Harrison, Mark (2003) Post-war Russian economic growth : not a riddle. Europe-Asia Studies, Vol.55 (No.8). pp. 1323-1329. doi:10.1080/0966813032000141132 ISSN 0966-8136.

Preview

PDF WRAP_Harrison_7470248-161008-eas03b_postprint.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer. Download (104Kb)

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

In a recent article Steven Rosefielde (2003) has advanced three propositions. He suggests that according to the best available statistics the post-war growth of the Russian economy under the command system was surprisingly good; in fact, he argues that it was too good. The standard for this judgement is economic theory, which holds that non-market systems must fail by comparison with market economies; Rosefielde associates specifically this view with the 'Washington consensus'. He concludes that it is the statistics that are at fault: they 'lied and were misconstrued' by Western 'statistically oriented comparativists' in a way that was unduly favourable to the command system.

In this comment I argue that Rosefielde has misread both the facts and the theory. There is no riddle in the statistics. His conclusion, therefore, must fall.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HC Economic History and Conditions D History General and Old World > DK Russia. Soviet Union. Former Soviet Republics
Divisions:	Faculty of Social Sciences > Economics
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Soviet Union -- Economic conditions -- 20th century, Economic development -- Soviet Union
Journal or Publication Title:	Europe-Asia Studies
Publisher:	Routledge
ISSN:	0966-8136
Official Date:	5 June 2003
Dates:	Date Event 5 June 2003 ["eprint_fieldopt_dates_date_type_modified" not defined]
Volume:	Vol.55
Number:	No.8
Page Range:	pp. 1323-1329
DOI:	10.1080/0966813032000141132
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access (Creative Commons)

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item