CQH Working Paper No.0005 | Posted:  2026-10-07

Telegraph, Media, and State Information Capacity: Evidence from Late Imperial China

Authors

  • Yu Hao Peking University
  • Yuxiang Wang Southwestern University of Finance and Economics

Abstract

The impact of modern information technology on state capacity is relatively under-researched. Most literature on state capacity in the pre-modern context focus on the "extractive" side rather than the "expenditure" side. In addition, little is known about the role of private media in historical state building. This paper explores the introduction of the telegraph in the late 19th-century China, the purpose of which were mostly military, to quantify the impact of information technology on state's capacity to obtain local information about natural disasters and to provide famine relief. The results show that telegraph connection increased the probability of officials' disaster reporting by 0.36 percentage points (31% of the mean of the dependent variable). It also improved the accuracy of reported information. Furthermore, the telegraph enhanced the capacity of private media to collect, transmit, and disseminate local information, thereby pressuring local officials to report disasters more truthfully. The impact was stronger in cases with competing information channels within state institutions and greater opportunity costs of misreporting. As a result, the telegraph improved public good provisions, stabilized grain prices, and mitigated social unrest. This paper underscores the complementarity between technology and institutions by showing how telegraph activated multiple informational channels internal and external to the bureaucracy.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References (85)

Aneja, Abhay, and Guo Xu. 2022. “The Costs of Employment Segregation: Evidence from the Federal Government Under Woodrow Wilson.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 137 (2): 911–958.

Bai, Ying, and Ruixue Jia. 2016. “Elite Recruitment and Political Stability: The Impact of the Abolition of China’s Civil Service Exam.” Econometrica 84 (2): 677–733.

Battaglini, Marco. 2002. “Multiple Referrals and Multidimensional Cheap Talk.” Econometrica 70 (4): 1379–1401.

Berlinski, Samuel, Torun Dewan, and Keith Dowding. 2012. Accounting for Ministers: Scandal and Survival in British Government 1945–2007. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Besley, Timothy, and Robin Burgess. 2002. “The Political Economy of Government Responsiveness: Theory and Evidence from India.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117 (4): 1415–1451.

Besley, Timothy, and Torsten Persson. 2009. “The Origins of State Capacity: Property Rights, Taxation, and Politics.” American Economic Review 99 (4): 1218–1244.

Bo, Shiyu, Cong Liu, and Yan Zhou. 2023. “Military Investment and the Rise of Industrial Clusters: Evidence from China’s Self-Strengthening Movement.” Journal of Development Economics 161: 103015.

Borusyak, Kirill, Xavier Jaravel, and Jann Spiess. 2024. “Revisiting Event-Study Designs: Robust and Efficient Estimation.” The Review of Economic Studies 91 (6): 3253–3285.

Busuioc, E. Madalina, and Martin Lodge. 2016. “The Reputational Basis of Public Accountability.” Governance 29 (2): 247–263.

Callaway, Brantly, and Pedro H. C. Sant’Anna. 2021. “Difference-in-Differences with Multiple Time Periods.” Journal of Econometrics 225 (2): 200–230.

Downloads

How to Cite

Hao, Yu, and Yuxiang Wang. 2026. “Telegraph, Media, and State Information Capacity: Evidence from Late Imperial China”. CQH Working Paper Series. https://cqhwp.hku.hk/index.php/cqh/preprint/view/wp0005.