The National Income of India in the Twentieth Century

By S. Sivasubramonian. 2000

112 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Finance, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4bfab1f867ca0891ec82d4ad8522cd6e493aa185

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Abhijit Banerjee
2. Thomas Piketty
3. Emmanuel Saez
4. G. Zucman
5. Benjamin Moll
6. Stefanie Stantcheva
7. David J. McKenzie
8. Esther Duflo

In Finance

1. Abhijit Banerjee
2. Thomas Piketty
3. Anton Korinek
4. S. Marginson
5. Terry Hyland

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Thomas Piketty
2. Abhijit Banerjee
3. Emmanuel Saez
4. Esther Duflo
5. Branko Milanovic
6. David J. McKenzie
7. Eckhard Hein
8. Daron Acemoglu

Citations in the corpus

• Top Indian Incomes, 1922-2000 (2005, methodology): “Top Indian nominal incomes did decline during the 1930s, but less rapidly than the national income and wage series computed by Sivasubramonian (2000). This probably reflects the fact that India had a very different position than France, the United States, or the United Kingdom in the world division ”
• China, Europe, and the Great Divergence: A Study in Historical National Accounting, 980–1850 (2017, unknown): “consistent with the findings of Sivasubramonian (2000: 87-90) for the case of Indian agriculture, where the share of value added in gross output was around 85 per cent during the first half of the twentieth century. The net output of cash crops is set at 25.2 per cent of the net output of grain crop”