IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jechis/v76y2016i01p205-217_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutions, Demography, and Economic Growth

Author

Listed:
  • Dennison, Tracy K.
  • Ogilvie, Sheilagh

Abstract

This article evaluates criticisms by Sarah G. Carmichael, Alexandra de Pleijt, Jan Luiten van Zanden, and Tine De Moor of our view of the European Marriage Pattern (EMP), and explains why their claims are incorrect. We elaborate our arguments concerning the institutional sources of economic growth, explore the relationship between women's position and the EMP, analyze the two-way links between demographic and economic behavior, and explicate aspects of our empirical analysis that these scholars find puzzling. The causes of European economic growth, we reiterate, are not to be found in the EMP but rather must be sought in the wider framework of nonfamilial institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dennison, Tracy K. & Ogilvie, Sheilagh, 2016. "Institutions, Demography, and Economic Growth," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 76(1), pages 205-217, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jechis:v:76:y:2016:i:01:p:205-217_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022050716000486/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Alexander Wakelam, 2023. "Assessing female accountability in the long eighteenth century through debt imprisonment," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 76(2), pages 575-598, May.
    2. Maravall Buckwalter, Laura & Baten, Joerg, 2019. "Valkyries: Was gender equality high in the Scandinavian periphery since Viking times? Evidence from enamel hypoplasia and height ratios," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 181-193.
    3. Baten, Joerg & de Pleijt, Alexandra M., 2022. "Female autonomy generated successful long-term human capital development: Evidence from 16th to 19th century Europe," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Francisco J. Beltrán Tapia & Gabriele Cappelli, 2024. "Missing girls in Liberal Italy, 1861–1921," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 77(1), pages 185-211, February.
    5. Palma, Nuno & Reis, Jaime & Rodrigues, Lisbeth, 2023. "Historical gender discrimination does not explain comparative Western European development: evidence from Portugal, 1300-1900," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    6. Clark, Gregory & Cummins, Neil & Curtis, Matthew, 2024. "How did the European Marriage Pattern persist? Social versus familial inheritance: England and Quebec, 1650–1850," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    7. Alexandra M. de Pleijt, 2018. "Human capital formation in the long run: evidence from average years of schooling in England, 1300–1900," Cliometrica, Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History, Association Française de Cliométrie (AFC), vol. 12(1), pages 99-126, January.
    8. Baten Joerg & Szołtysek Mikołaj & Campestrini Monica, 2017. "“Girl Power” in Eastern Europe? The human capital development of Central-Eastern and Eastern Europe in the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries and its determinants," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 21(1), pages 29-63.
    9. James Foreman‐Peck & Peng Zhou, 2018. "Late marriage as a contributor to the industrial revolution in England," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1073-1099, November.
    10. Youssouf Merouani & Faustine Perrin, 2022. "Gender and the long-run development process. A survey of the literature [Rethinking age heaping: A cautionary tale from nineteenth-century Italy]," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 26(4), pages 612-641.

    More about this item

    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:cup:jechis:v:76:y:2016:i:01:p:205-217_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jeh .

    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.