Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-r6c6k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T10:36:15.139Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flip the Switch: The Impact of the Rural Electrification Administration 1935–1940

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2015

Carl Kitchens  and
Price Fishback
Carl Kitchens
Affiliation:
Carl Kitchens is Assistant Professor of Economics, Florida State University and NBER, 269 Bellamy Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306. E-mail: ckitchens@fsu.edu.
Price Fishback
Affiliation:
Price Fishback is Thomas R. Brown Professor of Economics, University of Arizona and NBER, 401 McClelland Hall, 1130 E Helen St. Tucson, AZ 85721. E-mail: fishback@email.arizona.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To isolate the impact of access to electricity on local economies, we examine the impact of the Rural Electrification Administration low-interest loans in the 1930s. The REA provided loans to cooperatives to lay distribution lines to farms and aid in wiring homes. Consequently, the number of rural farm homes electrified doubled in the United States within five years. We develop a panel data set for the 1930s and use changes within counties over time to identify the effect of the REA loans on a wide range of socio-economic measures. The REA loans contributed significantly to increases in crop output and crop productivity and helped stave off declines in overall farm output, productivity, and land values, but they had much smaller effects on nonagricultural parts of the economy. The ex-ante subsidy from the low-interest loans was large, but after the program was completed, nearly all of the loans were fully repaid, and the ultimate cost to the taxpayer was relatively low.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 75 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 1161 - 1195
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2015 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

The authors would like to thank seminar and conference participants at University of Arizona, University of Mississippi, Florida State University, 7th World Congress of Cliometrics, NBER-DAE Spring Program Meeting 2014, and Southern Economic Association Annual Meeting 2013.

References

REFERENCES

Altonji, Joseph G., Elder, Todd, and Taber, Christopher R.. “Selection on Observed and Unobserved Variables: Assessing the Effectiveness of Catholic Schools.” Journal of Political Economy 113, no. 1 (2005): 151–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bellows, John and Miguel, Edward. “War and Local Collective Action in Sierra Leone.” Journal of Public Economics 93, no. 11 (2009): 1144–57.Google Scholar
Carter, Susan B., Gartner, Scott, Haines, Michael R., et al. . Historical Statistics of the United States, Earliest Times to the Present: Millennial Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Conley, Timothy G. “GMM Estimation with Cross Sectional Dependence.” Journal of Econometrics 92, no. 1 (1999): 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Depew, Briggs, Fishback, Price V., and Rhode, Paul W.. “New Deal or No Deal in the Cotton South: The effect of the AAA on the agricultural labor structure.” Explorations in Economic History 50, no. 4 (2013): 466–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinkelman, Taryn. “The Effects of Rural Electrification on Employment: New Evidence from South Africa.” American Economic Review 101, no. 7 (2011): 3078–108.Google Scholar
Duflo, Esther and Pande, Rohini. “Dams.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 122, no. 2 (2007): 601–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Federal Power Commission (FPC). “National Power Survey Interim Report”, Power Series No. 1. Washington, DC: GPO, 1935a.Google Scholar
Federal Power Commission (FPC). National Power Survey: Cost of Distribution of Electricity. Power Series No. 5. Washington, DC: GPO, 1935b.Google Scholar
Fishback, Price, Kantor, Shawn, and Wallis, John. “Can the New Deal's Three R's be rehabilitated? A Program-by-Program, County-by-County Analysis.” Explorations in Economic History 40 (2003): 278–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishback, Price, Haines, Michael, and Rhode, Paul. “The Impact of the AAA on Farm Wages.” Working Paper presented at the NBER-Development of the American Economy Sessions at the Summer Institute. Cambridge, MA, 23 July 2012 .Google Scholar
Fishback, Price, Rose, Jonathan, and Snowden, Kenneth. Well Worth Saving: How the New Deal Safeguarded Home Ownership, with Jonathan Rose and Kenneth Snowden. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Fleck, Robert K. “Electoral Incentives, Public Policy, and the New Deal Realignment.” Southern Economic Journal 65, no. 3 (1999): 377–404.Google Scholar
Fleck, Robert K. “Population, Land, Economic Conditions, and the Allocation of New Deal Spending.” Explorations in Economic History 38, no. 2. (2001): 296–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenstone, Michael, Hornbeck, Richard, and Moretti, Enrico. “Identifying Agglomeration Spillovers: Evidence from Winners and Losers of Large Plant Openings”. Journal of Political Economy 118, no. 3 (2010): 536–598.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. “The Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. Historical, Demographic, Economic, and Social Data: The United States, 1790–2002 [Computer file]”. ICPSR02896. Hamilton, NY: Colgate University.  Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producers], (2005).Google Scholar
Hansen, Zeynep K., and Libecap, Gary D.. “Small Farms, Externalities, and the Dust Bowl of the 1930s.” Journal of Political Economy 112, no. 3 (2004): 665–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornbeck, Richard. “The Enduring Impact of the American Dust Bowl: Short-and Long-Run Adjustments to Environmental Catastrophe.” American Economic Review 102, no. 4 (2012): 1477–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Energy Agency (IEA). “World Energy Outlook 2011.” IEA, 2011.Google Scholar
Kitchens, Carl. “The Role of Publicly Provided Electricity in Economic Development: The Experience of the Tennessee Valley Authority, 1929–1955.” Journal of Economic History 74, no. 2 (2014): 389–419.Google Scholar
Kitchens, Carl and Fishback, Price. “Flip the Switch: The Spatial Impact of the Rural Electrification Administration 1935–1940.” NBER Working Paper No. w19743. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2013.Google Scholar
Kline, Patrick and Moretti, Enrico. “Local Economic Development, Agglomeration Economies, and the Big Push: 100 Years of Evidence from the Tennessee Valley Authority.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 129, no. 1 (2014): 275–331.Google Scholar
Lipscomb, Molly, Mobarak, Ahmed, and Barham, Tania. “Development Effects of Electrification: Evidence from the Geologic Placement of Hydropower Plants in Brazil.” American Economic Journal: Applied 5, no. 2 (2012): 200–31.Google Scholar
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA). Rural Electric Fact Book. Washington, DC: The Association, 1960.Google Scholar
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA). “America's Cooperative Utilities. The Nations's Consumer-Owner Electric Utility Network.” Arlington, VA, 2014. Downloaded 9 September 2015. http://www.nreca.coop/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/AnnualMeetingFactSheet.pdf Google Scholar
Neufeld, John. “Light and Power: U.S. Electric Utilities before 1940.” Unpublished Book Manuscript. Greensboro, NC: University of North Carolina, 2015.Google Scholar
Reuters. “World Bank Approves Loan for Coal-Fired Power Plant in South Africa.” New York, NY, 9 April 2010. Downloaded 26 February 2013 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/08/AR2010040805407.html.Google Scholar
Reuters. “World Bank Approves Loan for Coal-Fired Power Plant in South Africa. “ Kenya Power Gets $200 Million from World Bank for Grid.” New York, NY, 2012. Downloaded 26 February 2013 from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/08/kenya-power-idUSL6E8J857D20120808.Google Scholar
Richardson, Lemont. “Wisconsin REA: The Struggle to Extend Electricity to Rural Wisconsin 1933–1955.” Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Experiment Station, College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, 1961.Google Scholar
Roback, Jennifer. “Wages, Rents, and the Quality of Life.” Journal of Political Economy 90 no. 6 (1982): 1257–78.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Report of Rural Electrification Administration 1936. Washington, DC: GPO, 1936a.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Electric Power on the Farm. Washington, DC: GPO, 1936b.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Suggested Rural Line Construction No. 1. Washington, DC: GPO, 1936c.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Report of Rural Electrification Administration 1937. Washington, DC: GPO, 1937.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Report of Rural Electrification Administration 1938. Washington, DC: GPO, 1938a.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Rural Electrification on the March. Washington, DC: GPO, 1938b.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Report of Rural Electrification Administration 1939a. Washington, DC: GPO, 1939.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). A Guide for Members of REA Cooperatives. Washington, DC: GPO, 1939b.Google Scholar
Rural Electrification Administration (REA). Rural Lines - USA. U Washington, DC: GPO, 1960.Google Scholar
Severnini, Edson. “The Power of Hydroelectric Dams: Agglomeration Spillovers.” University of California Berkeley Working Paper. Berkeley, CA: University of California Berkeley, 2012.Google Scholar
Slattery, Harry. Rural America Lights Up. The National Home Library Association. Washington, DC, 1940.Google Scholar
U.S. Census Bureau. Census of Electrical Industries 1932: Central Electric Light and Power Stations. Washington, DC: GPO, 1934.Google Scholar
U.S. Census Bureau. Sixteenth Census of the United States: 1940, Agriculture, Volume III, General Report, Statistics by Subjects. Washington, DC: GPO, 1943.Google Scholar
U.S. Office of Government Reports. Report No 9–1939. Unpublished mimeos. College Park, MD: Office of Government Reports. Record Group 44, National Archives II, 1939.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. “Allotment, Construction, Operating, and Financial Statistics of REA-Financed Systems- December 31, 1942.” Washington, DC: GPO, 1943.Google Scholar
Wallis, John Joseph. “The Political Economy of New Deal Spending Revisited, Again: With and without Nevada.” Explorations in Economic History 35, no. 2 (1998): 140–70.Google Scholar
Wallis, John Joseph. “The Political Economy of New Deal Spending, Yet Again: A Reply to Fleck.” Explorations in Economic History 38, no. 2 (2001): 305–14.Google Scholar
World Bank. “Fact Sheet: Ethiopia-Kenya Eastern Electricity Highway Project First Phase of regional Eastern Africa Power Integration Program.” Washington, DC, 2012a. Downloaded 26 February 2013 from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRICA/Resources/AFR-EEHP-Fact-Sheet-7-July-2012.pdf.Google Scholar
World Bank. World Bank Approver New Power Transmission Line between Ethiopia and Kenya to Boost Electricity and Economic Growth in East Africa.” 2012b. Downloaded 9 September 2015 from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2012/07/12/world-bank-approves-new-power-transmission-line-ethiopia-kenya-boost-electricity-economic-growth-east-africa.Google Scholar
World Bank. “Plugged in to progress with Geothermal Energy in Kenya.” Washington, DC, 2013. Downloaded 26 February 2013 from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2013/01/11/plugged-in-to-progress-with-geothermal-energy-in-kenya.Google Scholar
Wright, Gavin. “The Political Economy of New Deal Spending: An Econometric Analysis.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 56, no. 1 (1974): 30–38.Google Scholar