Commodity boom‐bust cycles and the resource curse in Australia

1900 To 2007

Bibliographic Data

ID20437604
AuthorsSambit Bhattacharyya (0000-0001-5932-6943, Department of Economics University of Sussex Sussex UK, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume61
Issue2
Pages186-203
Publication date2021-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAustralian Economic History Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0004-8992 • E-ISSN: 1467-8446
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/aehr.12219
OpenAlexW3171354303
LanguageEN
References cited37

The Australian economy experienced very frequent and sizeable terms of trade shocks. These shocks at times were more pronounced than commodity exporting developing countries and disproportionately benefited the extreme top end of income distribution. Did they derail overall economic progress? Circumstantial evidence suggests that they did not, but hard econometric evidence appears to be rare. In this paper, I revisit the Australian resource curse question from a long‐run perspective. Using time series data on commodity prices, real GDP, real wages, non‐farm GDP, manufacturing share of GDP, and manufacturing share of employment covering the period 1900 to 2007, I find very little evidence of a resource curse. Commodity booms in general and positive agricultural price shocks in particular appear to have impacted the rest of the economy positively both in short‐ and long‐run. The positive effect is primarily led by expansion in manufacturing. This is perhaps reflective of trade protection, labour and credit market flexibility, and relatively open skilled migration in Australia especially during the post‐war period

Boom · Bust · Commodity · Economics · Macroeconomics · Market economy · Monetary economics · Natural resource · Real wages · Resource curse · Terms of trade · Unemployment · Mining and Resource Management · Natural Resources and Economic Development

Tools

Open DOI