The Census as an Accurate Source of Information: The Value of Mid-Nineteenth Century Manufacturing Returns

Walsh, Margaret

doi:10.1080/00182494.1970.10593923

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 6 For examples of research using the industrial manuscripts that do not focus on productivity see Atack, Bateman, and Margo (2004), Laurie and Schmitz (1981), or Walsh (1970, 1971). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bigger establishments in thicker markets:  can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

Inwood

Keay

2005

Canadian J of Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We use establishment-level data describing manufacturers located in 128 border and near-border counties in Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Ontario to calculate Canadian relative to U.S. total factor productivity ratios for 25 industries. The data have been compiled from the manuscripts for the 1870 U.S. and 1871 Canadian census of manufacturing. Our results illustrate that the average U.S. establishment was approximately 7% more efficient than its Canadian counterpart in 1870/71. When we control for establishment size and market density the U.S. productivity advantage shrinks to slightly less than 3%.De plus gros e´tablissements dans des marche´s plus denses : peut-on expliquer les diffe´r-entiels de productivite´entre le Canada et les Etats-Unis au sie`cle dernier? On utilise les donne´es au niveau de l'e´tablissement de´crivant des installations manufacturie`res localise´es dans 128 comte´s a`la frontie`re ou pre`s de la frontie`re dans les e´tats du Michigan, de New York, de l'Ohio, de la Pennsylvanie et dans la province de l'Ontario pour calculer la productivite´totale relative des facteurs de production dans 25 industries. Les donne´es ont e´te´extraites des manuscrits des recensements des manufactures des Etats-Unis (1870) et du Canada (1871). Les re´sultats indiquent que l'e´tablissement ame´ricain moyen e´tait a`peu pre`s 7% plus productif que sa contrepartie au Canada. Quand on normalise pour tenir

show abstract

“…6 6 For examples of research using the industrial manuscripts that do not focus on productivity see Atack, Bateman, and Margo (2004), Laurie and Schmitz (1981), or Walsh (1970, 1971). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For additional details, see Inwood and Sullivan (1993). For a discussion of the decomposition of U.S. establishments see Atack (1985, 49–55), or Walsh (1970, 1971). For further comment on the need for reconstitution of multi‐process establishments see Inwood (1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bigger establishments in thicker markets:  can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

Inwood

Keay

2005

Canadian J of Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…15 10 See United States (1872), pp 20 and 384. 11 For example see Atack (1985), pp 49-55 and Walsh (1970Walsh ( , 1971. 12 There are no visible indications of US influence, although Canadian census staff had the opportunity to learn from their US counterparts.…”

Section: Using Manuscript Census Datamentioning

confidence: 97%

The devil is in the details: assessing early industrial performance across international borders using late nineteenth century North American manufacturers as a case study

Inwood

Keay

2007

Cliometrica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Was the average late nineteenth century Canadian manufacturer a hopelessly inefficient laggard when compared to his American counterparts just on the other side of the international border? Could it have been that Canadian producers were really productivity leaders so early in their industrialization process? To answer these fundamental questions about the performance of a small open economy at a key juncture in its industrial development we need a quantitative comparison of Canadian relative to US productivity. Unfortunately, the approach we adopt with respect to data compilation, methodological choice, and the identification of inputs, outputs, input weights, and prices has both quantitative and qualitative effects on any performance assessment we may undertake. To illustrate the severity of these effects we use manuscript census data from 1870/1871 to derive a series of total factor productivity (TFP) comparisons for a sample of manufacturing establishments located immediately to the north and south of the Canada-US border. Even with some of the most common and defensible variable definitions, we find dramatic differences between the most optimistic and most pessimistic assessments of late nineteenth century Canadian performance. Our case study suggests to us that those interested in the assessment of long run performance differentials should appreciate the sensitivity of these assessments and they should carefully consider the approach that has been taken toward data preparation, methodological choice, and variable definitions in their construction.JEL codes D2 Á L6 Á N6

show abstract

“…If enumeration was not Page 6 of 71 URL: https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jhistmeth E-mail: hacker@umn.edu, kenms@umich.edu Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History consistent in the level of coverage across sectors, locations and size classes, and the extent of this inconsistency could affect data availability for 50% or more of manufacturing concerns, judging by Walker's figures, then the implications for use of the original manufacturing census schedules are potentially very significant. It is therefore surprising that these questions are not really considered, either by Walsh (1970) or Atack and Bateman (1999). In the latter case, assiduous attention is given to explaining the methodology for creating the samples from the extant manuscript schedules, but the potential statistical effects of varying undercounts or biases in the contents of the schedules themselves is not examined, though any biases will necessarily be reflected, or even magnified, in the samples, however comprehensive they may appear to be.…”

Section: Within-census Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, no such checks appear to have been made and the literature on manufacturing census data errors is very small, with the partial exception of Walsh (1970), and Atack and Bateman (1999). Inwood (1995) provides a valuable comparison, in terms of the Canadian manufacturing census.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Under-enumeration, inconsistency, and bias in the U.S. Manufacturing Census 1860–1880: Case studies from the American manufacturing belt

Healey

2015

Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdiscipli

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new typology of major types of enumeration and tabulation errors found in the manuscript schedules and the published reports of the US Manufacturing Census 1860-1880 is proposed. This is based on a review of historical and contemporary assessments of census accuracy and additional new findings. Detailed cases studies of different manufacturing sectors in the rapidly growing city of Cleveland, OH, including railroad shops, transportation-related manufacturing and oil refining are undertaken using non-census sources, as worked examples of census reporting problems, and comparisons are provided with cities in surrounding states. Significant under-enumeration, bias towards small companies and inconsistent reporting, both within and between census years emerges as the norm rather than the worst case scenario. The manufacturing census is found to be unsuitable for use in quantitative studies without extensive additional corroborating evidence of accuracy.

show abstract

The Census as an Accurate Source of Information: The Value of Mid-Nineteenth Century Manufacturing Returns

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Bigger establishments in thicker markets:  can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

Bigger establishments in thicker markets:  can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

The devil is in the details: assessing early industrial performance across international borders using late nineteenth century North American manufacturers as a case study

Under-enumeration, inconsistency, and bias in the U.S. Manufacturing Census 1860–1880: Case studies from the American manufacturing belt

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Census as an Accurate Source of Information: The Value of Mid-Nineteenth Century Manufacturing Returns

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Bigger establishments in thicker markets: can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

Bigger establishments in thicker markets: can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

The devil is in the details: assessing early industrial performance across international borders using late nineteenth century North American manufacturers as a case study

Under-enumeration, inconsistency, and bias in the U.S. Manufacturing Census 1860–1880: Case studies from the American manufacturing belt

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Bigger establishments in thicker markets:  can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?

Bigger establishments in thicker markets:  can we explain early productivity differentials between Canada and the United States?