mardi 29 décembre 2015

Annexe 13 - List of regions by past GDP (PPP)

List of regions by past GDP (PPP)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For estimations of economic wealth in history, see List of regions by past GDP (PPP) per capita.
These are lists of regions and countries by their estimated real gross domestic product (GDP) in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP), the value of all final goods and services produced within a country/region in a given year. GDP dollar (international dollar) estimates here are derived from PPP estimates.

Methodology

In the absence of sufficient data for nearly all economies until well into the 19th century, past GDP cannot be calculated, but at best only roughly estimated. In a first step, economic historians try to reconstruct the GDP per capita for a given political or geographical entity from the meagre evidence. This value is then multiplied by estimated population size, another determinant for which as a rule only little ancient data is available.
A key notion in the whole process is that of subsistence, the income level which is necessary for sustaining one's life. Since pre-modern societies, by modern standards, were characterized by a very low degree of urbanization and a large majority of people working in the agricultural sector, economic historians prefer to express income in cereal units. To achieve comparability over space and time, these numbers are then converted into monetary units such as International Dollars, a third step which leaves a relatively wide margin of interpretation.
The formula thus is: GDP (PPP) = GDP per capita (PPP) x population size
It should be stressed that, historically speaking, population size is the far more important multiplier in the equation. This is because, in contrast to industrial economies, the average income ceiling of premodern agrarian societies was quite low everywhere, possibly not higher than twice the subsistence level.[1] Therefore, the total GDP as given below primarily reflects the respective historical population size, and is much less indicative of contemporary living standards than, for example, estimations of past GDP per capita are.
According to the 20th-century macroeconomist Paul Bairoch, a pioneer in historical economic analysis,
it is obvious that by itself the volume of total GNP has no important significance, and that the volume of GNP is not by itself the expression of the economic strength of a nation.
Rather, Bairoch advocates a formula combining GNP per capita and total GNP to give a better measure of the economic performance of national economies.[2]

World 1–2003 (Maddison)

The following estimates are taken exclusively from the 2007 monograph Contours of the World Economy, 1–2030 AD by the British economist Angus Maddison.[3] For his separate estimate of Roman GDP (PPP) and that of other authors, see below.
GDP (PPP) in millions of 1990 International Dollars
Country / Region 1 1000 1500 1600 1700 1820 1870 1913 1950 1973 2003
Austria 213 298 1,414 2,093 2,483 4,104 8,419 23,451 25,702 85,227 173,311
Belgium 135 170 1,225 1,561 2,288 4,529 13,716 32,347 47,190 118,516 219,069
Denmark 72 144 443 569 727 1,471 3,782 11,670 29,654 70,032 124,781
Finland 8 16 136 215 255 913 1,999 6,389 17,051 51,724 106,749
France 2,366 2,763 10,912 15,559 19,539 35,468 72,100 144,489 220,492 683,965 1,315,601
Germany 1,225 1,435 8,256 12,656 13,650 26,819 72,149 237,332 265,354 944,755 1,577,423
Italy 6,475 2,250 11,550 14,410 14,630 22,535 41,814 95,487 164,957 582,713 1,110,691
Netherlands 85 128 723 2,072 4,047 4,288 9,952 24,955 60,642 175,791 348,464
Norway 40 80 183 266 361 777 2,360 5,988 17,728 44,852 118,591
Sweden 80 160 382 626 1,231 3,098 6,927 17,403 47,269 109,794 193,352
Switzerland 128 123 411 750 1,068 2,165 5,581 16,483 42,545 117,251 164,773
UK 320 800 2,815 6,007 10,709 36,232 100,180 224,618 347,850 675,941 1,280,625
12 country total 11,146 8,366 38,450 56,784 70,988 142,399 338,979 840,612 1,286,434 3,660,561 6,733,430
Portugal 180 255 606 814 1,638 3,043 4,219 7,467 17,615 63,397 144,694
Spain 1,867 1,800 4,495 7,029 7,481 12,299 19,556 41,653 61,429 266,896 684,537
Other 1,240 504 632 975 1,106 2,110 4,712 12,478 30,600 105,910 294,733
Total Western Europe 14,433 10,925 44,183 65,602 81,213 159,851 367,466 902,210 1,396,078 4,096,764 7,857,394
Eastern Europe 1,956 2,600 6,696 9,289 11,393 24,906 50,163 134,793 185,023 550,756 786,408
Former USSR 1,560 2,840 8,458 11,426 16,196 20,678 25,646 32,351 510,243 1,513,070 1,552,231
USA 272 520 800 600 527 12,548 98,374 517,383 1,455,916 3,536,622 8,430,762
Other Western offshoots 176 228 320 320 306 951 13,119 65,558 179,574 521,667 1,277,267
Total Western offshoots 448 748 1,120 920 833 13,499 111,493 582,941 1,635,490 4,058,289 9,708,029
Mexico 880 1,800 3,188 1,134 2,558 5,000 6,214 25,921 67,368 279,302 740,226
Other Latin America 1,360 2,760 4,100 2,629 3,788 9,921 21,097 94,875 347,960 1,110,158 2,391,919
Total Latin America 2,240 4,560 7,288 3,763 6,346 14,921 27,311 120,796 415,328 1,389,460 3,132,145
Japan 1,200 3,188 7,700 9,620 15,390 20,739 25,393 71,653 160,966 1,242,932 2,699,261
China 26,820 26,550 61,800 96,000 82,800 228,600 189,740 241,431 244,985 739,414 6,187,984
India 33,750 33,750 60,500 74,250 90,750 111,417 134,882 204,242 222,222 494,832 2,267,136
Other east Asia 4,845 8,968 20,822 24,582 28,440 36,451 53,155 122,874 256,938 839,258 3,926,975
West Asia 10,120 12,415 10,495 12,637 12,291 15,270 22,468 40,588 106,283 548,120 1,473,739
Total Asia (excl. Japan) 75,535 81,683 153,617 207,469 214,281 391,738 400,245 609,135 830,428 2,621,624 13,855,834
Africa 8,030 13,835 19,383 23,473 25,776 31,266 45,234 79,486 203,131 549,993 1,322,087
World 105,402 120,379 248,445 331,562 371,428 694,598 1,110,951 2,733,365 5,331,689 16,022,888 40,913,389
Country / Region 1 1000 1500 1600 1700 1820 1870 1913 1950 1973 2003
Maddison' assumptions have been criticized and admired by academics and journalists. By Bryan Haig, who has characterized Maddison's figures for 19th century Australia as "inaccurate and irrelevant",[4] by John Caldwell, in whose assessment Maddison's arguments have a "dangerous circularity",[5] by W. W. Rostow, according to whom "this excessive macroeconomic bias also causes him (Maddison) to mis-date, in my view, the beginning of what he calls the capitalist era at 1820 rather than, say, the mid-1780s."[6]
W. J. MacPherson has described Maddison's work on India and Pakistan of using "dubious comparative data."[7] Maddison's estimates have also been critically reviewed and revised by the Italian economists Giovanni Federico[8] and Elio Lo Cascio/Paolo Malanima (see below).[9]
However, economist and journalist Evan Davis has praised Maddison's research by citing it as a "fantastic publication" and that it was "based on the detailed scholarship of the world expert on historical economic data Angus Maddison." He also added that "One shouldn't read the book in the belief the statistics are accurate to 12 decimal places."[10]

Europe

Europe 1830–1938 (Bairoch)

The following estimates were made by the economic historian Paul Bairoch.[11] Contrary to most other estimates on this page, the GNP (PPP) is given here in 1960 US dollars. Unlike Maddison, Bairoch allows for the fluctuation of borders, basing his estimates mostly on the historical boundaries at the given points in time.[12]
GNP (PPP) in millions of 1960 US dollars
Country / Region 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1913 1925 1938
Austria - - - - - - - - - - 4,314 4,320
Austria-Hungary 7,210 8,315 9,190 9,996 11,380 12,297 15,380 19,400 23,970 26,050 - -
Baltic countries - - - - - - - - - - 2,298 2,760
Belgium 1,098 1,397 1,809 2,302 2,882 3,256 3,804 4,800 6,308 6,794 7,658 8,501
Bulgaria - - - 588 616 611 808 970 1,165 1,260 1,613 2,628
Czechoslovakia - - - - - - - - - - 6,822 8,050
Denmark 256 292 361 476 612 788 1,095 1,544 2,031 2,421 2,893 2,893
Finland 256 295 370 420 550 670 860 1,110 1,395 1,670 1,910 3,339
France 8,582 10,335 11,870 13,326 16,800 17,381 19,758 23,500 26,869 27,401 36,262 39,284
Germany 7,235 8,320 10,395 12,771 16,697 19,993 26,454 35,800 45,523 49,760 45,002 77,178
Greece - 200 220 250 365 440 640 780 910 1,540 2,340 4,200
Hungary - - - - - - - - - - 3,025 4,137
Ireland - - - - - - - - - - 1,862 1,907
Italy 5,570 5,951 6,666 7,466 8,273 8,745 9,435 10,820 12,598 15,624 18,510 23,701
Netherlands 913 1,105 1,318 1,502 1,823 2,188 2,660 3,164 4,150 4,660 6,696 7,987
Norway 316 378 490 642 728 886 1,041 1,286 1,601 1,834 2,370 3,812
Poland - - - - - - - - - - 7,325 12,885
Portugal 860 945 985 1,100 1,175 1,270 1,360 1,550 1,710 1,800 2,046 2,634
Romania - - 760 836 950 1,100 1,350 1,700 2,125 2,450 5,123 6,780
Russia/USSR 10,550 11,200 12,700 14,400 22,920 23,250 21,180 32,000 43,830 52,420 32,600 75,964
Serbia - - - 320 345 382 432 560 700 725 - -
Spain 3,600 4,150 4,700 5,400 5,300 5,400 5,675 6,500 7,333 7,450 9,498 8,511
Sweden 557 617 729 860 1,025 1,385 1,700 2,358 3,261 3,824 4,627 6,908
Switzerland 580 700 930 1,200 1,460 1,920 2,100 2,599 3,355 3,700 4,300 5,063
United Kingdom 8,245 10,431 12,591 16,072 19,628 23,551 29,441 36,273 40,623 44,074 43,700 56,103
Yugoslavia - - - - - - - - - - 3,870 5,221
Europe 58,152 66,997 77,937 91,073 114,966 126,975 146,723 188,534 231,550 256,845 257,434 376,947
Western Europe[12] 38,910 - - 63,670 - - - 126,900 - 163,780 179,830 231,560
Eastern Europe[12] 19,240 - - 27,400 - - - 61,640 - 93,060 77,600 145,390
Country / Region 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1913 1925 1938

Europe 1500–1870 (Lo Cascio/Malanima)

The following estimates are taken from a revision of Angus Maddison's numbers for the whole of Europe by the Italian economists Elio Lo Cascio and Paolo Malanima.[13] According to their calculations, the basic level of European GDP (PPP) was historically higher, but its increase was less pronounced.
Year GDP (PPP) in millions of 1990 International Dollars
1500 111,680
1600 133,760
1700 159,440
1750 205,530
1800 253,900
1870 619,970

Roman and Byzantine Empires

See also: Roman economy and Eastern Roman economy
Much of the recent work in estimating past GDP has been done in the study of the Roman economy, following the pioneering studies by Keith Hopkins (1980) and Raymond Goldsmith (1984).[14] The estimates by Peter Temin, Angus Maddison, Branko Milanović and Peter Fibiger Bang follow the basic method established by Goldsmith, varying mainly only in their set of initial numbers; these are then stepped up to estimations of the expenditure checked by those on the income side. Walter Scheidel/Steven Friesen determine GDP on the relationship between certain significant economic indicators which were historically found to be plausible; two independent control assumptions provide the upper and lower limit of the probable size of the Roman GDP.[15]
Estimates of Roman GDP (PPP)[A]
Unit Goldsmith
1984[16]		 Hopkins
1995/96[17]		 Temin
2006[18]		 Maddison
2007[19]		 Milanovic
2007[20]		 Bang
2008[21]		 Scheidel/Friesen
2009[22]
Population
(Approx. year)		 55m
(14 AD)		 60m
(14 AD)		 55m
(100 AD)		 44m
(14 AD)		 55m
(14 AD)		 60m
(150 AD)		 70m
(150 AD)
GDP (PPP) in Sesterces HS 20.9bn HS 13.5bn HS 9.2bn HS 16.7bn HS 20.9bn HS 13.7bn ~HS 20bn
Wheat equivalent 46.4 Mt 29.5 Mt 33.8 Mt 37.1 Mt – 30 Mt 50 Mt
Million 1990 International Dollars – – – $25,100 $34,815 – $43,400
A ^ Decimal fractions rounded to the nearest tenth. Italic numbers not directly given by the authors; they are obtained by multiplying the respective value of GDP per capita by estimated population size.
The GDP per capita of the Byzantine Empire, the continuation of the Roman Empire in the east, has been estimated by the World Bank economist Branko Milanović to range between $680 and 770 (in 1990 International Dollars) at its peak around 1000 AD, that is the reign of Basil II.[23] The Byzantine population size at the time is estimated to have been 12 to 18 million.[24] This would yield a total GDP somewhere between $8,160 and 13,860 million.

Notes

  1. Milanovic 2006, p. 460, 468:
    In conclusion, the fact that the average incomes in the most developed agricultural economies like Augustan Rome and Basil's Byzantium were about twice or less than the subsistence minimum might indicate that the pre-industrial societies were unlikely to ever exceed that ceiling. This in turn has implications for our assessment of the average standard of living in other, non-Western, pre-industrial economies like those of China, India, pre-Columbian Americas, and Africa....A further implication of these calculations is that a realistic maximum income that could be envisaged for the pre-industrial societies might be a bit more than twice the subsistence minimum, or around $PPP 1000 (at 1990 international prices).
  2. Bairoch 1976, p. 282
  3. Maddison 2007, p. 379, table A.4.
  4. Haig, Bryan. 2005. "Review of The World Economy: Historical Statistics by Angus Maddison," Economic Reports, volume 81.
  5. Caldwell, John C. (Sept. 2002), "Reviewed Work(s): The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective by Angus Maddison", Population and Development Review, Vol. 28, No. 3., pp. 559-561.
  6. Rostow, W. W.. "Reviewed Work(s): Phases of Capitalist Development. by Angus Maddison," The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 45, No. 4. (Dec., 1985), pp. 1026-1028.
  7. MacPherson, W. J. "Reviewed Work(s): Class Structure and Economic Growth. India and Pakistan since the Moghuls by Angus Maddison." The Economic Journal, Vol. 82, No. 328. (Dec., 1972), pp. 1470-1472.
  8. Federico 2002, pp. 111–120
  9. Lo Cascio, Malanima Dec. 2009, pp. 391–420
  10. "China's magnificent historic past". BBC News. 2005-03-10. Retrieved 2010-05-08.
  11. Bairoch 1976, pp. 281, table 4; 295, table 10
  12. The border between "Western Europe" and "Eastern Europe" as defined by Bairoch corresponds to the iron curtain, with "Eastern Europe" being identical to the Eastern Bloc (Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the USSR plus Albania). All the rest of Europe makes up "Western Europe" (Bairoch 1976, pp. 317, 319).
  13. Lo Cascio, Malanima Dec. 2009, p. 411, table 6
  14. Scheidel, Walter; Morris, Ian; Saller, Richard, eds. (2007): The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-78053-7
  15. Scheidel, Friesen Nov. 2009, pp. 63–72
  16. Goldsmith 1984, pp. 263–288
  17. Hopkins 1995/96, pp. 41–75. His estimates are upward revisions from Hopkins 1980, pp. 101–125, where he lays out his basic method.
  18. Temin 2006, pp. 31–54
  19. Maddison 2007, pp. 43–47; 50, table 1.10; 54, table 1.12
  20. Milanovic, Lindert, Williamson Oct. 2007, pp. 58–66
  21. Bang 2008, pp. 86–91
  22. Scheidel, Friesen Nov. 2009, pp. 61–91
  23. Milanovic 2006, p. 468
  24. Milanovic 2006, p. 461

Bibliography

Publié par à

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire

Inscription à : Publier les commentaires (Atom)