The Great Leap Forward: Anatomy of a Central Planning Disaster

The Great Leap Forward disaster, characterized by a collapse in grain production and a widespread famine in China between 1959 and 1961, is found attributable to a systemic failure in central planning. Wishfully expecting a great leap in agricultural productivity from collectivization, the Chinese g...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of political economy 2005-08, Vol.113 (4), p.840-877
Main Authors: Li, Wei, Yang, Dennis Tao
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agricultural Laborers
Agricultural policy
Agricultural Production
Agricultural productivity
Agriculture
Central planning
China
Collective Settlements
Collectivization
Developing Nations
Economic Factors
Economic history
Economic policy
Economic systems
Economic theory
Failure
Famine
Food
Food availability
Food consumption
Food supply
Foreign Countries
Government Role
Grains
History
Hunger
Industrial agriculture
Industrial development
Industrial production
Industrialization
Instrumental variables estimation
Labour productivity
Peasants
Planning
Political economy
Political Influences
Political parties
Poverty
Procurement
Production functions
Productivity
Public Policy
Rural Areas
Social Systems
Studies
Weather
Weather conditions
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The Great Leap Forward disaster, characterized by a collapse in grain production and a widespread famine in China between 1959 and 1961, is found attributable to a systemic failure in central planning. Wishfully expecting a great leap in agricultural productivity from collectivization, the Chinese government accelerated its aggressive industrialization timetable. Grain output fell sharply as the government diverted agricultural resources to industry and imposed an excessive grain procurement burden on peasants, leaving them with insufficient calories to sustain labor productivity. Our analysis shows that 61 percent of the decline in output is attributable to the policies of resource diversion and excessive procurement.
ISSN:0022-3808
1537-534X
DOI:10.1086/430804