns to scale technology, and show, parallel to the findings of Vedder, et. al. (1990), that the equilibrium subsistence wage in the system of slavery is strictly lower than the marginal product of labor. We then extend the model, given the same technology and preferences, to free labor markets covering possibilities ranging from monopsony to perfect competition in the limit, and obtain a second and perhaps more striking result: Differently from equilibria in imperfectly competitive free labor markets, slavery and perfect competition equilibria are Pareto optimal. Furthermore, our comparisons across labor market scenarios suggest that the resistance of slaveholders to the abolishment of slavery is directly related to the expected level of demand side competition in the free labor market which would replace slavery. Finally, we show that the conclusions derived from our analysis would remain generally valid under a constant returns to scale technology as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Haluk I. Ergin & Serdar Sayan, 1997. "A Microeconomic Analysis of Slavery in Comparison to Free Labor Economies," Economic History 9710001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpeh:9710001
    Note: Type of Document - Word for Windows 6.0; prepared on IBM PC ; to print on HP Laser Jet IV; pages: 26 ; figures: Request from Author. On line version of Bilkent University Economics Department Discussion Paper No. 97-08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/eh/papers/9710/9710001.html
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/eh/papers/9710/9710001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/eh/papers/9710/9710001.ps.gz
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haskell, Thomas L, 1979. "Explaining the Relative Efficiency of Slave Agriculture in the Antebellum South: A Reply to Fogel-Engerman," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 206-207, March.
    2. Wright, Gavin, 1979. "The Efficiency of Slavery: Another Interpretation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 219-226, March.
    3. Fleisig, Heywood, 1976. "Slavery, the Supply of Agricultural Labor, and the Industrialization of the South," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 572-597, September.
    4. Emmanuel S. de Dios, 1990. "Preliminary Notes on Modes of Production," Philippine Review of Economics, University of the Philippines School of Economics and Philippine Economic Society, vol. 27(1), pages 8-18, June.
    5. Findlay, Ronald, 1975. "Slavery, Incentives, and Manumission: A Theoretical Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 83(5), pages 923-933, October.
    6. Graves, Philip E. & Sexton, Robert L. & Vedder, Richard K., 1983. "Slavery, amenities, and factor price equalization: A note on migration and freedom," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 156-162, April.
    7. Chwe, Michael Suk-Young, 1990. "Why Were Workers Whipped? Pain in a Principal-Agent Model," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1109-1121, December.
    8. David, Paul A & Temin, Peter, 1979. "Explaining the Relative Efficiency of Slave Agriculture in the Antebellum South: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 213-218, March.
    9. Fogel, Robert W & Engerman, Stanley L, 1980. "Explaining the Relative Efficiency of Slave Agriculture in the Antebellum South: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(4), pages 672-690, September.
    10. Roger L. Ransom and Richard Sutch., 1988. "Capitalists Without Capital: The Burden of Slavery and the Impact of Emancipation," Economics Working Papers 8867, University of California at Berkeley.
    11. Fogel, Robert W & Engerman, Stanley L, 1977. "Explaining the Relative Efficiency of Slave Agriculture in the Antebellum South," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 275-296, June.
    12. Schaefer, Donald F & Schmitz, Mark D, 1979. "The Relative Efficiency of Slave Agriculture: A Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 208-212, March.
    13. Fenoaltea, Stefano, 1984. "Slavery and Supervision in Comparative Perspective: A Model," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 635-668, September.
    14. Field, Elizabeth B, 1988. "The Relative Efficiency of Slavery Revisited: A Translog Production Function Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 543-549, June.
    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. Rauscher, Michael & Willert, Bianca, 2020. "Modern slavery, corruption, and hysteresis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard C. Sutch, 2018. "The Economics of African American Slavery: The Cliometrics Debate," NBER Working Papers 25197, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Saito, Tetsuya, 2005. "Managerial Strategies of the Cotton South," MPRA Paper 181, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Aug 2006.
    3. Toman, J.T., 2005. "The gang system and comparative advantage," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 310-323, April.
    4. Trevon D. Logan, 2022. "American Enslavement and the Recovery of Black Economic History," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 36(2), pages 81-98, Spring.
    5. Rauscher, Michael & Willert, Bianca, 2020. "Modern slavery, corruption, and hysteresis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Willert, Bianca, 2018. "Masters and slaves: A matching approach with heterogeneous workers," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 159, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    7. Daron Acemoglu & Alexander Wolitzky, 2011. "The Economics of Labor Coercion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 555-600, March.
    8. Michael Rauscher & Bianca Willert, 2019. "Slavery, Corruption, and Institutions," CESifo Working Paper Series 7944, CESifo.
    9. Gregg, Matthew T., 2009. "Technical efficiency estimates of Cherokee agriculture: A pre- and post-removal analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 826-833, October.
    10. Trevon Logan, 2015. "A Time (Not) Apart: A Lesson in Economic History from Cotton Picking Books," The Review of Black Political Economy, Springer;National Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 301-322, December.
    11. Claudia Goldin, 1995. "Cliometrics and the Nobel," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 191-208, Spring.
    12. Alan L. Olmstead & Paul W. Rhode, 2010. "Productivity Growth and the Regional Dynamics of Antebellum Southern Development," NBER Working Papers 16494, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Bernd Beber & Christopher Blattman, 2010. "The Industrial Organization of Rebellion: The Logic of Forced Labor and Child Soldiering," HiCN Working Papers 72, Households in Conflict Network.
    14. Rauscher, Michael & Willert, Bianca, 2019. "Slavery, corruption, and institutions," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 164, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    15. Heeho Kim, 2022. "Changes in informal society and slavery during the Chosun-Era in Korea," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Nils-Petter Lagerlof, 2002. "The Roads To and From Serfdom," Macroeconomics 0212011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Olmstead, Alan L. & Rhode, Paul W., 2008. "Biological Innovation and Productivity Growth in the Antebellum Cotton Economy," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 68(4), pages 1123-1171, December.
    18. Jonathan Conning, 2004. "The Causes of Slavery or Serfdom and the Roads to Agrarian Capitalism: Domar's Hypothesis Revisited," Economics Working Paper Archive at Hunter College 401, Hunter College Department of Economics.
    19. Dari-Mattiacci Giuseppe & de Oliveira Guilherme, 2021. "Slavery versus Labor," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 495-568, November.
    20. Olivella, P. & Aron, D.J., 1991. "Bonuses and Penalties as Equilibrium Incentive Devices, with Application to Manufacturing Systems," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 153.91, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economics of Slavery vs. Free Labor Systems Labor Economics Perfect Competition vs. Oligopsony and Monopsony in Labor Markets.;

    JEL classification:

    • N31 - Economic History - - Labor and Consumers, Demography, Education, Health, Welfare, Income, Wealth, Religion, and Philanthropy - - - U.S.; Canada: Pre-1913
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • P51 - Political Economy and Comparative Economic Systems - - Comparative Economic Systems - - - Comparative Analysis of Economic Systems
    • J42 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Particular Labor Markets - - - Monopsony; Segmented Labor Markets
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    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:wpa:wuwpeh:9710001. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.