Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/195250
Authors: 
Campante, Filipe
Glaeser, Edward L.
Year of Publication: 
2018
Citation: 
[Journal:] Latin American Economic Review [ISSN:] 2196-436X [Volume:] 28 [Year:] 2018 [Issue:] 2 [Pages:] 1-33
Abstract: 
Buenos Aires and Chicago grew during the nineteenth century for remarkably similar reasons. Both cities were conduits for moving meat and grain from fertile hinterlands to eastern markets. However, despite their initial similarities, Chicago was vastly more prosperous for most of the twentieth century. Can the differences between the cities after 1930 be explained by differences in the cities before that date? We highlight four major differences between Buenos Aires and Chicago in 1914. Chicago was slightly richer, and significantly better educated. Chicago was more industrially developed, with about 2.25 times more capital per worker. Finally, Chicago's political situation was far more stable and it was not a political capital. Human capital seems to explain the lion's share of the divergent path of the two cities and their countries, both because of its direct effect and because of the connection between education and political instability.
Subjects: 
Argentine exceptionalism
Comparative development
Industrial development
Education
Political instability
JEL: 
N10
I25
L15
D74
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Document Type: 
Article

Files in This Item:
File
Size
672.52 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.