Resumen: En este trabajo se hace una crítica empírica de lo que puede denominarse “nueva
ortodoxia” interpretativa de los problemas económicos contemporáneos de
Iberoamérica (crecimiento lento y gran desigualdad). Más concretamente, son
Acemoglu, Johnson y Robinson (2001a y 2002) y Engerman y Sokoloff (1994, 2002 y
2005), que encuentran en la herencia institucional del colonialismo español en América
las claves de los problemas de desarrollo iberoamericanos, quienes
reciben una
atención especial en este trabajo. Su principal conclusión es que la fundamentación
empírica de la “nueva ortodoxia” dista de ser satisfactoria.
Palabras clave: Instituciones coloniales y desarrollo económico de América Latina, Neoinstitucionalismo, Colonialismo y desarrollo económico, Historia económica de América Latina
Editorial: Facultad de Cienias Económicas y Empresariales. Decanato
Departamento: Fac. de CC. Económicas y Empresariales - Decanato
Notas: Texto presentado al Seminario Obstáculos al crecimiento económico en Iberoamérica, 1790-1850, organizado por Enrique Llopis y Carlos Marichal para la Fundación Ramón Areces,
Madrid, España, 2007
Resumen: Based on substantial empirical work, our paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the historical causes of
contemporary Latin America problems of development (slow growth and high inequality). It shows solid
quantitative evidence on wages and heights for Bourbon Hispanic America that, in our opinion, challenges
mainstream assumptions about the –allegedly negative- effects of Spanish colonialism on the welfare of
common people. Purchasing
capacity of miners and labourers in terms of grain and, especially, of meat was
generally equal to -or higher than- that in most parts of Europe and Asia. Heights of some 5000 recruits in
the colonial army and militias show a significant inter-regional variance. In South-eastern New Spain they
turn out to be slightly below Western standards whereas in Northern Mexico and Venezuela (Maracaibo)
they are comparable to those of Central, Eastern and Southern Europe. Thus, wages of ordinary Hispanic
Americans in eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries were not low by international standards. Neither
were their physical statures always shorter than the European norm in the middle of the eighteenth century.
Our results might carry other far-reaching implications. On the one hand, an increasing and influent scholarship
characterizes colonial Hispanic America as an extreme case of economy based on extractive institutions
and inequality [Engerman and Sokoloff (1994, 2002, 2005); Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson
(2002)]. Was it really the case? Our response is somewhat sceptical. On the other hand, calculating ratios of
heights and real wages to GDP per capita estimates [Maddison (2009)] for 1820 converts Hispanic America
into a clear outlier within a wide sample of countries. This finding suggests that available estimations on
Bourbon Hispanic America GDP per capita should be revised upwards.
Palabras clave: Heights, Welfare, Colonialism, Development, Latin America.
