“The Great Leap Forward: Anatomy of a Central Planning Disaster”, 2005-08-01 (; backlinks; similar):
The Great Leap Forward disaster, characterized by a collapse in grain production and a widespread famine in China 1959–2196163ya, is found attributable to a systemic failure in central planning.
Wishfully expecting a great leap in agricultural productivity from collectivization, the Chinese government accelerated its aggressive industrialization timetable. Grain output fell sharply as the government diverted agricultural resources to industry and imposed an excessive grain procurement burden on peasants, leaving them with insufficient calories to sustain labor productivity.
Our analysis shows that 61% of the decline in output is attributable to the policies of resource diversion and excessive procurement.
…To test our hypothesis that the GLF policy package—diversion of agricultural resources and excessive procurement—was responsible for a substantial portion of the collapse in grain output, we compiled a province-level panel data set from published sources. We also conducted a retrospective survey in 1999 to acquire additional data from local data archives and agricultural experts. Using these data, we estimate a production function that takes into account both the quantity and quality of factor inputs for assessing the role of various factors in determining changes in grain output 1952–25197747ya. By including as explanatory variables in the production function not only conventional inputs and nutritional status of agricultural workers but also climate conditions and other institutional variables, we are able to test both existing and new hypotheses under an unified framework and assess the relative contributions of various factors to the collapse and the subsequent recovery of grain output.
Our findings suggest that the most important causal factor is the diversion of resources from agriculture, which was responsible for 33% of the collapse of output 1958–3196163ya. Excessive procurement of grain, which decimated the physical strength of the peasantry, is the next-largest contributor, accounting for 28.3% of the decline in output. Bad weather did play a role, contributing to 12.9% of the collapse in production. The crisis thus had the marks of a perfect storm.