One stereotype that has arisen suggests Maori have been incapable of and/or unable to manage the production and use of alcohol. On the other hand, another commonly held belief has been that Maori supported abstinence or 'resisted alcohol' because they recognised its 'ruinous nature' and because it was contrary to traditional custom and practices. Historical information indicates that the Maori response to the introduction of alcohol was in fact diverse and for much of the nineteenth century alcohol was non-problematic for many Maori. This reinterpretation of the historical record can potentially empower contemporary Maori to take greater responsibility for the use of alcohol. It also challenges the negativity of the stereotypes generated by historical misinformation.

1985, pp. 52-57) argue that output per capita increased between 0.3 and 0.6 percent per year; Egnal (1975, p. 191-222) puts the growth at 0.5 percent per year between 1720 and 1775, while Jones (1980, p. 78) put it around 0.4 percent per year. Taylor (1964, pp. 427-44), however, asserts a much faster rate of 1.0 percent per year. 2 David's conjectural technique was based on the work of Kuznets (1952).

Conventional wisdom holds that output per capita in colonial British America increased between 0.3 and 0.6 percent per year. Our conjectural estimates challenge this view, suggesting instead that such growth was unlikely. We show that the most likely rate of economic growth was much lower, probably close to zero. We argue further that to understand the performance of the colonial economy it is necessary to include the economic activity of Native American Indians. When this is done, we estimate that the economy may have grown at the rate suggested by previous researchers.

No abstract

No abstract