Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 4th, 2018, 02:31 PM   #1
Academician
 
Joined: Feb 2017
From: Hungary
Posts: 52
Divide of economic power in Austria-Hungary


Hello there!

So, I stumbled across this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...31938_(Bairoch)

Seeing the GNP of Austria-Hungary made me wonder, how much did Austria and how much did Hungary contribute to that number(, also how much did Bosnia)?

I assume Austria was the more economically dominant one, but what I need are exact numbers or percentage related to the link.

Thank you so much in advance for your help, I truly appreciate it!
Fehervari is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 4th, 2018, 03:03 PM   #2

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,628

There you got some estimations:

P.27 of the PDF: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/22311/1/WP106schulze.pdf

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.
Frank81 is online now  
Old January 4th, 2018, 03:26 PM   #3
Academician
 
Joined: Feb 2017
From: Hungary
Posts: 52

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank81 View Post
There you got some estimations:

P.27 of the PDF: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/22311/1/WP106schulze.pdf

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.
Thank you so much!
Is it in USD(1990) right? As you could guess, I'm not so well informed on this topic, but I have some related question:
-How close are the values of GDP and GNP to each other? Are they interchangeable in this timeperiod?
-What's the difference between "new" and "good and ma" on the pics (table 4, table 5)? What do they mean?
-What about Bosnia?

Thank you again for your quick answer, I hope you answer this one as well!

(UI.: I forgot to mention in the OP, that I'm primarily interested in datas about 1910)
Fehervari is offline  
Old January 4th, 2018, 04:00 PM   #4

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,628

Hi Fehervari, the paper is an evaluation and estimation of A-H GDP at 1870, 1880, 1890, 1900 and 1910.

*1. By "G-K Intl. $" they mean Geary–Khamis dollar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geary%...3Khamis_dollar, a fictious unit of measure used by economists, includding Maddison, the author who did most of the estimations you linked in Wikipedia.

*2. GNP calculate the total product as GDP, but add total product of overseas incomes got by residents, minus the product of overseas residents inside the country. Basically, rents invested in the world add, while transfers of inmigrants detracts. This is and oldfashioned way to measure the product, and, depending of the country, gives a higher or a lower result than GDP.

*3. The difference between "New" and "Good&Ma" is that the author compares an older paper: Good, D.F and Ma, T. (1998). ‘New estimates of income levels in central and
eastern Europe, 1870-1910’, in F. Baltzarek, F. Butschek and G. Tichy
(eds), Von der Theorie zur Wirtschaftspolitik - ein österreichischer Weg
(Stuttgart). They estimated Central Europe GDP by proxys based on taxes, while the author of the paper I linked tried with some statistics from economic areas of the A-H

4. Bosnia: no idea, sorry friend


In short, this is just another economic paper on the issue, I'm sure there are more and newer. But this can give a brief idea on the subject.

Yours faithfully
Frank81 is online now  
Old January 4th, 2018, 04:52 PM   #5
Academician
 
Joined: Feb 2017
From: Hungary
Posts: 52

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank81 View Post
Hi Fehervari, the paper is an evaluation and estimation of A-H GDP at 1870, 1880, 1890, 1900 and 1910.

*1. By "G-K Intl. $" they mean Geary–Khamis dollar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geary%...3Khamis_dollar, a fictious unit of measure used by economists, includding Maddison, the author who did most of the estimations you linked in Wikipedia.

*2. GNP calculate the total product as GDP, but add total product of overseas incomes got by residents, minus the product of overseas residents inside the country. Basically, rents invested in the world add, while transfers of inmigrants detracts. This is and oldfashioned way to measure the product, and, depending of the country, gives a higher or a lower result than GDP.

*3. The difference between "New" and "Good&Ma" is that the author compares an older paper: Good, D.F and Ma, T. (1998). ‘New estimates of income levels in central and
eastern Europe, 1870-1910’, in F. Baltzarek, F. Butschek and G. Tichy
(eds), Von der Theorie zur Wirtschaftspolitik - ein österreichischer Weg
(Stuttgart). They estimated Central Europe GDP by proxys based on taxes, while the author of the paper I linked tried with some statistics from economic areas of the A-H

4. Bosnia: no idea, sorry friend


In short, this is just another economic paper on the issue, I'm sure there are more and newer. But this can give a brief idea on the subject.

Yours faithfully
First of all, thank you for your answer!

Secondly I guess, I messed up. I thought my link would immediately jump to the "3.1 1830–1938 (Bairoch)" section, because that's what I was viewing. It says that Austria-Hungary had a GNP of 23 970 million USD(1960) in 1910. Now I wonder if the portionshares of Austria and Hungary in GDP (based on the papers provided by you) could be the same or very similar if I did the same with GNP?

So, what I mean, that your paper says that the whole Austro-Hungarian GDP in 1910 was 95045,62 million or 107 047,44 million. Now let's use the second one.

Austria had 67708.64 mil, which means it generated the ~63,25%, while Hungary just the ~36,75% of the entire GDP.

Is wrong to assume, that the GNP would have the same (or almost the same) ratio between the two half of the empire?
As I wrote already the whole GNP was 23 970 mil USD(1960), so this would mean the Austria generates ~15 161 mil, while Hungary generates ~8809 mil, right?

Sorry, if my rather silly questions would bother you, my flawed english is not much of a help either, but I truly appreciate your help, and I will definately read the pdf you sent!
Fehervari is offline  
Old January 4th, 2018, 05:26 PM   #6

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,628

Bairots work is useful, but outdated. Consider that he used 1960 US dollars, which is a mesaure nobody use anymore.

In my opinion, in the case of A-H, relation betwen GNP and GDP will be similar (little foreign investment, little inmigration). As a proof:

According to Bairoch, in 1925 proper Austrian economy (4,314 GNP) was 16% of A-H economy in 1913 (26,050 GNP).

This is similar to Schulze:

Lower Austria+Upper Austria+ Salzburg+Carinthia+Styria (in consequence, exceeding limits of Austria after WWI) = 18,602.94 GDP
Austria-Hungary = 95,045.62 GDP
Relation: 19%



*"Is wrong to assume, that the GNP would have the same (or almost the same) ratio between the two half of the empire?" - Yes, both authors agreed that the Austrian part of the empire produced more than the Hungarian part. But this can't be a surprise, since important industrial areas like Bohemia and Silesia were part of the Austrian area. According to Schulze data, Austrian part was a bit richer than considered before. However, both authors agree (well, three actually) that the Hungarian part grew a bit faster through the period, particularly Schulze, passing from 33.5% in 1870, to 35.9% in 1910


*I can give two more, less interesting data:

P.22 An attempt to evaluate the GDP (1990 valour) for some countries of the old A-H in 1913 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6a2...67d562c503.pdf Don't miss p.18, where total values for the A-H are given

P.23-24 of the PDF, distribution of Austrian GDP by sector, from Schulze as well

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/94927.pdf

Last edited by Frank81; January 4th, 2018 at 05:32 PM.
Frank81 is online now  
Old January 6th, 2018, 11:32 AM   #7
Academician
 
Joined: Feb 2017
From: Hungary
Posts: 52

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank81 View Post
Bairots work is useful, but outdated. Consider that he used 1960 US dollars, which is a mesaure nobody use anymore.

In my opinion, in the case of A-H, relation betwen GNP and GDP will be similar (little foreign investment, little inmigration). As a proof:

According to Bairoch, in 1925 proper Austrian economy (4,314 GNP) was 16% of A-H economy in 1913 (26,050 GNP).

This is similar to Schulze:

Lower Austria+Upper Austria+ Salzburg+Carinthia+Styria (in consequence, exceeding limits of Austria after WWI) = 18,602.94 GDP
Austria-Hungary = 95,045.62 GDP
Relation: 19%



*"Is wrong to assume, that the GNP would have the same (or almost the same) ratio between the two half of the empire?" - Yes, both authors agreed that the Austrian part of the empire produced more than the Hungarian part. But this can't be a surprise, since important industrial areas like Bohemia and Silesia were part of the Austrian area. According to Schulze data, Austrian part was a bit richer than considered before. However, both authors agree (well, three actually) that the Hungarian part grew a bit faster through the period, particularly Schulze, passing from 33.5% in 1870, to 35.9% in 1910


*I can give two more, less interesting data:

P.22 An attempt to evaluate the GDP (1990 valour) for some countries of the old A-H in 1913 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6a2...67d562c503.pdf Don't miss p.18, where total values for the A-H are given

P.23-24 of the PDF, distribution of Austrian GDP by sector, from Schulze as well

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/94927.pdf
Again, thank you for your help, it will be a huge boost for my research about Austria-Hungary
Fehervari is offline  
Old January 7th, 2018, 11:25 AM   #8

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,628

Good luck with your research

I'd like to read that paper some day.
Frank81 is online now  
Old January 7th, 2018, 11:41 AM   #9

deaf tuner's Avatar
hier is da feestje !!!
 
Joined: Oct 2013
From: Europe
Posts: 11,266
Blog Entries: 27

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank81 View Post
...
*"Is wrong to assume, that the GNP would have the same (or almost the same) ratio between the two half of the empire?" - Yes, both authors agreed that the Austrian part of the empire produced more than the Hungarian part. But this can't be a surprise, since important industrial areas like Bohemia and Silesia were part of the Austrian area. According to Schulze data, Austrian part was a bit richer than considered before. However, both authors agree (well, three actually) that the Hungarian part grew a bit faster through the period, particularly Schulze, passing from 33.5% in 1870, to 35.9% in 1910
...
Agreed.

Click the image to open in full size.

not that lisible, but suggestive enough for the differences between different regions of AH (reddish is industry/services, greenish is agriculture)
deaf tuner is offline  
Old January 7th, 2018, 12:40 PM   #10

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 4,628

Wow! The economic boundaries were pretty sharp over there
Frank81 is online now  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
austria, austria-hungary, austriahungary, divide, economic, economy, gnp, hungary, power



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Saving Austria-Hungary? newtohistory Speculative History 87 March 5th, 2018 07:32 AM
Austria-Hungary: Your thoughts? Cperer European History 59 February 25th, 2018 08:32 PM
Why was Austria/Austria Hungary so militarily weak? ren0312 European History 59 February 29th, 2016 05:42 PM
Surviving Austria-Hungary oshron Speculative History 13 January 7th, 2011 01:35 PM
Austria-Hungary or Serbia? dave zlot War and Military History 18 April 21st, 2010 05:02 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.