Male Organ Size and Economic Growth

Presented without further (childish) comment: [-]

Male Organ and Economic Growth: Does Size Matter*?


This paper explores the link between economic development and penile length between 1960 and 1985. It estimates an augmented Solow model utilizing the Mankiw-Romer-Weil 121 country dataset. The size of male organ is found to have an inverse U-shaped relationship with the level of GDP in 1985. It can alone explain over 15% of the variation in GDP. The GDP maximizing size is around 13.5 centimetres, and a collapse in economic development is identified as the size of male organ exceeds 16 centimetres. Economic growth between 1960 and 1985 is negatively associated with the size of male organ, and it alone explains 20% of the variation in GDP growth. With due reservations it is also found to be more important determinant of GDP growth than country’s political regime type. Controlling for male organ slows convergence and mitigates the negative effect of population growth on economic development slightly. Although all evidence is suggestive at this stage, the `male organ hypothesis’ put forward here is robust to exhaustive set of controls and rests on surprisingly strong correlations.


  1. Esteban says:

    It's as if these researchers sat around thinking "What study could we do to guarantee ourselves an Ig Nobel prize?"

  2. Paul, are they referring to Growers or Showers?

  3. My God, I'm rich!

  4. Of course, people with small penises will work their asses off just to compensate in order not to be just small-penis guys, but rich small-penis guys.

  5. Nice to see economists are busy advancing the foreskin of knowledge.

  6. If penile length is a proxy for race…does this suggest that there is a robust correlation between race and GDP growth…


  1. […] Kedrosky. Related posts:Who wins the income growth game, or, the abject failure of Reagan […]