Erik Green
Professor
The substitutability of slaves : Evidence from the Eastern frontier of the Cape Colony
Author
Summary, in English
The substitutability of the economic institution of slave labour is often
assumed as a given. Apart from some capital investment to retrain slaves for a different task,essentially their labour could be substituted for any other form of labour. This paper questions that assumption by using a longitudinal study of the Graaff-Reinet district on the eastern frontier of South Africa’s Cape Colony. We calculate the Hicksian elasticity of complementarity coefficients for each year of a 22-year combination of cross-sectional tax datasets (1805–1828) to test whether slave labour was substitutable for other forms of labour. We find that slave labour, indigenous labour and settler family labour are not substitutable over the period of the study. This lends credence to the finding that slave and family labour were two different inputs in agricultural production. Indigenous labour and slave labour remain complements throughout the period of the study even when indigenous labour becomes scarce after the frontier conflicts. We argue that the non-substitutability of slave labour was due to the settlers’ need to acquire labourers with location-specific skills such as the indigenous khoe, and that slaves may have served another purpose, such as for artisan skills or for collateral.
assumed as a given. Apart from some capital investment to retrain slaves for a different task,essentially their labour could be substituted for any other form of labour. This paper questions that assumption by using a longitudinal study of the Graaff-Reinet district on the eastern frontier of South Africa’s Cape Colony. We calculate the Hicksian elasticity of complementarity coefficients for each year of a 22-year combination of cross-sectional tax datasets (1805–1828) to test whether slave labour was substitutable for other forms of labour. We find that slave labour, indigenous labour and settler family labour are not substitutable over the period of the study. This lends credence to the finding that slave and family labour were two different inputs in agricultural production. Indigenous labour and slave labour remain complements throughout the period of the study even when indigenous labour becomes scarce after the frontier conflicts. We argue that the non-substitutability of slave labour was due to the settlers’ need to acquire labourers with location-specific skills such as the indigenous khoe, and that slaves may have served another purpose, such as for artisan skills or for collateral.
Department/s
- Department of Economic History
Publishing year
2020
Language
English
Pages
98-122
Publication/Series
Economic History of Developing Regions
Volume
35
Issue
2
Document type
Journal article
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Topic
- Economic History
- International Migration and Ethnic Relations
Keywords
- slavery
- labour
- labor
- indigenous
- substitutes
Status
Published
Project
- The Cape of the Good Hope Panel: Long-term studies of growth, inequality and labour coercion in the global south
ISBN/ISSN/Other
- ISSN: 2078-0397