Did inequality in farm sizes lead to suppression of banking and credit in the Late Nineteenth Century?

Matthew Jaremski, Price V Fishback

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

This article creates a new database that covers all U.S. banks in the census years between 1870 and 1900 to test the interaction between inequality and financial development when the banking system was starting over from scratch. A fixed-effects panel regression shows that the number of banks per thousand people in the South has a strong positive relationship with the size of farm operations. This suggests that large southern farm operators welcomed new banks after the Civil War. When the analysis is extended into the 1900s, the relationship becomes more negative, as bankers may have tried to block entrants.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)155-195
Number of pages41
JournalJournal of Economic History
Volume78
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2018

Fingerprint

Farm size
Banking
Credit
Farm
Suppression
Banking system
Interaction
Financial development
Bankers
Fixed effects
Census
Operator
Data base
Panel regression
Data Base
Fixed Effects
1900s

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • History
  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Did inequality in farm sizes lead to suppression of banking and credit in the Late Nineteenth Century? / Jaremski, Matthew; Fishback, Price V.

In: Journal of Economic History, Vol. 78, No. 1, 01.03.2018, p. 155-195.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{93f1abc7c0274c2fb180fa830990f79a,
title = "Did inequality in farm sizes lead to suppression of banking and credit in the Late Nineteenth Century?",
abstract = "This article creates a new database that covers all U.S. banks in the census years between 1870 and 1900 to test the interaction between inequality and financial development when the banking system was starting over from scratch. A fixed-effects panel regression shows that the number of banks per thousand people in the South has a strong positive relationship with the size of farm operations. This suggests that large southern farm operators welcomed new banks after the Civil War. When the analysis is extended into the 1900s, the relationship becomes more negative, as bankers may have tried to block entrants.",
author = "Matthew Jaremski and Fishback, {Price V}",
year = "2018",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S0022050718000062",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "78",
pages = "155--195",
journal = "Journal of Economic History",
issn = "0022-0507",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Did inequality in farm sizes lead to suppression of banking and credit in the Late Nineteenth Century?

AU - Jaremski, Matthew

AU - Fishback, Price V

PY - 2018/3/1

Y1 - 2018/3/1

N2 - This article creates a new database that covers all U.S. banks in the census years between 1870 and 1900 to test the interaction between inequality and financial development when the banking system was starting over from scratch. A fixed-effects panel regression shows that the number of banks per thousand people in the South has a strong positive relationship with the size of farm operations. This suggests that large southern farm operators welcomed new banks after the Civil War. When the analysis is extended into the 1900s, the relationship becomes more negative, as bankers may have tried to block entrants.

AB - This article creates a new database that covers all U.S. banks in the census years between 1870 and 1900 to test the interaction between inequality and financial development when the banking system was starting over from scratch. A fixed-effects panel regression shows that the number of banks per thousand people in the South has a strong positive relationship with the size of farm operations. This suggests that large southern farm operators welcomed new banks after the Civil War. When the analysis is extended into the 1900s, the relationship becomes more negative, as bankers may have tried to block entrants.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045001831&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85045001831&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S0022050718000062

DO - 10.1017/S0022050718000062

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85045001831

VL - 78

SP - 155

EP - 195

JO - Journal of Economic History

JF - Journal of Economic History

SN - 0022-0507

IS - 1

ER -