![]() |
Leandro Prados de la Escosura is professor in
Economic history at Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
|
How has freedom evolved over time? A
distinction has been made between ‘negative’ freedom, defined as lack of
interference or coercion by others (freedom from), and ‘positive’ freedom, that
is, the guarantee of access to markets that allow people to control their own
existence (freedom to) (Berlin, 1958). An example of negative freedom is
economic liberty. A country will be economically free in so far privately owned
property is securely protected, contracts enforced, prices stable, barriers to
trade small, and resources mainly allocated through the market (Friedman,
1962).
Empirical research on economic liberty has
been restricted to the last decades (de Haan et al., 2006). The resulting
indices of economic freedom exhibit wide spatial coverage but their time
dimension is limited and, in the most comprehensive measure of economic
liberty, the Fraser Institute’s index, only goes back to 1970 (Gwartney et al.,
2013). The lack of a long-run perspective reduces the value of its lessons and
policy implications, with the risk of identifying what it is specific to the
recent past, with empirical regularities that apply across space and time.
A new Historical Index of Economic Liberty
(HIEL) provides a long-run view of economic freedom and its main dimensions for
today’s advanced nations, more specifically, those included in the OECD prior
to its enlargement since 1994 (Prados de la Escosura, 2014).
Given the bounded nature of any index of economic freedom, the use of its percentage change or rate of growth would be misleading as increases achieved at low levels cannot be matched at high levels. It is preferable, then, to look at the absolute shortfall of economic freedom from its upper bound at the initial point and, then, compute its relative decline over a given period. Thus, the improvement is measured as the proportion of the maximum possible (that is, the reduction in its shortfall).
Given the bounded nature of any index of economic freedom, the use of its percentage change or rate of growth would be misleading as increases achieved at low levels cannot be matched at high levels. It is preferable, then, to look at the absolute shortfall of economic freedom from its upper bound at the initial point and, then, compute its relative decline over a given period. Thus, the improvement is measured as the proportion of the maximum possible (that is, the reduction in its shortfall).
![]() |
| The Historical index of Economic Liberty, HIEL. (click on image to enlarge) |
During the first half of the twentieth
century economic freedom suffered a severe reversal. After a dramatic decline
during the war and its aftermath, the recovery was fast and peaked by 1929, but
at the level of the late 1890s. The Great Depression pushed down economic
freedom again and the post-Depression recovery did not imply a rebound of
economic liberty so, by the eve of World War II, it had shrunk to the level of
the early 1850s.
Economic freedom expanded in the second
half of the twentieth century and peaked by 2007. However, in between two
expansionary phases: a quick recovery in the 1950s and a post-1980 expansion,
economic freedom came to a halt, stabilising during the 1960s around the late
1920s level, and declining in the early 1970s. From the early 1980s to the eve
of the current recession, a sustained expansion took place, overcoming the 1913
peak after 1989 and reducing the early 1980s shortfall to half by the mid-2000s.
In the last two decades the highest levels of economic freedom have been
reached.
![]() |
| Improvements to economic liberty, by dimension and period. (click on image to enlarge) |
The trends exhibited by the new historical index of economic liberty raise pressing questions. If economic freedom is usually associated to economic growth, how can we reconcile good economic performance in the OECD during the 1960s and early 1970s with stagnant and relatively low levels of economic freedom? Furthermore, are there any trade-offs between economic liberty, as a negative freedom, and other kinds of positive freedom, in particular, human development and democracy? Answering these questions provides an exciting and worth pursuing research agenda.
This blog post was written by:
LeandroPrados de la Escosura (Universidad Carlos III, LSE, CEPR)
The results can also be found in a new working paper by the EHES, no 54



No comments:
Post a Comment