Reassessing the Standard of Living in the Soviet Union: An Analysis Using Archival and Anthropometric Data Betsy Brainerd January 29, 2007 Presentation to the Program on the Global Demography of Aging, Harvard School of Public Health
Reassessing the Standard of Living in the Soviet Union:
An Analysis Using Archival and Anthropometric Data
Betsy BrainerdJanuary 29, 2007
Presentation to the Program on the Global Demography of Aging,
Harvard School of Public Health
“The greatest failed experiment in the history of the human race.”
-- Joel Mokyr
on the Soviet Union
Did the standard of living improve in the Soviet Union in the postwar period?
• GNP grew in every decade
• But know little about standard of living: little data; some unfavorable trends
• Important: our judgment of the Soviet growth model depends in part on whether growth translated into improved well-being for the population as a whole
This paper:
• Examines alternative measures of well-being: birth weights; child and adult heights; infant and adult mortality
• Useful supplement to traditional measures of living standards, especially where economic data is of poor quality and reliability
• Previously unexploited data sources
Outline:
1. Introduction and motivation2. Related literature3. Previous assessments of GNP growth and consumption
in the USSR4. New data sources5. Trends in height, birth weight, and mortality 6. Hypotheses7. Conclusions and further work
Related literature:
• Economic history: heights and the ‘antebellum puzzle’ in the US; ‘early industrial growth puzzle’ in Europe
• Comparative economics: reassessments of Soviet growth (Robert Allen on 1928-1940 period)
• Archival research in Soviet economics and history: Paul Gregory and Mark Harrison, J. Econ Lit Sept. 2005
• Russian mortality crisis of 1990s
Conventional measures of growthin the Soviet Union
“The fundamental problem in evaluating Soviet growth is data quality.”
-- Easterly and Fischer, 1994
Problems with Soviet economic statistics
• Strong incentives for overreporting output
• Methodological differences between Soviet and western national income accounting practices
• Selective publication of data
• Shortages; poor quality of goods; lack of market prices
• Growing underground economy
Estimates of national income growth in the Soviet Union,1928 – 1985 (annual rates of growth)
Khanin Bergson/CIA TsSU
1928-1985 3.3 4.3 8.8
1928-1941 2.9 5.8 13.9
1950s 6.9 6.0 10.1
1960s 4.2 5.2 7.1
1970s 2.0 3.7 5.3
1980-85 0.6 2.0 3.2
Comparisons of Soviet and Western economic performance, 1950 – 1980
(annual rates of growth)
Soviet Union E-OECD United States
1950 -1980
1970 -1980
1950 -1980
1970 -1980
1950 -1980
1970 -1980
GNP percapita 3.3 2.1 3.3 2.3 1.9 2.0
Householdconsumptionper capita
3.7 2.6 3.2 2.6 2.1 2.3
New data sources
• Data on infant and adult mortality from the Soviet archives:
by region, urban/rural, age and sex (adult mortality) for 1959, 1970 and 1979
• Additional (limited) archival and published data on wages, health care infrastructure, food and alcohol consumption
• Anthropometric data: birth weights and child heights across regions, 1910s - present; adult heights from the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey
Advantages of anthropometric and mortality data:
• More objective measures of well-being than economic growth or consumption
• Not affected by data problems inherent in more conventional measures
• Take into account that some economic activity is non-monetized
Insights from anthropometric data
• Adult height is a cumulative measure of nutritional status in infancy and childhood; measures net nutrition
• Fogel and others: height can provide a wealth of information on living standards; height and income highly correlated
• At the population level nearly all differences in average height are due to environmental influences: can compare stature across countries and over time
Soviet Anthropometric Data
• Most collected by the Semashko Inst. of Public Health from 1920s to present
• 59 Russian regions and most USSR republics
• Collected in preschools and schools; at least 100 children of each sex age each age (n = 165 on average)
• Underlying RSFSR data represent average heights of over 470,000 children
• Average child heights converted into percentiles of US growth standards, from (old) standard US growth charts
(1) Child height data:
Soviet Anthropometric Data, cont.
• Researchers sometimes excluded children with “defects” and chronic illnesses
• Urban areas sampled more frequently; urban stature is greater on average than rural stature
• Surveys not representative of USSR or RSFSR
• If better-off children more likely to go to school, will over-estimate heights (schooling became compulsory in 1958)
Possible problems with child height data:
05
1015
2025
3035
4045
5055
60P
erce
ntile
1910191519201925193019351940194519501955196019651970197519801985
Moscow St. Petersburg
Height of boys age 4-15 by year of birthas a percentile of US standards
05
1015
2025
3035
4045
5055
60P
erce
ntile
1910191519201925193019351940194519501955196019651970197519801985
Moscow St. Petersburg
Height of girls age 4-15 by year of birthas a percentile of US standards
05
1015
2025
3035
4045
5055
60Pe
rcen
tile
1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985Year of birth
Kiev Kharkov Minsk
Figure 2a. Height of boys age 4-15 by year of birthas a percentile of US standards
05
1015
2025
3035
4045
5055
60Pe
rcen
tile
1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985Year of birth
Tashkent Frunze
Figure 2b. Height of boys age 4-15 by year of birthas a percentile of US standards
Height of children in urban centers of the RSFSRby year of birth as a percentile of U.S. standards, boys age 9
16
6
16 17
6
22
31
16
20284051
5963
64
841828
391923
263839
5
7
2161
82
19
1956586263
72
51
7210
34
35
596
3641
49
515151
58
84
82
2
30
53
70
72
25
75
16
6262726
1319
49
56
63
64
756
6
27
43
78
65
53
83
8510
42
8716
41
63
18
306
37
3979
82
2062
328
36
52
56
32 79
5
14
3
18
2855
62
64
16
354152
56
05
1015
2025
3035
4045
5055
60Pe
rcen
tile
1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985Year of birth
Boys age 9
Is This Real? Soviet Anthropometric Data, cont.
• Corroborating evidence: Average stature of male military recruits born 1906 – 1910 was 167.5 cm, the 8th percentile of the U.S. height standard for 18-year old boys
• Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey, 1994 – 2004:
– Measurement of adult height (not self-reported) by exact date of birth
– 5,476 men and 5,771 women age 22 – 55 (birth years 1939 – 1982)
– Problems: small sample; does not cover whole period of interest
(2) Adult height data:
Male and female adult height by exact date of birth (RLMS),
ages 22 - 55
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
Wom
en
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
Men
1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985Year of birth
Men Women
Other Evidence
(1) Infant mortality rates:
– Very high pre-WWII
– Significant decline 1945 – 1970
– No improvement 1970 – 1980, with worsening between 1970 and 1975
010
020
030
0D
eath
s pe
r 10
00 b
irth
s
1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Official IMR Estimated IMR
Figure 7. Infant Mortality Rate, Russian Republic
Infant mortality rates in Russia
15
20
25
30
35
40
De
ath
s p
er
10
00
bir
ths
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1989
Urban Rural
37
87
58
531 40
166358
7
64
7
40
37
63
84
3117
83
53
6
51
287
40
64
83
17
72
23
6
87
63
40
37
39
37
16
83
8558
1
376
59
84
643
16
72
87
36
30
36
21
1655
655
21
59 7575
1
39
8232
1626
35
3200
3300
3400
3500
3600
3700
3800
Bir
thw
eigh
t, gr
ams
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985
Figure 5a. Birthweight of urban boys by year of birth,RSFSR republics
Other Evidence, cont.
(1) Life expectancy at birth:
– Substantial increases between 1940 and early 1960s; nearly equal to that of U.S. by 1965
– Worsening life expectancy began around 1965
– By 1980: gap between Russian and U.S. life expectancy:• 8.5 years for men• 4.3 years for women
– Occurred in all other USSR republics
2030
4050
6070
80L
ife
expe
ctan
cy a
t bir
th
1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990
Russia Russia (estimated) U.S.
Source: see Appendix 1.
Figure 9a. Life Expectancy at Birth, Men, RSFSR and U.S.
55
57
59
61
63
65
67
69
71
73
75
19581960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
U.S.
Belarus
Russia
Lithuania
Estonia
Ukraine
Male Life Expectancy at Birth, 1958 - 2001
U.S.
Russia
Belarus
Lithuania
Estonia
Ukraine
Inequality in stature: how were the gainsdistributed across the population?
1939 - 1982 1945 - 1970 1971 - 1982
Men Women Men Women Men Women
10th percentile .114 (.013)
.090 (.012)
.137 (.016)
.099 (.022)
.140 (.122)
.135 (.069)
Median .106 (.009)
.089 (.009)
.104 (.015)
.096 (.013)
.101 (.082)
0.00 (.069)
90th percentile .126 (.012)
.113 (.009)
.130 (.022)
.130 (.014)
.186 (.131)
-.086 (.142)
N 5,475 5,764 3,895 4,131 1,235 1,239
Coefficients from regressions of height on exact date of birth, converted into cm. Bold
coefficients are statistically significant at the 1 percent level or less. Bootstrapped SEs.
.04
.06
.08
.1.1
2.1
4.1
6.1
8.2
Ann
ual g
row
th in
cm
1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 99Percentile of height distribution
Men Women
year of birth 1939 - 1982Fig. 8 Annual growth by percentile of the height distribution
What caused the improvement and subsequent stagnation in population health status?
1. Possible explanations for improvement:
• Development and expansion of national health care system; particularly effective at controlling infectious diseases
• Significant increases in female education
• Improvement in caloric and nutrient content of the food supply
• Urbanization (clean water, sewers, heat, etc.)
Possible causes, cont.
2. Possible explanations for stagnation/decline:
• Changes in diet; poor agricultural harvests
• Increase in alcohol consumption
• Increase in military expenditures crowding out domestic consumption
• Increased macroeconomic imbalances leading to decreased availability of consumer goods
Table 5. Correlates of Adult Stature:RLMS Results, Individuals Born 1939 - 1982 (Age 22 - 55)
Dependent variable: height in cm
A. Men
Independentvariables:
Men, non-migrants
Abortion legal in yearof birth (1 = yes)
8.13(1.44)
8.10(2.68)
5.81(2.67)
6.37(2.72)
–
Born during WWII 2.34(1.43)
4.14(3.05)
– – –
Doctors per capita inyear and region ofbirth
– – .045(.032)
– –
Population density inyear and region ofbirth
– – – .003(.002)
–
Avg. monthly wage inyear and region ofbirth
– – – – -.975(1.69)
Higher education 1.96(.337)
1.61(.541)
1.74(.545)
1.63(.621)
1.81(.619)
N 5476 2198 2015 1857 1688
R2 .10 .10 .08 .08 .07
B. Women
Independent variables: Women, non-migrants
Abortion legal in yearof birth (1 = yes)
4.55(1.26)
4.23(1.49)
-.219 (1.80)
-.288(1.19)
–
Born during WWII .446(1.15)
-2.84(2.74)
– – –
Doctors per cap. inyear and region ofbirth
– – .068(.023)
– –
Population density inyear and region ofbirth
– – – .003(.002)
–
Avg. monthly wage inyear and region ofbirth
– – – – 1.34(1.05)
Higher education 1.16(.249)
1.32(.409)
1.46(.435)
1.63(.484)
1.25(.531)
N 5771 2199 1977 1817 1651
R2 .08 .12 .10 .10 .09
(1) (2) (3) (4)
Doctors per capita
-.164
(.096)
-- -.023
(.121)
-.046
(.103)
Pop. density -- .014
(.141)
-- --
% pop. w/>sec. ed.
-- -- -.489
(.278)
-.550
(.321)
Alcohol cons. per cap.
-- -- -- -.032
(.065)
N
R2
216
.74
231
.74
216
.75
175
.74
Correlates of log change in infant mortality rates,RSFSR regions, 1959 – 1989 (stacked)
Other controls: crude birth rate; large region; decade (1970-1979, 1980-1989;1959 – 1970 is omitted decade).
010
2030
4050
Perc
entil
e
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
Per
capi
ta d
aily
cal
orie
s
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990Year of birth
Per capita daily calories Moscow St. Petersburg
Source: see Appendix 1.
Figure 8a. Calories and child stature in Moscowand St. Petersburg
010
2030
4050
Perc
entil
e
200
400
600
800
1000
Per
capi
ta d
aily
cal
orie
s, a
nim
al s
ourc
es
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990Year of birth
Per capita daily calories, animal sources Moscow St. Petersburg
Source: see Appendix 1.
Figure 8b. Calories from animal sources and child staturein Moscow and St. Petersburg
Conclusion: Did the standard of living rise or fall in the Soviet Union in the postwar period?
• Given poor quality of GNP data, trends portrayed by stature and death rates may be more believable than GNP growth
• Conventional measures of GNP growth and consumption indicate a long, upward climb in living standards 1950-1989
• Corroborated for 1950 – 1970 by increasing child and adult heights, declining IMR and rising life expectancy at birth
Conclusion, cont.
• But evidence of deteriorating living conditions in the mid- to late-1960s: – declining male life expectancy – rising infant mortality, even in regions with reliable vital event data– stagnation or decrease in child heights; – slight decline or stagnation in height of men and women born in
early 1970s
• Underlying reasons for these trends are inconclusive, but may include:– expansion of national health system – increased education – declining availability of consumer goods – increased alcohol consumption
Implications and further research
• More data on food and alcohol consumption, tobacco use
• Effect of abortion legalization on child and parent/adult outcomes
• Effect of Chernobyl on child well-being
• Are deteriorating living conditions of the 1970s related to current high mortality levels in Russia?