Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:44:12.502Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Infant Health, Women's Fertility, and Rural Electrification in the United States, 1930–1960

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2018

Joshua Lewis
Joshua Lewis*
Affiliation:
Joshua Lewis is Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, University of Montreal. 3150, rue Jean-Brillant #6032, Montreal, QC, H3T 1N8. E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

From 1930 to 1960 rural communities, mainly in the U.S. South and Southwest, gained access to electricity. In addition to lights, the benefits included easier clothes washing, refrigeration, and pumped water. This article uses differences in the timing of electricity access across rural counties to study the effects on infant mortality and fertility. Rural electrification led to substantial reductions in infant mortality but had little effect on women's fertility. The increase in electricity access between 1930 and 1960 can account for 15 to 19 percent of the decline in rural infant mortality during this period.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 78 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 118 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I am very grateful to my PhD advisors Dwayne Benjamin, Robert McMillan, Aloysius Siow, and Mark Stabile for their support and guidance. I thank Price Fishback and three anonymous referees for detailed comments and suggestions. I also thank Ran Abramitzky, Martha Bailey, Andriana Bellou, Leah Boustan, Gustavo Bobonis, Emanuela Cardia, Karen Clay, William Collins, Shari Eli, Raphael Godefroy, Claudia Goldin, Gillian Hamilton, Frank Lewis, Valerie Ramey, Edson Severnini, Matthew Turner, and seminar participants at the Canadian Network for Economic History in Ottawa, Carleton University, Carnegie Mellon University, Dalhousie University, Northwestern University, Queen's University, Simon Fraser University, University of Delaware, University of Montreal, University of Miami, and University of Toronto for valuable comments. Funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council is gratefully acknowledged.

Due to the Journal's conflict of interest policy, this paper was handled by a former editor.

References

REFERENCES

Acemoglu, Daron, Autor, David H., and Lyle, David. “Women War and Wages: The Impact of Female Labor Supply on the Wage Structure at Mid-Century.” Journal of Political Economy 112, no. 3 (2004): 497–551.Google Scholar
Albanesi, Stefania, and Olivetti, Claudia. “Maternal Health and the Baby Boom.” Quantitative Economics 5, no. 2 (2014): 225–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angrist, Joshua, and Pischke, Jorn-Steffen. Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Bailey, Martha J., and Collins, William J.. “Did Improvements in Household Technology Cause the Baby Boom? Evidence from Electrification, Appliance Diffusion, and the Amish.” American Economic Journal – Macroeconomics 3, no. 2 (2011): 189–217.Google Scholar
Baker, Michael, and Milligan, Kevin. “Maternal Employment, Breastfeeding, and Health: Evidence from Maternity Leave Mandates.” Journal of Health Economics 27, no. 4 (2008): 871–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barreca, Alan, Clay, Karen, and Tarr, Joel. “Coal, Smoke, and Death: Bituminous Coal and American Home Heating.” NBER Working Paper No. 19881, Cambridge, MA, 2015.Google Scholar
Beall, Robert T. Rural Electrification. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture, 1940.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary S., and Gregg Lewis, H.. “On the Interaction between the Quantity and Quality of Children.” Journal of Political Economy 81, no. 2 (1973): 279–88.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary S., and Tomes, Nigel. “Child Endowments and the Quantity and Quality of Children.” Journal of Political Economy 84, no. 4 (1976): 143–62.Google Scholar
Burlig, Fiona, and Preonas, Louis. “Out of Darkness and Into the Light: Development Effects of Rural Electrification.” Working Paper, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, 2016.Google Scholar
Carter, Susan, B., Gartner, Scott S., Haines, Michael R., et al. Historical Statistics of the United States: Millennial Edition, Volume 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Chakravorty, Ujjayant, Emerick, Kyle, and Ravago, Majah L.. “Lighting Up the Last Mile: The Benefits and Costs of Extending Electricity to the Rural Poor.” Working Paper, Department of Economics, Tufts University, Boston, 2016.Google Scholar
Clay, Karen, Lewis, Joshua, and Severnini, Edson. “Canary in a Coal Mine: Infant Mortality, Property Values, and Tradeoffs Associated with Mid-20th Century Air Pollution.” NBER Working Paper No. 22155, Cambridge, MA, 2016.Google Scholar
Conley, Timothy G. “GMM Estimation with Cross-Sectional Dependence.” Journal of Econometrics 92, no. 1 (1999): 1–45.Google Scholar
Cowan, Ruth S. More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. New York: Basic Books, 1983.Google Scholar
Cutler, David M., and Miller, Grant. “The Role of Public Health Improvements in Health Advances: The Twentieth-Century United States.” Demography 42, no. 1 (2005): 1–22.Google Scholar
Cutler, David M., and Meara, Ellen. “The Technology of Birth: Is It Worth It?” NBER Working Paper No. 7390, Cambridge, MA, 1999.Google Scholar
De La Croix, David, and Doepke, Matthias. “Inequality and Growth: Why Differential Fertility Matters.” American Economic Review 93, no. 4 (2003): 1091–113.Google Scholar
Dinkelman, Taryn. “The Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: New Evidence from South Africa.” American Economic Review 101, no. 7 (2011): 3078–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Electrical World, 5 January 1935.Google Scholar
Ewbank, Douglas C., and Preston, Samuel H.. “Personal Health Behaviour and the Decline in Infant and Child Mortality: The United States, 1900–1930.” In What We Know About Health Transition: The Cultural, Social and Behavioural Determinants of Health, Volume 1, edited by Caldwell, John, et al., 115–49. Canberra: The Australian National University, 1989.Google Scholar
Fishback, Price V., Haines, Michael R., and Kantor, Shawn. “Births, Deaths, and New Deal Relief during the Great Depression.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 89, no. 1 (2007): 1–14.Google Scholar
Fishback, Price V., and Kitchens, Carl. “Flip the Switch: The Impact of the Rural Electrification Administration 1935–1940.” Journal of Economic History 75, no. 4 (2015): 1161–95.Google Scholar
Galor, Oded, and Moav, Omer. “Natural Selection and the Origin of Economic Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 117, no. 4 (2002): 374–87.Google Scholar
General Electric Digest, April 1925.Google Scholar
Greenwood, Jeremy, Seshadri, Ananth, and Vandenbroucke, Guillaume. “The Baby Boom and Baby Bust.” American Economic Review 95, no. 1 (2005): 183–207.Google Scholar
Greenwood, Jeremy, Seshadri, Ananth, and Yorukoglu, Mehmet. “Engines of Liberation.” The Review of Economic Studies 72, no. 1 (2005): 109–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grogan, Louise, and Sadanand, Asha. “Rural Electrification and Employment in Poor Countries: Evidence from Nicaragua.” World Development 43 (2013): 252–65.Google Scholar
Haines, Michael R., and ICPSR. Historical, Demographic, Economic, and Social Data: The United States, 1790–2002. Ann Arbor: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research, 2010.Google Scholar
Hughes, Thomas P. Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880–1930. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Jaworski, Taylor, and Kitchens, Carl T.. “Ownership and the Price of Electricity: Evidence from the United States, 1935–1950.” Exploration in Economic History 64 (April 2017): 53–61.Google Scholar
Seema, Jayachandran, Lleras-Muney, Adriana, and Smith, Kimberly V.. “Modern Medicine and the 20th-Century Decline in Mortality: Evidence on the Impact of Sulfa Drugs.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2, no. 2 (2010): 118–46.Google Scholar
Jones, Larry E., Schoonbroodt, Alice, and Tertilt, Michèle. “Fertility Theories: Can They Explain the Negative Fertility-Income Relationship?” NBER Working Paper No. 14266, Cambridge, MA, 2008.Google Scholar
Jones, Larry E., Manuelli, Rodolfo E., and McGratton, Ellen R.. “Why Are Married Women Working So Much?” Journal of Demographic Economics 81, no. 1 (2015): 75–114.Google Scholar
Kitchens, Carl. “The TVA's Fight Against Malaria 1926–1951.” Journal of Economic History 73, no. 3 (2014): 694–724.Google Scholar
Lebergott, Stanley. The American Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976.Google Scholar
Lewis, Joshua. “Infant Health, Women's Fertility, and Rural Electrification in the United States, 1930–1960.” Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 22 October 2017. http://doi.org/10.3886/E101186V1.Google Scholar
Lewis, Joshua. “Short-run and Long-run Effects of Household Electrification.” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Montreal, Montreal, 2016.Google Scholar
Lewis, Joshua, and Severnini, Edson. “The Value of Rural Electricity: Evidence from the Rollout of the U.S. Power Grid.” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Montreal, Montreal, 2016.Google Scholar
Lipscomb, Molly, Mushfiq Mobarak, A., and Barham, Tania. “Development Effects of Electrification: Evidence from the Topographical Placement of Hydropower Plants in Brazil.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 5, no. 2 (2013): 200–31.Google Scholar
Luff, Willard J. “Water Systems and Bathrooms for Farm Homes.” Rural Electrification News, September 1940.Google Scholar
Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics and Labor. The Relative Cost of Home-Cooked and Purchased Food, edited by Wadlin, Horace et al., 67–98. Boston: Bureau of Statistics of Labor, 1901.Google Scholar
Meckel, Richard A. Save the Babies: American Public Health Reform and the Prevention of Infant Mortality, 1850–1929. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Miller, Grant, and Piedad Urdinola, B.. “Cyclicality, Mortality, and the Value of Time: The Case of Coffee Price Fluctuations and Child Survival in Colombia.” Journal of Political Economy 118, no. 1 (2010): 113–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moav, Omer. “Cheap Children and the Persistence of Poverty.” Economic Journal 115, no. 500 (2005): 88–110.Google Scholar
Moehling, Carolyn, and Thomasson, Melissa A.. “The Political Economy of Saving Babies: The Politics of State Participation in the Sheppard-Towner Program.” Journal of Economic History 72, no. 1 (2012): 75–103.Google Scholar
Moehling, Carolyn, and Thomasson, Melissa A.. “Saving Babies: The Contribution of Sheppard-Towner to the Decline in Infant Mortality in the 1920s.” Demography 51, no. 2 (2014): 367–86.Google Scholar
Mokyr, Joel. “Why ‘More Work for Mothers?’ Knowledge and Household Behavior, 1870–1945.” Journal of Economic History 60, no. 1 (2000): 1–41.Google Scholar
National Electric Light Association. Proceedings, Forty-Eighth Convention, 1925.Google Scholar
Ramey, Valerie. “Time Spent in Home Production in the Twentieth-Century United States: New Estimates from Old Data.” Journal of Economic History 69, no. 1 (2009): 1–47.Google Scholar
Rud, Juan Pablo. “Electricity and Industrial Development: Evidence from India.” Journal of Development Economics 92, no. 2 (2012): 352–67.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration. Report of Rural Electrification Administration 1938. Washington, DC: GPO, 1938.Google Scholar
Skipton, Sharon O., Shelton, David P., Dvorak, Bruce I., et al. Decommissioning Water Wells to Protect Water Quality and Human Health. Report from the Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, 2008.Google Scholar
Slattery, Harry. Rural America Lights Up. Washington, DC: National Home Library Foundation, 1940.Google Scholar
United Nations Development Programme and World Health Organization. The Energy Access Situation in Developing Countries – A Review Focusing on Least Developed Countries and SSA. New York, NY: Sustainable Energy Programme Environment and Energy Group, 2009.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Administration, Bureau of Human Nutrition and Home Economics. The Time Costs of Homemaking – A Study of 1,500 Rural and Urban Households. Manuscript, 1944.Google Scholar
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Sixteenth Census of the United States, 1940: Housing, Volume II: General Statistics. Washington, DC: GPO, 1943.Google Scholar
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Seventeenth Census of the United States, 1950: Housing, Volume I: General Characteristics. Washington, DC: GPO, 1953.Google Scholar
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Eighteenth Census of the United States, 1960: Housing, Volume I: States and Small Areas. Washington, DC: GPO, 1963.Google Scholar
United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Vital Statistics of the United States. Washington, DC: GPO, various years.Google Scholar
United States Federal Power Commission. Principal Electric Power Facilities in the United States (Map). Washington, DC: Federal Power Commission, 1963.Google Scholar
United States Public Health Service. Individual Water Supply Systems. Recommendations of the Joint Committee on Rural Sanitation. Washington, DC: U.S. Public Health Service, 1950.Google Scholar
Vogl, Tom. “Differential Fertility, Human Capital, and Development.” Review of Economic Studies 83, no. 1 (2016): 365–401.Google Scholar
Watson, Tara. “Public Health Investments and the Infant Mortality Gap: Evidence from Federal Sanitation Interventions on U.S. Indian Reserves.” Journal of Public Economics 90, no. 8–9 (2006): 1537–60.Google Scholar
Wilson, Maud. Present Use of Time in Households and by Homemakers: Complete Report of Purnell Study. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State Agricultural Experiment Station, 1929.Google Scholar
Bank, World. World Development Report 1994: Infrastructure for Development. Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1994.Google Scholar
Bank, World. The Welfare Impact of Rural Electrification: A Reassessment of Costs and Benefits. Washington, DC: The World Bank Independent Evaluations Group, 2008.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (WHO). Diarrhoea: Why Children Are Still Dying and What Can Be Done. New York, NY: UN Children's Fund and the World Health Organization, 2009.Google Scholar