Required Reading for Italian-Americans...

Sicilian Culture: News & Views

Intelligence & The Wealth & Poverty of Nations
By Richard Lynn, University of Ulster, Coleraine, North Ireland

National IQs assessed by the Progressive Matrices were calculated for 60 nations and examined in relation to per capita incomes in the late 1990s and to post World War Two rates of economic growth. It was found that national IQs are correlated at with real GDP (Gross Domestic Product) per capita 1998 and, with per capita GNP (Gross National Product) 1998; and with the growth of per capita GDP 1950-90 and with growth of per capita GNP 1976-98. The results are interpreted in terms of a causal model in which population IQs are the major determinant of the wealth and poverty of nations in the contemporary world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTRODUCTION The causes of the inequalities in income and wealth between nations have been discussed for some two and a half centuries. In 1748 Montesquieu published De l'Esprit des Lois in which he proposed that temperate climates were more favorable to economic development than tropical climates. In 1776 this problem was discussed by Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations, in which he proposed that the skills of the population are the principal factor responsible for national differences in incomes and wealth.

Since these early attempts to analyse this problem, numerous other theories have been advanced. These theories fall into four principal categories.

First, climatic theories are still proposed. Their leading exponent in recent times is Kamarck (1976) who argues that tropical climates are unfavorable for economic development because the heat and humidity reduce the efficiency of working capacities, impair the productivity of the land and provide a favorable environment for debilitating diseases. This explains the difference between what is sometimes called "the rich north" with its temperate climate and "the poor south" with its predominantly tropical climate. Diamond (1998) presents similar arguments on the crucial significance of climatic and geographical factors.

The Second major contemporary explanation is "dependency theory". This proposes that the economically developed capitalist nations are responsible for the poverty of the underdeveloped nations because they dominate the world economy, force the rest of the world into economic dependency, and pay low prices for Third World agricultural products and natural resources. Some of the leading exponents of this theory are Frank (1969, 1996), dos Santos (1993, 1996), Wallerstein (1998) and Valenzuela and Valenzuela (1998); see also Seligson and PassŽ-Smith (1998).

Third, there is the neoliberal theory. This proposes that the major factor responsible for national differences in economic development consists of the presence of free markets as opposed to command, socialist and communist economies. Bates (1993) and Weede (1993) are leading recent exponents of this theory.

Fourth, there are a variety of psychological theories which argue for the importance of differences in attitudes, values and motivations. The first major theory of this kind was Weber's (1904) theory that the Protestant work ethic explained the more rapid economic development of northern Europe as compared with the Catholic south from the sixteenth century onwards. Later theorists in this tradition include McClelland (1976) who advanced the similar concept of achievement motivation. Several economists, while not endorsing the theories of Weber or McClelland, are sympathetic to this kind of explanation and propose what are generally termed "cultural" factors as major contributors to national differences in economic development. Landes writes of the importance of culture "in the sense of inner values and attitudes that guide a population" (1998, p. 516). Many economists have taken eclectic positions in which they argue that several of these factors contribute to national differences in incomes and wealth.

We believe it has never been suggested that national differences in intelligence might play some role in national differences in economic development. It is widely assumed that the peoples of all nations have the same average level of intelligence. For instance, Kofi Annan, the United Nations Secretary General, asserted in April 2000 that intelligence "is one commodity equally distributed among the world's people" (Hoyos and Littlejohns, 2000). It is known in psychology that this is incorrect and that there are large differences in average levels of intelligence between different nations. Reviews of the literature have shown that in relation to average IQs of 100 in Britain and the United States, the peoples of north east Asia have average IQs of around 105 and the peoples of sub-Saharan Africa have average IQs of around 70 (Lynn, 1991).

In view of these differences, it seems a reasonable hypothesis that national differences in intelligence may be a factor contributing to national differences in wealth.......

Profile of Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus, University of Ulster

© Copyright 1999-2003 (MCMXCIX) Cristaldi Communications Web Design, Hosting & Promotion - - December 21, 2002