How did Cuba's GDP per capita trend from 1900 to 1958 compared with Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Cuba entered the 20th century as one of Latin America’s relatively prosperous economies and by 1958 had a reported per‑capita GDP of $2,363, “in the middle of Latin American countries” [1]. Scholarly reconstructions (Maddison/Journal of Economic History work) show Cuba’s per‑capita income was especially strong in the 1920s and ranked among the top tier of the region around 1950, while comparative studies find Cuba declining in rank relative to fast‑growing peers after midcentury [2] [3].
1. Cuba’s long‑run profile: early strength, midcentury plateau
Economic historians reconstruct Cuba as a once‑prosperous middle‑income country: incomes in the 1920s approached Western European levels and were about 30% of U.S. income on the eve of the revolution, and researchers describe Cuba as “among the highest in Latin America” before 1959 [2]. Maddison‑style series and academic work used by analysts show Cuba’s relative position was high early in the century but that growth slowed; one survey of the half‑century to 2009 concludes Cuban per‑capita GDP did not keep pace with most other Latin American economies [3] [4].
2. The 1950s snapshot: Cuba in the regional middle
Contemporary summaries cite a 1958 Cuban per‑capita GDP of $2,363 and describe Cuba as occupying a middle position in Latin America at that moment [1]. Other reconstructions rank Cuba seventh in Latin America by per‑capita GDP around 1950—behind Venezuela, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, and Trinidad & Tobago and nearly tied with Guatemala—indicating a respectable standing though not topmost [3].
3. How Cuba compared with Mexico, Argentina and Brazil before 1959
Available sources show two themes: Argentina and some smaller southern cone economies often had higher per‑capita incomes than Cuba, while Mexico and Brazil’s larger size masks varied per‑capita performance. Academic work stresses Cuba’s relatively high income in the early 20th century and its top‑ten Latin America ranking in 1950, implying Cuba was competitive with Mexico and Brazil in per‑capita terms but generally behind Argentina and Uruguay at midcentury [2] [3]. The provided material does not contain year‑by‑year numeric series directly comparing Cuba, Mexico, Argentina and Brazil from 1900–1958; those panel data are “not found in current reporting” among the supplied results.
4. Data sources, measurement problems and why comparisons disagree
Long‑run GDP per‑capita comparisons rely on reconstructed series (Maddison Project) or interpolations from national accounts; each method produces different levels and trends because of exchange‑rate conversions, PPP adjustments, and sparse historical records [5] [6]. Cuba’s official and later series also diverge from independent reconstructions; scholars warn that measuring welfare by GDP per‑capita is imperfect and results depend on methodology [4] [6]. The Maddison approach is cited as a principal, internationally comparable source in several studies of Cuba’s past [4] [5].
5. Competing interpretations: decline or missed potential?
Some scholars interpret the trajectory after 1950 as relative decline—Cuba fell behind faster‑growing Latin American peers over the second half of the century [4] [3]. Others emphasize that Cuba’s early‑20th‑century income levels were comparatively high, suggesting the island’s midcentury performance represented a plateau rather than a sudden collapse [2]. The ASCE paper argues policy choices after 1959 depressed output per‑capita below what might have been achieved—an explicit causal claim grounded in its analysis [4].
6. What the supplied numbers can and cannot tell you
The cited sources support these concrete points: Cuba’s 1958 per‑capita GDP reported as $2,363 [1]; academic reconstructions place Cuba among Latin America’s higher per‑capita incomes in the 1920s–1950s [2] [3]. The supplied material does not provide a complete annual series for 1900–1958 for all four countries in a directly comparable table, nor does it offer a definitive ranking year‑by‑year between Cuba, Mexico, Argentina and Brazil across that whole span—those data series are “not found in current reporting” among the results provided [5] [4].
7. Practical next steps if you want precise annual comparisons
To produce a year‑by‑year comparative chart for 1900–1958, consult the Maddison Project / Our World in Data long‑run GDP per‑capita series and national accounts (the Maddison dataset is referenced by the sources here) and carefully choose nominal vs. PPP measures and anchoring years; the Maddison/Our World in Data series is explicitly cited as a standard for historical comparison [5]. The present set of sources supports broad conclusions about Cuba’s relatively high early standing and midcentury moderation but does not deliver a complete numeric panel for all four countries across 1900–1958 [2] [3].