James Ahiakpor wrote:  
>I was startled to read Polly Cleveland's claim that "as any development  
>economist can tell us, growth proceeds faster in more egalitarian societies  
>with relatively low levels of corruption."  I'd like to have some documentation   
>of the claim because, for more than two decades of teaching development   
>economics, I have yet to find such evidence with respect to egalitarianism   
>causing growth.  She may have a point with respect to corruption.  
>  
>My next graduate class in development economics is scheduled for this fall.    
>I'm genuinely interested in Polly Cleveland's pointing to the evidence in   
>support of her claim so I may enrich my instruction or, at least, not   
>mis-educate my students.  
  
  
How about William Easterly, _The Elusive Quest for Growth_ (MIT Press paperback   
edition, 2002), Chapter 13: Polarized Peoples, p. 265:  
"This story predicts that high inequality goes with low growth. This is indeed   
what researchers have found: higher inequality in income or land is associated   
with lower growth."  
  
Income inequality's relationship with growth may be complicated, but land   
inequality seems pretty clear cut to me.  Would anyone seriously argue that   
Spain and Portugal's initial allocation of land had no effect on the economic   
performance of Latin American countries in the last few hundred years? Do you   
believe that Korea, Japan, and Taiwan would have done as well without land   
redistribution after WWII?   
  
Humberto Barreto