ABSTRACT
What about ~I&l\Ic's lindin~ that the (h'bilitatin~ dk('( ordinTsity decreases with rising inconH': TI1l'Y conclude that Ic)r rich economies, ethnic diversity causes little if any reduction in e(,(lIlomic growth. This is a plausible claim, which [ shall discuss below. But lirst [ want to discuss the relationship hctwlTn diwrsity anel per capita income, rather than growth in income. Present income !en'l is important because it tells us sonll'thing about a country's history of eCOllomic growth. Countries with high incomes must haw' had a history oflong-tenn rohust economic growth. Diwrsity is strongly and negatiwly correlated with per capita income, as f(HllId by E&L: ';\ mO\'t'nH'nt Irom com plett' het('ro~eneity to complete homogeneity is associated with an income increase of 3.B times: E&L interpret this to indicate that eli\Trsity is a long-term drag on economic gTowth, and that in the past, mainly homogeneous countries haw' achie\'l'eI high-income status. l\I&.Mc oflh the radically difl('fent interpretation that this dl' .. ct is due to low income musing the creation of ethnic groups and thereby causing higher diversity. In their view, ethnic boundaries are arhitrary social constructs thrown up hy individuals as a means of resource competition during times of scarcity. Take away poverty, they suggest, and ethnic divisions c\·aporate. In support of this view, they report their finding that ethnic diwrsity is not positi\'t'ly correlated with the population size of states, contrary to expectations if ethnic groups were evenly distrihuted around the world. 'IPlerhaps t'\'C1l in the smallest countries, individuals can find ethnolinguistic differences to assert if they choose to do so - and even in the largest countries huge m,~()rities can he put in the same category, if they are \villing to be seen as similar.'
