The Seeds of Divergence: The Economy of French North America, 1688 to 1760

Vincent J. Geloso
{"title":"The Seeds of Divergence: The Economy of French North America, 1688 to 1760","authors":"Vincent J. Geloso","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2899723","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Generally, Canada has been ignored in the literature on the colonial origins of divergence with most of the attention going to the United States. Late nineteenth century estimates of income per capita show that Canada was relatively poorer than the United States and that within Canada, the French and Catholic population of Quebec was considerably poorer. Was this gap long standing? Some evidence has been advanced for earlier periods, but it is quite limited and not well-suited for comparison with other societies. \nThis thesis aims to contribute both to Canadian economic history and to comparative work on inequality across nations during the early modern period. With the use of novel prices and wages from Quebec—which was then the largest settlement in Canada and under French rule—a price index, a series of real wages and a measurement of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) are constructed. They are used to shed light both on the course of economic development until the French were defeated by the British in 1760 and on standards of living in that colony relative to the mother country, France, as well as the American colonies. \nThe work is divided into three components. The first component relates to the construction of a price index. The absence of such an index has been a thorn in the side of Canadian historians as it has limited the ability of historians to obtain real values of wages, output and living standards. This index shows that prices did not follow any trend and remained at a stable level. However, there were episodes of wide swings—mostly due to wars and the monetary experiment of playing card money. The creation of this index lays the foundation of the next component. \nThe second component constructs a standardized real wage series in the form of welfare ratios (a consumption basket divided by nominal wage rate multiplied by length of work year) to compare Canada with France, England and Colonial America. Two measures are derived. The first relies on a “bare bones” definition of consumption with a large share of land-intensive goods. This measure indicates that Canada was poorer than England and Colonial America and not appreciably richer than France. However, this measure overestimates the relative position of Canada to the Old World because of the strong presence of land-intensive goods. A second measure is created using a “respectable” definition of consumption in which the basket includes a larger share of manufactured goods and capital-intensive goods. This second basket better reflects differences in living standards since the abundance of land in Canada (and Colonial America) made it easy to achieve bare subsistence, but the scarcity of capital and skilled labor made the consumption of luxuries and manufactured goods (clothing, lighting, imported goods) highly expensive. With this measure, the advantage of New France over France evaporates and turns slightly negative. In comparison with Britain and Colonial America, the gap widens appreciably. This element is the most important for future research. By showing a reversal because of a shift to a different type of basket, it shows that Old World and New World comparisons are very sensitive to how we measure the cost of living. Furthermore, there are no sustained improvements in living standards over the period regardless of the measure used. Gaps in living standards observed later in the nineteenth century existed as far back as the seventeenth century. In a wider American perspective that includes the Spanish colonies, Canada fares better. \nThe third component computes a new series for Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This is to avoid problems associated with using real wages in the form of welfare ratios which assume a constant labor supply. This assumption is hard to defend in the case of Colonial Canada as there were many signs of increasing industriousness during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The GDP series suggest no long-run trend in living standards (from 1688 to circa 1765). The long peace era of 1713 to 1740 was marked by modest economic growth which offset a steady decline that had started in 1688, but by 1760 (as a result of constant warfare) living standards had sunk below their 1688 levels. These developments are accompanied by observations that suggest that other indicators of living standard declined. The flat-lining of incomes is accompanied by substantial increases in the amount of time worked, rising mortality and rising infant mortality. In addition, comparisons of incomes with the American colonies confirm the results obtained with wages— Canada was considerably poorer. \nAt the end, a long conclusion is provides an exploratory discussion of why Canada would have diverged early on. In structural terms, it is argued that the French colony was plagued by the problem of a small population which prohibited the existence of scale effects. In combination with the fact that it was dispersed throughout the territory, the small population of New France limited the scope for specialization and economies of scale. However, this problem was in part created, and in part aggravated, by institutional factors like seigneurial tenure. The colonial origins of French America’s divergence from the rest of North America are thus partly institutional.","PeriodicalId":273796,"journal":{"name":"Social History eJournal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social History eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2899723","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

Generally, Canada has been ignored in the literature on the colonial origins of divergence with most of the attention going to the United States. Late nineteenth century estimates of income per capita show that Canada was relatively poorer than the United States and that within Canada, the French and Catholic population of Quebec was considerably poorer. Was this gap long standing? Some evidence has been advanced for earlier periods, but it is quite limited and not well-suited for comparison with other societies. This thesis aims to contribute both to Canadian economic history and to comparative work on inequality across nations during the early modern period. With the use of novel prices and wages from Quebec—which was then the largest settlement in Canada and under French rule—a price index, a series of real wages and a measurement of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) are constructed. They are used to shed light both on the course of economic development until the French were defeated by the British in 1760 and on standards of living in that colony relative to the mother country, France, as well as the American colonies. The work is divided into three components. The first component relates to the construction of a price index. The absence of such an index has been a thorn in the side of Canadian historians as it has limited the ability of historians to obtain real values of wages, output and living standards. This index shows that prices did not follow any trend and remained at a stable level. However, there were episodes of wide swings—mostly due to wars and the monetary experiment of playing card money. The creation of this index lays the foundation of the next component. The second component constructs a standardized real wage series in the form of welfare ratios (a consumption basket divided by nominal wage rate multiplied by length of work year) to compare Canada with France, England and Colonial America. Two measures are derived. The first relies on a “bare bones” definition of consumption with a large share of land-intensive goods. This measure indicates that Canada was poorer than England and Colonial America and not appreciably richer than France. However, this measure overestimates the relative position of Canada to the Old World because of the strong presence of land-intensive goods. A second measure is created using a “respectable” definition of consumption in which the basket includes a larger share of manufactured goods and capital-intensive goods. This second basket better reflects differences in living standards since the abundance of land in Canada (and Colonial America) made it easy to achieve bare subsistence, but the scarcity of capital and skilled labor made the consumption of luxuries and manufactured goods (clothing, lighting, imported goods) highly expensive. With this measure, the advantage of New France over France evaporates and turns slightly negative. In comparison with Britain and Colonial America, the gap widens appreciably. This element is the most important for future research. By showing a reversal because of a shift to a different type of basket, it shows that Old World and New World comparisons are very sensitive to how we measure the cost of living. Furthermore, there are no sustained improvements in living standards over the period regardless of the measure used. Gaps in living standards observed later in the nineteenth century existed as far back as the seventeenth century. In a wider American perspective that includes the Spanish colonies, Canada fares better. The third component computes a new series for Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This is to avoid problems associated with using real wages in the form of welfare ratios which assume a constant labor supply. This assumption is hard to defend in the case of Colonial Canada as there were many signs of increasing industriousness during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The GDP series suggest no long-run trend in living standards (from 1688 to circa 1765). The long peace era of 1713 to 1740 was marked by modest economic growth which offset a steady decline that had started in 1688, but by 1760 (as a result of constant warfare) living standards had sunk below their 1688 levels. These developments are accompanied by observations that suggest that other indicators of living standard declined. The flat-lining of incomes is accompanied by substantial increases in the amount of time worked, rising mortality and rising infant mortality. In addition, comparisons of incomes with the American colonies confirm the results obtained with wages— Canada was considerably poorer. At the end, a long conclusion is provides an exploratory discussion of why Canada would have diverged early on. In structural terms, it is argued that the French colony was plagued by the problem of a small population which prohibited the existence of scale effects. In combination with the fact that it was dispersed throughout the territory, the small population of New France limited the scope for specialization and economies of scale. However, this problem was in part created, and in part aggravated, by institutional factors like seigneurial tenure. The colonial origins of French America’s divergence from the rest of North America are thus partly institutional.
分歧的种子:1688年至1760年法属北美经济
一般来说,在关于分歧的殖民起源的文献中,加拿大一直被忽视,大部分注意力都集中在美国。19世纪末对人均收入的估计表明,加拿大比美国相对贫穷,而在加拿大境内,魁北克的法国人和天主教徒要穷得多。这个差距是长期存在的吗?在较早的时期已经提出了一些证据,但这些证据相当有限,不适合与其他社会进行比较。本论文旨在为加拿大经济史和近代早期各国不平等的比较工作做出贡献。使用来自魁北克的新价格和工资——魁北克当时是加拿大最大的定居点,受法国统治——一个价格指数,一系列实际工资和国内生产总值(GDP)的测量被构建出来。它们被用来说明法国在1760年被英国击败之前的经济发展进程,以及该殖民地相对于母国法国和美国殖民地的生活水平。这项工作分为三个部分。第一部分与价格指数的构建有关。没有这样一个指数一直是加拿大历史学家的眼中钉,因为它限制了历史学家获得工资、产出和生活水平的真实价值的能力。该指数表明,价格没有跟随任何趋势,保持在稳定的水平。然而,也有剧烈波动的时期——主要是由于战争和纸牌货币的货币实验。这个索引的创建为下一个组件奠定了基础。第二个部分以福利比率(消费篮子除以名义工资率乘以工作年长度)的形式构建了一个标准化的实际工资序列,将加拿大与法国、英国和殖民地美国进行比较。导出了两个度量。第一种依赖于消费的“基本”定义,其中很大一部分是土地密集型商品。这一衡量标准表明,加拿大比英国和殖民时期的美国更穷,也不比法国富裕多少。然而,这一措施高估了加拿大与旧世界的相对地位,因为土地密集型商品的强劲存在。第二种衡量标准是使用“体面的”消费定义创建的,其中一篮子商品包括更大份额的制成品和资本密集型商品。第二个篮子更好地反映了生活水平的差异,因为加拿大(和殖民时期的美国)丰富的土地使人们很容易达到勉强维持生活的水平,但资本和熟练劳动力的稀缺使得奢侈品和制成品(服装、照明、进口商品)的消费非常昂贵。这样一来,新法兰西相对于法国的优势就消失了,并略微变得消极起来。与英国和殖民时期的美国相比,差距明显扩大。这个因素对未来的研究是最重要的。通过显示由于转向不同类型的篮子而导致的逆转,它表明旧世界和新世界的比较对我们如何衡量生活成本非常敏感。此外,无论采用何种措施,在这一时期生活水平都没有持续改善。19世纪后期观察到的生活水平差距早在17世纪就存在了。从包括西班牙殖民地在内的更广泛的美国人的角度来看,加拿大的情况要好一些。第三部分计算国内生产总值(GDP)的新系列。这是为了避免在假设劳动力供给不变的情况下,以福利比率的形式使用实际工资所带来的问题。这一假设很难在加拿大殖民时期站住脚,因为在十八和十九世纪,有许多迹象表明加拿大人越来越勤劳。GDP系列没有显示生活水平的长期趋势(从1688年到大约1765年)。1713年至1740年的长期和平时期,经济适度增长,抵消了1688年开始的稳定衰退,但到1760年(由于持续的战争),生活水平下降到1688年的水平以下。伴随这些发展的观察结果表明,生活水平的其他指标有所下降。与收入持平相伴的是工作时间的大幅增加、死亡率和婴儿死亡率的上升。此外,与美国殖民地的收入比较证实了工资所得的结果——加拿大要穷得多。最后,一个很长的结论提供了一个探索性的讨论,为什么加拿大会在早期出现分歧。在结构方面,有人认为法国殖民地受到人口少的问题的困扰,这使得规模效应无法存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信