Disease and Development: A Reply to Bloom, Canning, and Fink
13 Pages Posted: 28 Apr 2014 Last revised: 12 May 2023
There are 2 versions of this paper
Disease and Development: A Reply to Bloom, Canning, and Fink
Date Written: April 2014
Abstract
Bloom, Canning, and Fink (2014) argue that the results in Acemoglu and Johnson (2006, 2007) are not robust because initial level of life expectancy (in 1940) should be included in our regressions of changes in GDP per capita on changes in life expectancy. We assess their claims controlling for potential lagged effects of initial life expectancy using data from 1900, employing a nonlinear estimator suggested by their framework, and using information from microeconomic estimates on the effects of improving health. There is no evidence for a positive effect of life expectancy on GDP per capita in this important historical episode.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Population, Technology, and Growth: From the Malthusian Regime to the Demographic Transition
By Oded Galor and David N. Weil
-
By Oded Galor and David N. Weil
-
The Gender Gap, Fertility and Growth
By Oded Galor and David N. Weil
-
The Gender Gap, Fertility, and Growth
By Oded Galor and David N. Weil
-
By Gary D. Hansen and Edward C. Prescott
-
Natural Selection and the Origin of Economic Growth
By Oded Galor and Omer Moav
-
Natural Selection and the Origin of Economic Growth
By Oded Galor and Omer Moav
-
From Stagnation to Growth: Unified Growth Theory
By Oded Galor
-
From Stagnation to Growth: Unified Growth Theory
By Oded Galor
-
From Physical to Human Capital Accumulation: Inequality in the Process of Development
By Oded Galor and Omer Moav