HES - History of Economics Society...subject, especially the works of: Theotonio dos Santos, Ruy Mauro Marini, Andreas Gunder Frank, Vânia Bambirra, Orlando Caput and Roberto Pizarro,

HES

46th Annual Meetings of the History of Economics Society

Book of Abstracts

Faculty House

Columbia University New York City, New York

2

HES 2019 Book of Abstracts

Friday, June 21 Session 1A: Moments of Innovation in Economic Thought and Policy The normative foundations of early Neoclassical Economics: John Bates Clark. Felix Schroeter Today, scholars of the history of economic thought broadly recognize that John Bates Clark envisioned Christian ethics to cope with the social grievances that he encountered in his time in the U.S. This may be true at least for his early work before the violent incidents of Chicago´s Haymarket in 1886. Nevertheless, as economist he receives the most appraisal for his later, distinctively theoretical contributions, which succeeded in purging the economic approach to questions of distribution from ethical connotations. The paper demonstrates that in contrast to this common understanding, all of Clark’s writings after Haymarket bear his former ethical impetus. It traces his theory of value, distribution and capital back to the younger Clark’s reformative claim to found the American economy on the principle of just and free exchange. Frank Ramsey’s Place in the History of Mathematical Economics. Pedro Garcia Duarte and Cheryl Misak Frank Ramsey is considered by many economists to be a pioneering figure in modern economics who built a workhorse model that is present in any graduate textbook (the so-called Ramsey-Cass-Koopmans model). Although economists and some historians of economics either acclaim Ramsey’s contributions or criticize them depending on their own inclinations, they disagree on whether Ramsey pioneered the use of a representative agent model or instead employed a social utility function that represents the social planner’s evaluation to the neglect of how it relates to the differences in individual. We intend to clarify the question by further complicating it. It is clear from material other than Ramsey’s two famous papers in the Economic Journal that the standard readings of him, heavily based either on the published materials or on their modern renditions, are simplistic. From the papers Ramsey read to the Apostles, we can see that he was a socialist, who did not think that the utility was the only good, nor that the utility of the working class could be neatly averaged with the utility of the rich. We can also see him struggle with the tension between what is good for the individual and what is good for society. Moreover, we can reconstruct from the minutes a lost paper (‘Mathematical Economics’, read to the Trinity Mathematical Society and the Quintics Society in 1927) that he was skeptical of idealizations such as the representative agent. The question is then: what is Ramsey’s pioneering role in the history of modern mathematical economics? We shall offer a surprising answer.

3


Session 1B Session: Factoring ‘Impact’ in H.E.T., Part I: Measurement Observations through the 2-year impact window. Stephen Meardon and José Edwards The recent decision of Clarivate Analytics to suppress its calculated impact factors for HEI, JHET, and EJHET gives historians of economics occasion to rethink what a journal impact factor means and what purpose it serves. Also how to measure what it should mean and what purpose, if any, it should serve. We explain the development of the most common measure of journal impact and the opportuneness of its common abuse. We argue that a journal impact factor should be used as a measure of the average resonance within a scholarly community of the articles published in a given journal. But only insofar as the statistic’s construction (particularly the temporal width of its citation window) puts it in alignment with the citation practices of the scholarly community; and as authors cite, and journal editors encourage citation, for a few particular reasons. They are to attribute properly the claims of an article, to improve an argument by accommodating or refuting the arguments of others, and to make the scholarly conversation more relevant to a larger audience. Towards Measuring Journal Impact––Properly. Melissa Vergara Fernández In this paper I evaluate the Journal Impact Factor using a theory of measurement. I argue that JIF does not stand up to close scrutiny. To measure a concept precisely, our theory of measurement requires correspondence between three steps: the characterisation of the concept, its representation, and the procedures followed to carry out the measurement. Characterisation involves defining the concept: identifying its boundaries, which fixes the features that belong to it. Representation involves defining a metrical system that appropriately represents the concept. The procedures are the rules formulated for applying the metrical system to the tokens. These three steps do not line up together neatly for JIF. There are at least two problems. First, the procedures to measure JIF do not reflect an unequivocal characterisation. Second, the representation strategy of JIF is inappropriate and not justified, given the kind of concept it tries to capture: one without strict boundaries. The bottom line is not that the JIF ought to be eschewed. Sufficient reasons related to how JIF distorts scientists’ incentives have been provided to this end. But path-dependence is a tricky issue––the longevity of querty keyboards demonstrates it. The bottom line is that, given that JIF is unlikely to vanish, we better start giving it some proper scientific basis. Some Clear Evidence that Citation Counts Do Not Measure Quality. James Forder Three papers by Milton Friedman are considered, and the number and character of citations of them analysed. As regards their content, two are directly comparable. These are Friedman's "The Role of Monetary Policy" (AER, 1968),

4


which is cited 1,789 times on the ‘Web of Science Core Collection’ as of 28 December 2018; and Friedman's "Monetary Policy" (Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 1972), which, by the same date, had been cited nine times. It it is argued that the later, rather less cited, paper is in every respect the better one; and that the reason for the greater citation of the earlier one is that it is falsely believed to be the origin of an important argument. It is concluded that the comparison of these papers offers a dramatic counter-example to the view that citation counts offer a worthwhile measure of the quality or originality of a paper. That proposition is considered further in relation to Friedman's "The Methodology of Positive Economics" (1953). It is argued that in this case, a very high citation count (not measured on the Web of Science) is due to disputes about its meaning. As Friedman himself said, the volume of discussion is indicative of lack of clarity in the paper. Again, then, a very highly cited work is not cited because of its quality. Session 1C Session: Varieties of Marxian Economics Marxian but not Marxist: Albion W. Small’s appraisal on Marx. Guillaume Vallet and Virgile Chassagnon This paper sheds light on the neglected views of Albion W. Small, founder of the department of sociology in Chicago in 1892. More specifically, as he wrote during the ‘Progressive Era’ in the United States and since he had grounding in Political economy, Small was interested in Marx’s ideas. This paper then explains why Small can be affiliated to Marxian, but not Marxist authors. From Small’s appraisal on Marx’s thought, the article raises fundamental issues on the emergence of profit in the workplace, and on the question of the possibility of cooperation between capitalists and workers, what Small believed as necessary and possible. For those reasons, Small’s ideas ring still true today The Theory of Dependence in Economics: history and current debate in Latin America. Isaías Albertin de Moraes and Hugo Márcio Vieira de Almeida Andrade The article lists as unit of analysis the Theory of Dependence that emerged in the 1960s in Latin America. The Theory of Dependency was structured within sociology and economics and its studies innovated by presenting a third-worldview to understand the international economic dynamics. The Theory of Dependency emerged in the mid-1960s with the aim of explaining the failure of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) to develop the region's structuralist proposals (Import substitution industrialization – ISI). The purpose of this article is to analyze the emergence and evolution of the two currents of Dependency Theory: the Weberian and the Marxist. The hypothesis is that both currents continue to be active in Latin America, especially in Brazil, and are being reinvigorated. The Marxist perspective has undergone influences of the

5


studies of World-System Economy and the Weberian aspect is updated with the precepts of neo-institutionalism. The research prioritized as technical procedures a systematic approach through the critical evaluation of the bibliographical and documentary data on the subject, especially the works of: Theotonio dos Santos, Ruy Mauro Marini, Andreas Gunder Frank, Vânia Bambirra, Orlando Caput and Roberto Pizarro, with strong Marxist influence; and Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Enzo Faletto, current Weberian. The work is justified by the importance that Dependency Theory continues to have in Latin America, but is rarely studied in the central countries. Peasants, Landlords, and Risk: Moritaro Yamada on the Duality of the Japanese Capitalism. Masaki Nakabayashi Analysis of the Japanese Capitalism by Moritaro Yamada, a representative Marxian economist in Japan in the 1930s, characterized the Japanese economy at that time with a distinctive viewpoint. It first described the Japanese economy as a two-sector economy that contained the capital stock and the consumer goods sectors. Second, it pointed out the duality composed of the modern sector whose productivity was relatively high and the traditional sector whose productivity was relatively low. Third, it argued that the paternalistic risk-bearing mechanism work in the traditional sector. Fourth, it discussed that while the stability of the society and the continued stagnancy of productivity had coexisted, the structure was then disintegrating. When he presented the picture, economics did not have analytical tools for the two-sector economy, duality, risk sharing, and dynamic transition in the growth path. This paper places his argument on the duality and risk sharing in an analytical framework and rephrases its implications. Session 1D Session: Economics and Other Disciplines - I Jane Jacobs' urban and regional economic theory: a comprehensive approach. Cedric Philadelphe Divry Fifteen years after the last publication of Jane Jacobs (1916-2006), her place as an economist is still up for discussion. The vast majority of her research rests within the realm of economics yet fits uncomfortably with the academic discipline. One exceptional point of compatibility is the concept of “Jacobs externality”: a type of knowledge spillover operating between industries, as defined by Glaeser et al (1992), following Lucas’ lead (1988). However, the “Jacobs externality” remains a narrow interpretation of her work (Desrochers 2007) which masks the continuity in Jacobs’ economic writings and the scale of her analysis: The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) describes the generation of economic diversity at the urban scale; The Economy of Cities (1969) then theorizes the economic behavior of cities as nodes in a

6


larger network of exchange; finally, Cities and the Wealth of Nations (1984) elaborates on the properties of networks of cities. It follows that a broader look at her framework in itself, from a history of economic thought perspective, is missing. In this article, I argue that the current discussion on Jacobs bypasses the core of her contribution as a theoretical system of urban and regional economics, which suffers from partial interpretations. An investigation on the internal coherence of her systematic approach reveals how her economic theory expands from initial insights at the urban level into a political economy, over nearly four decades – providing an original bridge between urban studies and economic theory. Capitalizing the "measure of our ignorance" — post-war tension in R&D economics and accountancy. Sarvnaz Lotfi As the dust of the Second World War began to settle, that which began life in the U.S. as an experimental space in early twentieth century firms became a knowable object of intervention for economics and accountancy alike. Jumpstarted by the war, research and development, or R&D, was pulled into the experimental forays of a new generation of macroeconomic model builders, on the one hand, and tax-minded business accountants, on the other. At stake for macroeconomists was solving the mystery of the newly discovered “residual.” For accountants, the unprecedented reach of federal tax machinery confounded the traditional, albeit rough, distinction between investments in capital and “ordinary and necessary” business expenses. Working within a pragmatic, Deweyian framework, this paper traces the distinct trajectories of post-war macroeconomics and accountancy with an eye to understanding how each came to develop means of valuing R&D. With these trajectories traced, including points of divergence and overlap between them, this paper (1) highlights how R&D is paradoxically rendered a capital item and a (non-capital) expense, and (2) recommends further scrutiny of R&D in order to investigate the potential implications of this paradox for the governance of American society writ large. Radio-Active Farmers: A History of Information on Commodities Markets. Guillaume Noblet and Thomas Delcey History of economics usually considers that financial economics develop information theories at the dawn of the 1960s through the efficient market hypothesis. This article studies the debates around information on (future) markets for agricultural commodities in the United States in the 1920s and the 1930s. We defend that the becoming of information hatched at first for political concerns, and then led to a theoretical representation : markets as the aggregation of scattered information. We advocate that information is a three-side coin. Beyond the theoretical construction of information, we argue that it was at the same time strongly entrenched in a political and material

7


arrangement, namely both the end of the earlier laissez-faire in the United States with a New Deal apotheosis and the availability of radio-transmission. In the 1920s, the United States Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) changed its policy making towards a deeper economic planning of agriculture. The USDA was particularly concerned by the “farmer's problem'” which was to ensure isolated farmers a fair price and to provide them information on the current state of their local, national, and international commodities markets. The USDA and the Agricultural Experiment Stations within the land-grant colleges aimed to educate market participants, especially farmers, thanks to extension services and economic bulletin. The first phase consisted of building empirical knowledge for and on farmers' information through surveys and experiments, and the second of conveying market information in an intelligible way. For the latter, radio-transmission added to newspapers appeared as the technological mean for binding scattered informed individuals—dealers and farmer—over the country. Thus, the market extended through this device and has connected the US farmers. The federal concern for the farmers' problem shaped commodities markets as information markets. Finally, we study how Holbrook Working - an agricultural economist and a pioneered theorist of the efficient market hypothesis—reworked the problem of scattered information in a theoretical way. He did acknowledge the role of the USDA for facilitating the transmission of information from local markets to the whole country, which led him to study the interrelation of local prices. He investigated how this interrelation between commodities prices are determined by well-informed traders. Session 1E Session: Associated Economists The Cowles Commission and Foundation for Research in Economics: Bringing Mathematical Economics and Econometrics from the Fringes of Economics to the Mainstream. Robert W. Dimand Founded in 1932 by a newspaper heir disillusioned by the failure of forecasters to predict the Great Crash, the Cowles Commission promoted the use of formal mathematical and statistical methods in economics, initially through summer research conferences in Colorado and through support of the Econometric Society (of which Alfred Cowles was secretary-treasurer for decades). After moving to the University of Chicago in 1939, the Cowles Commission sponsored works, many later honored with Nobel Prizes but at the time out of the mainstream of economics, by Haavelmo, Hurwicz and Koopmans on econometrics, Arrow and Debreu on general equilibrium, Yntema and Mosak on general equilibrium in international trade theory, Arrow on social choice, Koopmans on activity analysis, Klein on macroeconometric modelling, Lange, Marschak and Patinkin on macroeconomic theory, and Markowitz on portfolio

8


choice, but came into intense methodological, ideological and personal conflict with the emerging “Chicago school.” This conflict led the Cowles Commission to move to Yale in 1955 as the Cowles Foundation, directed by James Tobin (who had declined to move to Chicago to direct it). The Cowles Foundation remained a leader in the more technical areas of economics, notably with Tobin’s “Yale school” of monetary theory, Scarf’s computable general equilibrium, Shubik in game theory, and later Phillips and Andrews in econometric theory but as formal methods in economic theory and econometrics pervaded the discipline of economics, Cowles (like the Econometric Society) became less distinct from the rest of economics. This paper, which will be the New Palgrave entry on Cowles, is an overview of an archivally-based history of the Cowles Commission and Foundation commissioned by the Cowles Foundation. The history of the International Association for Feminist Economics. Rebeca Gomez Betancourt and Camila Orozco Espinel In this project we study the history of non-profit international association created in 1992: The International Association for Feminist Economics (IAFFE) to better understand the present and past status of the debate on women economists, in particular the feminist economists position. We make reference to the history of the quarterly journal published by the association, Feminist Economics, and take advantage of some archives and interview to Diana Strassmann (Carolyn and Fred McManis Distinguished Professor of Humanities at Rice University) who was one of the co-founder of IAFFE and current editor of Feminist Economics. We interview also Alicia Giron who was president in 2014-2015 and who is currently the president of the ECLAC in Chile. We also analyze the role played by many Latin Americans on the creation of the IAFFEE and its evolution. Our main aim is to increase the visibility of IAFFE and understand its place in the community of economists. Who Runs the AEA? Leadership Hierarchy in American Economics. Andrej Svorenčík and Kevin Hoover The American Economic Association (AEA) comprises approximately 16,000 professional economists, belonging mostly to hundreds of universities, government and international agencies, and businesses. It is a key institution of the economics discipline, serving as the public face of the profession and operating the central labor market for economists in the United States, which is also important internationally. The governance of the AEA is formally democratic, although it is widely perceived to be run by a consistently narrow group of prominent economists. To investigate the nature of the leadership of the AEA and to try to understand how that leadership has changed over time as the economics profession has developed in the post-World War II era, we have constructed an extensive biographical database. The database is essentially a complete record of the leadership from 1950-2019, covering the offices of President/President-elect, Vice-president, members of the Executive Board, including both winning and losing candidates, as well as the Nominating

9


Committee, Editorial Advisory Board, editors of the American Economic Review, and members of its board. For each person we have identified education and employment histories and academic and other honors. We use the database to document patterns in the leadership, including identifying a small core set of universities to which the majority of the leadership are affiliated through education and/or employment. We show how the composition of the core has shifted and narrowed with the expansion of graduate education in the postwar period. And we address the question, is the narrow core a response to merit or institutionalization of a self-perpetuating elite? Session 1F Session: Themes in Interwar Economics Capitalism, revolution and reaction: 1919 revisited. Clara Mattei This paper discusses the emergence of austerity rationality as a powerful means in the hands of Italian and British economic experts to rescue capitalism from its political breakdown in the period of its most acute crisis largely produced by the First World War. It looks at how, in all belligerent countries, the abandonment of laissez-faire and the unprecedented State intervention in the economy produced diffused contestation of the foundational pillars of capitalist accumulation: money, private property and wage relations. As the press of the time attests, these categories were no longer understood as the result of the natural functioning of impersonal laws of the market but rather as historical institutions the outcome of political and classist decisions. Indeed, during the war workers were enormously pressured by State intervention that had disciplined labour-relations (especially impeding free movement of labour) and heavily taxed the working classes who were also hit hard by inflation. At the same time war collectivism had secured unprecedented profits and the fortification of the financial-industrial complex. Hence the emergence of the most radical and wide-spread mobilization throughout Europe taking a variety of forms: from spontaneous food-riots, organized strikes, occupation of factories etc. Direct action went hand in hand with articulate economic proposals (often discussed also in Parliament) to substitute the profit motive, wage relations and private property with use value, workers’ control of industry and nationalization. I will discuss austerity as a strong class reaction to these economic proposals. The Function of Interdependence: Economics and Politics in Interwar Projects for a United States of Europe. Liane M. Hewitt In the wake of the First World War’s cataclysm, a coterie of Western European industrialists, statesmen, diplomats and intellectuals formulated ambitious plans for a “United States of Europe.” A unified Europe, they hoped, would secure the continent’s fragile peace. Federation might also strengthen European producers to compete against the threat of American world economic hegemony. In particular, a triad of international cartels, a continental customs union and common market would enable parochial national industries to reach the economies of scale necessary to rival the U.S.’s colossal continental market.

10


Although the historiography insists on a dichotomy between interwar projects for political versus economic European unification, this distinction actually obscures how contemporaries vigorously debated the co-dependency between governmental and private business initiative. Indeed, the relationship between politics and economics was at the heart of interwar experimentation with projects for European integration. Even those who only sought a European economic union, such as the industrialists and statesmen Emile Mayrisch, Étienne Fougère and Louis Loucheur, usually advocated for governments to reach customs agreements that would make way for successful regional cartelization. The paper concludes with some reflections on the broader institutional context of national economic governance during the 1920s and 1930s. Pluralism and Political Economy in Interwar Britain: G.D.H. Cole on Economic Planning. Carlos Eduardo Suprinyak The political philosophy of pluralism enjoyed great currency in Britain during the early decades of the 20th century, as an alternative to the extreme poles of individualism and collectivism. Positing the existence of multiple types of political loyalty and allegiance in each society, pluralism questioned established theories of state sovereignty by advocating that other forms of associational life – churches, clubs, trade unions, etc. – should be recognized as legitimate sources of political power. The criticism of state sovereignty struck a chord within the interwar intellectual climate, when many analysts of international politics advocated the suppression of sovereign states as the only path to a durable peace – a theme with strong repercussions for the postwar European settlement. In an age of increasing state intervention in economic affairs, however, this fragmentation of power was also a matter of concern for political economy. The paper will explore how pluralism translated into an agenda for the political administration of economic life, focusing on the contributions to the theory of economic planning published in the 1930s by G. D. H. Cole, the foremost British advocate of guild socialism. More broadly, the study will help recast these topics as part of a larger history of the social sciences in interwar Britain. Session 2A Session: The Political Uses of Quantitative Social Sciences Building mathematically the Social Insurances. The work of Jacques Ferdinand-Dreyfus (1918-1930). Fabrice Cahen This paper will discuss the activity of a left-wing actuary, Jacques Ferdinand-Dreyfus, who occupied an official position at the Ministry of Work from 1912 to 1940. His work proved crucial in the mathematical design of the French social insurances system as defined by the 1928-1930 Laws. This communication will try to disentangle the different aspects and purposes of Ferdinand-Dreyfus’ intense activity: forecasting, convincing and educating. Indeed, Ferdinand-

11


Dreyfus considered that a solid understanding of the social state’s mechanisms was not only a bureaucratic technical requirement, but also a precondition for social support. The Physiocratic Politics of Numbers. Christine Théré and Loic Charles The paper will present the origins of the empirical economic analysis of François Quesnay and the physiocrats. More specifically, it will show that Quesnay’s conviction of the superiority of his economic analysis was based on the fact that it was able to provide a rigorous and quantified measurement of agricultural economy. Hence, the authors will argue that the development of Quesnay’s theoretical framework went hand in hand with that of a set of economic measurements. The final section will detail the debate on petite culture and grande culture to show that it revolved mainly on the comparison of the costs and productivity of oxen and horses for plowing. Conflicting Values and Facts: an enquiry on Bolshevism in the 1920s. Marine Dhermy-Mairal This paper will study an enquiry on bolshevism made by the International Labor Organization in the 1920s, which displays a mixture of scientific, ideological and political stances: comparing reality to hearsays through quantitative and qualitative knowledge, restoring peaceful economic cooperation with the bolshevist regime, securing the working conditions and legal status of foreign enterprises located in Russia, showing that social reformism was much more desirable. By studying the enquiry’s context of production, methodology and political consequences, it will question the classifications used by civil servants, who pretended to describe a “reality” which nonetheless kept escaping from any occidental viewpoint. Political economy, economic expertise and policy making in France (1750-1789). Loic Charles The paper will make use of a detailed case study on the debate on the liberalization of grain trade – perhaps the single most important economic reform implemented before the French revolution – to discuss the issue of how the huge economic literature that was produced at that time framed the process through which the French royal administration proclaimed free trade in grain in 1763-1764 and assessed its results. He will show that the change was made possible by the shift from a language of rights dominated by the search of legal and historical precedents to a language dominated by the computation of economic costs and benefits and the related search for quantitative facts to push certain economic policies. Session 2B Session: Rational Decisions and Rational Expectations The efficient market hypothesis and rational expectations: How did they meet? Thomas Delcey and Francesco Sergi

12


The efficient market hypothesis (EMH) and the rational expectations (RE) are today distinctive theoretical benchmarks for mainstream approaches to, respectively, financial (macro)economics and macroeconomics. Moreover, academics in each of this two fields associate the EMH and RE. The ground for this claim is that the EMH and the REH are both equilibrium concepts, closely related (or even equivalent), and mutually consistent. For instance, recent generations of economics undergraduates have learnt, through Frederic Mishkin’s popular textbook The Economics of Money, Banking, and Financial Markets, that “[the EMH] is just an application of rational expectations to the pricing of stocks and other securities” (2016, 195). This association is also quite common in DSGE macroeconomics: In a recent and well-known symposium about the current state of macroeconomics, the editors’ introduction states that EMH and the RE are “the two critical assumptions underpinning DSGE model” (Vines and Wills, 2018, 20). Historians have produced a substantial amount of research on the history of both concepts and their respective impact on either financial (macro)economics (see for instance Jovanovic, 2008) or macroeconomics (see for instance De Vroey, 2016). But these are so far two separate histories: the EMH and RE have been analysed as if each derived from a specific and distinctive lineage of individual and collective works, with no substantial connections with the lineage of the other; each concept is considered as developing within the boundaries of its specific field. Hence, little is known about the interactions between the literature on EMH and the one on RE: How and when the EMH and RE came to be considered as equivalent concepts? Our paper investigates this issue. After briefly reviewing the current literature associating the two concepts, we proceed backward in time looking for the origins of this association between the EMH and RE. We suggest that this association (as it is understood today) became widespread in the 1980s: Most works establishing this relation were published during this period. Our paper reviews most of these contributions but it focuses on two books published in 1983: Mishkin’s A Rational Expectations Approach to Macroeconometrics: Testing Policy Ineffectiveness and Efficient-Markets Models and Steven Sheffrin’s Rational Expectations. Our view is that these two books served as benchmark in framing the understanding of the EMH as “just an application” to the specific domain of stock price determination of the equilibrium concept resulting from RE. The roots of such a vision have to be find in the 1970s; although, during this period, the development of RE in macroeconomics have been largely distinct from the literature in financial economics about the EMH. However, at the end of the 1970s, Lucas’s (1978) paper played a pivotal role in breaching the separation between the two literatures and therefore associate the EMH and RE. In his paper, Lucas explicitly set a “methodological” roadmap to “bring financial and economic theory” together (444), i.e. to reinterpret the EMH as one implication of the equilibrium concept arising from RE. We discuss how this path was immediately taken by some Chicago scholars, notably Mishkin and, partially,

13


Fama himself (1981). We suggest then that these contributions have been reframing substantially the debate within financial economics, as the association of RE and EMH has driven theoretical and methodological changes into the definition of the EMH itself. Mário Henrique Simonsen’s critique to the rational expectations. Jessica Nascimento This paper aims to expose the criticism of Mário Henrique Simonsen towards the rational expectations hypothesis. This criticism is based on the claim that the hypothesis as conceived by the first new classical economists was unrealistic, since it prevented the occurrence of a consistent increase in the inflation rate. The lack of reasonableness of this hypothesis is easily verified when one observes the Brazilian inflationary dynamics in the highlighted period. The incorporation of rational expectations into the mainstream of macroeconomics brought with it the challenge of justifying the occurrence of inflationary inertia, a theme in which Simonsen had become one of the main references. Relying on the tools provided by game theory Simonsen discusses an alternative proposal to rational expectations and justifies the existence of inflationary inertia relying on the concept of knightian rationality. How Economics Became a Science of Discipline. Jean-Baptiste Fleury and Alain Marciano In her recent book, Prisoners of Reason, Sonja Amadea studies how the concept of strategic rationality, inherited from game theory, permeates a great number of subfields of contemporary social thought, from social contract theory to the economic analysis of law or evolutionary explanations of the “selfish gene.” This particular representation of the rational agent departs, to her, from the one identified with “classical liberalism”. In the latter, people were assumed to recognize human dignity and others’ rights; they are expected to naturally adopt pro-social behaviors and seek to exchange with others, and adopt a “no-harm” principle. In the former, the strategic agent maximizes his ends whatever the means, even if it means to cheat, to gain at the expense of others, thus, to adopt anti-social behavior. “Solidarity and good will are invalidated.” First, one may take issue with Amadae’s portrayal of social sciences’ permeation to the strategic agent, but secondly, and this is related, one wonders when the shift (if there was such a shift) between one representation to the other ever took place within economics. This is the goal of this paper: to retrace the emergence of economists’ portrayal of agents as being rational in a very narrowly-construed way, as being devoid of any attention for others, devoid of any a-priori inclination to cooperate, exchange with others, work hard, or behave ethically. Thus, because of this behavior, agents should be disciplined – deterred and punished.

14


Certainly, the representation of the economic agent in postwar economics is multifaceted. Strategic rationality as exposed by Amadae was being developed in game theory, notably with the prisoner’s dilemma, but many economists from various backgrounds were not really focusing on agents’ anti-social inclinations, or did not consider them as a source of problem for society. Chicago economists following Friedman, for instance, focused on the competitive equilibrium rather than on the details of rational choice, and considered many motivations for individual behavior. Others focused on bounded rationality: the problem underlined was related agent’s imperfect computing abilities. Studies of market failures, for instance Bator’s, focused on many sources for the equilibrium’s sub-optimality quite apart from individuals’ potential malevolence. Perhaps one clear instance of early commonly-accepted strategic behavior was to be found in Samuelson’s and others theories of public finance, which considered that agents would willingly conceal their willingness to pay in order to avoid paying taxes, though others, notably James Buchanan, denied that phenomenon should be a source of concern. By the 1970s and early 1980s, one finds many instances of theories built on the premises that agents are no longer assumed to take into consideration basic social rules. These theories would then make coordination mechanisms, markets or government intervention, devices to discipline this narrowly-construed selfish rational behavior. Obviously, the growing influence of game theory plays a part in that narrative, but other telling instances are to be found in less game-theoretic-prone subfields. Such examples are: Gary Becker’s early economic analysis of legal rules, premised on the assumption that criminal behavior is simply the result of a cost-benefit calculus. Criminal law and fines would then deter and discipline bad behavior through the correct amount of incentives. Another interesting example comes from Joseph Stiglitz’s and Carl Shapiro’s 1984 paper on efficiency wages, conceived as a way to “discipline” shirking workers. Others are to be found in the period regarding the literature on the voting paradox and later on the ways to design strategic-proof voting mechanisms. Savage and the Ellsberg Paradox: evidence from the archives. Carlo Zappia This paper explores archival material concerning the reception of Leonard J. Savage’s foundational work of Bayesian decision-making among fellow decision theorists. The focus is on the criticisms raised in the early 1960s by Daniel Ellsberg and William Fellner, who were supporters of the newly developed Bayesian viewpoint to decision-making, but could not understand Savage’s insistence on the strict version he shared with Bruno de Finetti. Although the episode is well-known − thanks to the so-called Ellsberg Paradox and the extensive reference made to it in current decision theory − Savage’s reaction to his critics has never been examined. Indeed, Savage never really engaged with the issue in his published writings. However, the private exchange with de Finetti, Ellsberg and Fellner shows that Savage’s reaction to the generalization advocated by his correspondents was more nuanced than what his published

15


works suggest. In particular, Savage’s defence of the normative value of his theory against counterexamples such as Ellsberg’s did not prevent him from admitting that he would not have been blind to a more realistic axiomatic system, should the critics be able to provide one. Session 2C Session: Development Economics in the Post WWII Period An American Economist in a Developmental State: Marion Clawson and Israeli Agricultural Policy, 1953-1955. Daniel Schiffman and Eli Goldstein Marion Clawson spent 1953-1955 in Israel as a member of the Economic Advisory Staff (EAS), a group of US economists invited by the Israeli Government. Clawson, a protégé of John Black and Mordecai Ezekiel, brought to Israel extensive US government experience (economist, USDA, 1929-1947; Director, Bureau of Land Management, 1948-1953). Clawson found that Israel’s agricultural planning contained “almost no analysis of...economic feasibility.“ To remedy this shortcoming, he authored over 40 memoranda on Israeli agriculture and irrigation. His major recommendations were as follows: reduce irrigation costs by 20%-40%, by “shifting…irrigation development to…relatively low cost areas” and exploiting economies of scale and gravity; increase average irrigated farm size from 1.25-2.5 to 10 acres minimum; freeze new agricultural settlements until the number of half-developed settlements has been reduced from 300 to 100; and establish at most ten new settlements in the Negev desert over 5-7 years. The Israeli government strongly rejected Clawson’s recommendations. In particular, Finance Minister Levi Eshkol rejected the EAS agricultural plan, because it assumed that agricultural settlements would end 50 km south of Tel Aviv, rather than 170 km as desired by Eshkol. For the government, state building, especially defense, Negev settlement and immigrant absorption, trumped productivity and efficiency. As Clawson put it, “much of the world does not value economic efficiency as highly as do most economists.” But in the long run, Eshkol was proven right: Today, Negev agriculture is a tremendous success, having overcome the weaknesses that Clawson identified. Development space versus small open economy: debating the Portuguese economy in the turbulent seventies. João Rodrigues, Ana Costa, and José Reis After the democratic revolution of the 25th of April, 1974, which ended the longest dictatorship in Western Europe, an opportunity opened up for more fundamental discussions about the future trajectory of the Portuguese economy among economists of radically different persuasions. This communication intends to frame and interpret those debates, in a period of intense and multiscalar turbulence, as an opposition between those economists of a neoclassical and/or neoliberal inclination and those of a more developmentalist bent, either structuralist or Marxist. The first type of economists, most of which

16


had just concluded their PhD's in the USA, used the concept of the small open economy both as a descriptive and prescriptive term, emphasizing the need for policies that recognized economic interdependence and that opened-up the economy. The second, more attuned to the economic goals of the socialist-leaning democratic Constitution emphasized the need to gain space for development through more attention to internal unbalances of the productive system and even a more cautious and limited economic integration. We argue that in practice the space for these debates, in the public sphere and in academia, closed quickly in the early eighties due to a series of factors, both internal and external. Attention will be given to the possible overdetermination of national debates among economists, as public intellectuals in a European periphery, by international trends that had a huge impact in Portugal. The views of social scientists on poverty and inequality in Uruguay between 1950 and 1985. Andrea Vigorito and Andrés Rius In their use as concepts in social science research, the meanings of “poverty” or “inequality” are far from self-evident. They are instead, name-tags that acquire more precise meaning through the negotiations that occur within and between research communities (Hands, 2001, chapter 5). This paper adopts the constructivist perspective that generalizes the previous assertion to, for example, concepts, beliefs, tools, measures and outcomes. These approaches are put to work, first, to characterize the intellectual and social environment in which knowledge about “poverty” and “inequality” was produced, and to identify and analyze factors and mechanisms of change. All this with the intention of rescuing lessons from the earlier stages of conceptualization; in particular challenging fatalism and inevitability of the most recent theories or approaches. To attain the project’s objectives, we analyze the studies that investigate empirically the phenomena of poverty and inequality in Uruguay between 1950 and 1985. From a review of published work and grey literature, we identify the prevailing concepts, the analytical tools and sources of data. The paper’s justification should mention the existing knowledge gaps due to the neglect of poverty and distribution studies in Uruguay until recently. Comparisons of how research was done in the 1950s, 1975 or even in 1985, are not just scarce but under-exploited as a source of ideas, inspirations, or concerns. Although there are some studies on the income distribution over a period of time, they differ markedly in objectives, methods and outcomes from what is involved in “poverty/inequality studies”. The latter tend to be more thoughtful in conceptualizing the links between poverty and redistribution and poverty and stratification and examine both as more interrelated phenomena. We rely on an extensive literature review, archival work and interviews with several key players, to compile a collection of project-relevant sources. The evidence gathered so far includes responses from four senior experts who were crucial in the first national efforts to build systems of labor market and living conditions surveys at the household level. The interviewees tell consistent

17


stories (despite their occasional disagreements), on the origins of conceptualization about poverty and inequality. The views coincide, for example, on the importance of having trained experts in data-intensive fields (e.g., statistics, accounting), build the critical mass of expertise to demand research funding from governments; and the little enthusiasm from the political elites about systems of social indicators, and how international organizations can put social conditions in local agendas. Session 2D Session: Theory and Empiricism How (and how much) does theory matter? Revisiting the relationship between theory and empirics in the economic controversies over the minimum wage since the early XXth century. Jerome Gautie In his seminal paper on the history of minimum wage (MW) debates, Leonard (2000) noted that ("[..] what is striking through much of the twentieth century is the extent to which the application of economics to labor markets remains almost entirely theoretical." Since the mid-1990s, and the emergence of the so-called “New Minimum Wage Research”, the observer may have the feeling that the imbalance is exactly the opposite: MW economic debates seem nowadays overwhelmingly empirical, with fierce debates over the relevance of different estimation techniques. This could be considered as a good illustration of the recent "applied turn" taken by the whole economics discipline (Backhouse and Cherrier, 2017). But this shift from the domination of theory to the domination of empirics disserves a closer look. Empirical matters were key concerns in the early economic contributions on the MW, and theory was most often "embedded" in application. Symmetrically, theoretical concerns played an important role in the emergence and development of the "new MW research" over the past 25 years. Our contention is that rather than the decline of theory and the parallel rise of empirics, the history of MW controversies provides a good illustration of the reconfigurations of the relationship between theory and empirics from one period to another, and of their respective role in the dynamics of economic knowledge. H. Gregg Lewis and the Formation of Post-war ‘Chicago’ Empirical Microeconomics. Chung-Tang Cheng This paper studies the intellectual history of H. Gregg Lewis (1914-1992) to understand his role in the development of post-war ‘Chicago’ approach in empirical microeconomics. Lewis’s intellectual history is divided threefold: an empirical pluralist, a labour economist, and a ‘Chicago’ empirical economist. I document relative historical contexts in each stage and explained how his works evolved from purely econometrics in the 1940s to the ‘Chicago’ reduced-form modelling in the mid-1960s. Furthermore, I examine how the methodological rationalisation of ‘Chicago’ approach by Biddle and Hemmermesh (2017) was actualised in early labour economics. This study concludes that Lewis’s practical

18


influence instead of Friedman’s methodology (1953) played a crucial in forming the post-war ‘Chicago’ approach as an empirical consensus in the 1970s. The legacy of British Empiricism on the causal structure of microeconomic theory. Thomas Vass Individual choice behaviour is considered the basic data for microeconomic analysis. Ultimately, microeconomic explanation is considered complete only if it reduces economic phenomena to intentional states of individuals. General equilibrium theory, for instance, entails a clear causal structure where individual preferences and technology determine production and distribution patterns. With the request for microfoundations this methodological constraint is also imposed on macroeconomic theory. However, the origin of this methodological approach is not well identified. This paper locates the historical roots of this methodological approach in the theory of the subject emerging in eighteenth century English Empiricism, exemplified by David Hume. With these thinkers a new view of the subject emerged, where the subject is seen as the source of individual choice, as a point of irreducible and non-transferable interest. Such a new conceptualization of the subject opened new theoretical questions to British thinkers, such as those addressed by utilitarianism and contract theory. It also opened the sphere of political economy as the independent mechanisms regulating the interplay of a multiplicity of non-totalizable subjective interests. This lineage of thought later gave rise to the emergence of homo economicus in economic thought. The representation of human behaviour as a utility function is heavily indebted to this view of man. By insisting on the individual as the origin of choice, the English Empiricist heritage constrained later economists from asking “the other way around” - what about the macrofoundations of individual behaviour? Karl Brunner’s Philosophy of Science: Macroeconomics through the Lens of Logical Empiricism. Kevin Hoover Best known as a monetary economist and prominent proponent of monetarism, Karl Brunner was deeply knowledgeable about the philosophy of science and attempted to explicitly integrate logical empiricist thinking, derived in some measure from his engagement with the work of the philosopher Hans Reichenbach, into his economics. His philosophical commitments are clearly reflected in this empirical work on monetary economics, his monetarist analysis, and in his critical approach to econometrics, microfoundations, and the New Classical macroeconomics. Broadly, Brunner was a supporter of both Friedman’s monetarism and his philosophy of science. In both cases, Brunner arrived at his positions independently and found Friedman’s positions lacking with respect to formal theory. He reworked Friedman’s methodology of positive economics in a

19


manner more congenial to logical empiricism and advocated a monetarism that was critical of, but more closely engaged than Friedman’s, with theoretical developments in monetary economics – e.g., with the “New View” of money associated with the work of Gurley and Shaw and of Tobin – was well as with the work on empirical macroeconometric modeling associated with Klein, Modigliani, Ando, and others. Subsequently, he developed substantive methodological criticism of the econometric practices of empirical macroeconomists. He occupied a middle ground in that he defended the empirical methods of the St. Louis monetarists, defended aggregate macroeconomics against demands for microfoundations as a sine qua non of acceptable macroeconomics, and attacked the overweening claims of real-business-cycle and dynamic-stochastic-business-cycle (DSGE) modelers to have discovered the only valid methodology. Brunner was skeptical of empirical progress in economics. Significantly, the skepticism was not of its possibility, but of the practices of economists seen through the lens of his philosophy of science. He believed that economists had paid too little attention to developing the kind of theories that were susceptible to critical resolution of empirical implications. Session 2E Session: Economists and Statistical Analysis Statistical Inference in Economics in the 1920s and 1930s: The Crop and Livestock Forecasts of the US. Department of Agriculture. Jeff E. Biddle Statistical inference is the process of drawing conclusions from samples of statistical data about things not fully described or recorded in those samples. During the 1920s, economists in the US articulated a general approach to statistical inference which downplayed the value of the inferential measures derived from probability theory that later came to be central to the idea of statistical inference in economics. This approach is illustrated by the practices of economists of the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the US Department of Agriculture, who on a regular basis analyzed statistical samples to forecast supplies of various agricultural products. Forecasting represent an interesting case for studying the development of inferential methods, as the analyst receives regular feedback on the effectiveness of his inferences when forecasts are compared to actual events. The Debate over Jewish Employments Structure in the Journal for Demography and Statistics of the Jews (1905-1931). Nicolas Vallois The late 19th century saw the multiplication of statistical studies on the Jewish populations. This literature is now known as “Jewish Statistics” or “Jewish Social Science” (hereafter JSS). This article focuses on the articles published in der Zeitschrift für Demographie und Statistik der Juden (Journal for Demography and Statistics of the Jews, hereafter ZDSJ). The ZDSJ was the main journal in JSS and appeared from 1905 until 1931.

20


Existing scholarship on Jewish statistics has either focused on the influence of Zionism (Hart, 2000) or eugenics and race theory (Efron, 1994). Our claim is that JSS can also be related to the history of economic thought and treated as an early type of empirical economics. The main economic concern in JSS was the question of Jewish “occupational” or employment structure: Jews were seen as excessively concentrated in commercial activities, thus raising a debate over Jewish “productivization”, i.e. on whether and how an occupational shift from commerce to industry and agriculture could occur (Kahan, 1986, p.43). As suggests both the intellectual profile of the main contributors to the ZDSJ, and the academic ambition of the journal, we argue that JSS was a by-product of the German historical school in economics. We then analyze the way the ZDSJ contributed to the debate on Jewish “productivization”. Numbers played an ambivalent role in this discussion: though contributors to the ZDSJ were certainly committed toward empirical rigor, statistics served also apologetic purposes, to disprove antisemitic claims about Jewish economic behavior, while Jewish statisticians themselves were not themselves free from economic stereotypes. In the end, the ZDSJ had two important economic and statistical legacies. It firstly provided a vast amount of “cleaned” economic data that could and has been used in subsequent research. Authors in the ZDSJ also developed a specific sense of reflexivity toward occupational categories, which led to a critical approach toward self-employment and precarious work. Reforming Political Economy using Statistics: The Words and Deeds of Quetelet and Whewell. Shin Kubo The establishment of the ‘statistical’ section in the British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) was the result of a sort of coup d’état instigated by a few at the third annual meeting of the society in 1833 at Cambridge. Among the few were T. R. Malthus, C. Babbage, R. Jones, and, most importantly, W. Whewell. Each of these Cantabrigians felt somewhat uneasy about orthodox, or Ricardian, economics and sought an alternative research programme in lieu of that which did not seem to them to be sufficiently inductive or empirical. It is interesting to note that among the members of that coup d’état was A. Quetelet, a Belgian who is generally known as the father of modern statistics and who had since the late 1820s considered how to apply mathematics to social studies. Whewell, on the other hand, had since much the same time criticised orthodox economics in terms of methodology by affirming that economics should not be mathematico-deductive at least at that moment, and invited Quetelet to the 1833 meeting of the BAAS. What was their alliance, bearing in mind that their ‘statistical movement’ culminated in the establishment of the BAAS section but did not last long?

21


The present paper aims to shed light on this question, considering their own attempts to bring ‘statistics’ to bear upon the domain hitherto occupied allegedly by political economists. Some Statistical Studies at the Harvard Economic Research Project (HERP). Amanar Akhabbar In the years 1936-1941, Leontief introduced his empirical work on interindustry relations, later named input-output analysis. The accuracy and reliability of inferences drew from this input-output framework critically depend on the actual stability of estimated input-output coefficients. Although in the theoretical model of Leontief coefficients are assumed to be fixed (constant), the statistical accuracy of this assumption raised a fixity issue. In 1948, Leontief created the Harvard Economic Research Project (HERP), a research center dedicated to input-output studies. At the HERP, Leontief put the fixity problem among the Project's research priorities. In 1951, in the second edition of his Structure of American Economy, he published the first statistical assessment of this problem. He proposed to measure the “discrepancy” introduced by the fixity assumption through the standard error of predicted industrial outputs computed from them. In his “empirical test of the constancy of input-output ratios,” he attempted to show that “the assumption of fixed coefficients [is] tolerably acceptable for pragmatic purposes of short-run analysis.” Later on, this problem was mainly dealt with by other HERP members and especially by Anne P. Carter. We will examine the specific approach of HERP members to tackle from a statistical point of view this fixity issue. This approach would illustrate Leontief's particular statistical methodology constructed in defiance of "sophisticated" econometrics. Advocating "direct inference" it focused on direct observation rather than "indirect inference", i.e. econometrics. Session 2F Session: American Economists, 19th and Early 20th Centuries Thorstein Veblen on Principles of Free Trade. Noriko Ishida The purpose of this paper is to give a more persuasive answer to the question whether Thorstein Veblen (1857-1929) was an advocate of free trade. It does so by looking at not only his argument about scientific methodology in economics in the early part of his career, but also peace-building after the Great War in the later part of his career. In other words, it explains the seeming contradiction between his rejection of laissez-faire doctrine and his affirmation of free trade. The explanation is based on the following two issues. First, it explores the relevant content of Veblen’s criticism of laissez-faire in the context of the use of a scientific methodology in economics. Second, it examines the reason why he responded favorably to free trade principles in 1917. Thus, the paper will: (1) resolve the seeming contradiction mentioned above; (2) provide a better

22


explanation of the positional relation between Veblen and other institutionalists; and (3) show that his acceptance of free trade principles at the end of the Great War included an ambitious view that suggested the formation of a new international pacific order regarding the trade and investment that went beyond the serviceability of free trade for the domestic economy. Economic growth was no enigma to 19th-century American economists Henry C. Carey and E. Peshine Smith. Simon Vézina Recent articles, such as those of Robert U. Ayres, B. Warr Bernard C. Beaudreau, try to bring back to the fore the central role of energy in economic growth as essential if we ever want to achieve a more realistic economic theory. If they clearly demonstrated how modern neoclassical economic theory doesn’t include this material process in their economic theory, when, especially in the case of Beaudreau, he looks back in history, he found traces of those ideas in Adam Smith, Karl Marx and William Stanley Jevons without them integrating it in their overall theory, he completely overlooks the work of American economists such as Henry C. Carey and E. Peshine Smith. Indeed, by sticking to canonic writers in the Samuelson’s family tree of economics and not exploring those belonging to what the economic historian Erik S. Reinert called the Other Canon family trees, they felt to discover that the idea of the fundamental role of energy in the growth process was not only already well thought of in the 19th century, but was at the core of the economic theory of the so-called American «protectionist» such as Henry C.Carey and E. Peshine Smith. This paper shall demonstrate this point and try to understand the policy implication they concluded from it and doing so, maybe help to answer the question raised by Beaudreau as to why Marx and Jevons, though having recognized somewhat the role of energy in the growth process, eluded it in their economic theory. C. S. Peirce’s Economy of Mathematical Research and Computation. James Wible One of Peirce’s recognized contributions was his application of economic ideas to scientific research. His 1879 “Note on the Theory of the Economy of Research” is now recognized as an important contribution to an economic understanding of science. Later in his career, Peirce extended his understanding of the economy of research to mathematics and computation. He conceived of both pure and applied mathematics and mathematically facilitated scientific inquiry as having an important economic dimension. He also seemed to hold that mathematics and logical reasoning increased the efficiency of inquiry in whatever domain it is practiced. Peirce’s economy of mathematical research is part of his philosophy of mathematics which can be contrasted and compared to the philosophies of mathematics that have influenced the development of mathematical economics in the 20th century. While those philosophies have been in some sense “applied” to mathematical economics, none has a significant economic dimension. Similarly Peirce’s philosophy of mathematics invites comparison to Lakatos’ views on mathematics. Peirce’s economy of mathematical research may provide

23


an alternative perspective of the role of mathematics in science, economics, statistics, and human thought than those conceptions of mathematics which have influenced economists to this point in the history of economic ideas. The Progressive Era and International Trade. Travis Freidman and Bruce Elmslie Since the founding of the United States through the Gilded Age, American Economists were generally in favor of economic protectionism. Then, as the 19th century ended, economists became staunch free trade advocates. At the same time, a major political shift occurred in the United States which began the first American Progressive Era. American Progressivism dramatically altered the way that American Economists thought of their discipline and its relation to the state. Progressive political and philosophical ideology should not have resulted in the American Economists becoming free trade advocates. Due in no small part to their abhorrence to laissez faire policies and Progressivism belief in an increased role for the State in regulating market activity, one would expect policies of protectionism to continue. The key to understanding the adoption of free trade philosophy comes in understanding how progressives justified conflicting aims of the movement. Specifically, Progressives paradoxical faith in gains from economies of scale and firm consolidation, in the power of the all-knowing technocrat, and in the growing explanatory power of statistics helps to explains why economists moved counter to the cultural zeitgeist that was reshaping the discipline into what we know today. Session 3A Session: Hidden Agencies – Economists and Political Economy under Authoritarian Rule-I Economists and the Authoritarian Regime in Portugal (1933-1974): From Adherence to Dissent. Jose Luis Cardoso This contribution aims at presenting the role played by different generations of Portuguese economists who were active throughout the authoritarian regime of the Estado Novo (New State), between 1933 and 1974. Many of them served the regime as ideologues and mentors, while a significant number of professional economists successfully managed to create an alternative to conventional, orthodox beliefs. Corporatist economists faithful to Salazar’s rule have produced a rationale for a major economic role of government. However, a similar claim for state economic intervention was also put forward by Keynesian economists. Though inspired in different ideological and philosophical presuppositions, these streams of thought shared strong criticisms towards the neoclassical notion of a market equilibrium reached through the action of a purely spontaneous mechanism. Therefore, the notion of market failure and the need to ensure a feasible social and economic order were at the very heart of the arguments developed by both corporatists and Keynesians, so as to justify the economic role of government.

24


The tacit acceptance of Keynesian arguments by political leaders of Salazar’s regime paved the way to the emergence of authorised voices of dissent. It is precisely this convergence that helps to explain the relevance of economists as a group of acknowledged experts with a key role on the post-war discussion of issues related to social policy, economic development and the building up of the welfare state under an authoritarian regime. Economics under Authoritarian rule: The Jan. L Sadie Study/Report and the Rhodesian Government and Economic Planning during UDI, Sanctions and War, 1965-1979. Tinashe Nyamunda and Sibanengi Ncube The work of Economists proved indispensable to the development of the settler economy in Southern Rhodesia to 1965. For example, William J. Barber’s 1961 study on labour and the economics of central Africa, although effectively challenged in 1970 by Giovanni Arrighi, summarised the basic elements of colonial thinking and policy-making and also influenced the ways in which the economy was thought about in the colony. However, the context in which these developments took place was influenced by imperial-colonial connections and the politics of knowledge production. In fact, Barber’s work had the DNA of W. Arthur Lewis’ 1954 publication on Economic Development with unlimited Labour Supplies. But Rhodesia’s Unilateral Declaration of Independence from Britain on 11 November 1975 cut these imperial-colonial links and shifted the mind-set of the colonial government on the economy. Suddenly, economic orthodoxy gave way to coordinated political planning in the auspices of Rhodesia’s Ministerial Economic Coordination Committee, which closely planned and controlled the Rhodesian economy. But even though the wisdom of the discipline was not completely abandoned, the authoritarian Ian Smith regime that presided over UDI for close to fifteen years had a different relationship to economists in comparison previous colonial governments. Nowhere is this more visible than in the case of the hiring of Stellenbosch Economics Professor Jan L Sadie as a consultant on the Rhodesian economy in 1967. Using the example of the Sadie recommendations and how they were ultimately rejected by the Rhodesian government, just as in the case of other suggestions by the local economics community, the paper examines how the changing political context informed the state’s approach to the economy. It also interrogates the political context in which the economics disciplines thrives and its limitations in an authoritarian context. Finally, the study interrogates the extent to which economics can, positively or negatively, influence economic processes. The caveat in this narrative is that, despite ignoring the suggestions of economists, the Rhodesian economy thrived for the most part during UDI in spite of international ostracism, sanctions and war. Had the government followed the prescriptions of these economists, it is unclear what the consequences would have been. But a reading of the thinking behind the Smith regime’s rejection of orthodox prescriptions may reveal of just how effective political considerations are to economic processes in the same way that economic convention may be limited.

25


Economic debates under authoritarian regimes: the case of the income distribution controversy in Brazil in the 1970s. Mauro Boianovsky and Alexandre Andrada The paper investigates the political and economic contexts of the controversy about the causes of the significant increase of income concentration in Brazil measured by the 1970 census. That was the most important economic debate under the military dictatorship that run the country from 1964 to 1985. The perceived sharp increase in income inequality posed a challenge to the economic legitimation of the military regime, which had by the early 1970s achieved high rates of economic growth accompanied by falling inflation. We discuss the reasons behind the relatively open debate during a period of political repression, as well as its international dimension as reflected in institutions such as the World Bank. Session 3B Session: Public Choice A Missed Criterion of Common-Pool Resources Institutions. Dagmar Schulze Heuling According to Elinor Ostrom, both provision and maintenance of common-pool resources depend on the institutions that govern them. A successful operation of the institutions is likely if the following criteria are met: clear boundaries of participants and resources, congruence of rules and local conditions, collective-choice arrangement, monitoring, graduated sanctions for rule-violators, mechanisms for conflict-resolution, minimal recognition and non-intervention by external authorities and, for larger systems, a set of nested enterprises. However, throughout her writings one can find scattered mentions of another criterion on which the institution’s establishment and continued existence depend: non-interference of powerful groups or individuals. Surprisingly, this is not systematically elaborated nor integrated in the analytical framework. Therefore, the nature, source and mode of action of the powerful remain unclear, which has led critics to label power as a blind spot of Ostrom’s.

My paper first provides a reconstruction of this criterion and subsequently discusses if and how it could be reconciled with Ostrom’s overall approach. In closing I will address the question whether power indeed was a blind spot of Elinor Ostrom, or if the respective critique is misreading her. James M. Buchanan on the Nature of Choice: Ontology, Artifactual man, and the Constitutional Moment in Political Economy. Paul Lewis and Malte Dold Historians of economic thought are paying greater attention to issues of social ontology (that is, to the assumptions that economists make about the nature of social reality). In this paper, we contribute to this burgeoning literature by exploring the hitherto neglected way in which James Buchanan invoked

26


ontological considerations, concerning in particular the nature of human choice, both in criticizing neoclassical economics and also in setting out his own contributions to constitutional political economy. We focus on Buchanan’s account of man as an artifactual being who has the capacity to choose the kind of person he wishes to become, in particular by selecting the kind of preferences he wishes to have and the kinds of rules under which he wishes to live. We discuss how Buchanan’s thinking on this issue was shaped by his mentor Frank Knight and by the work of British economist G.L.S. Shackle. We then explain why Buchanan was at pains explicitly to describe his argument as ontological in nature. Finally, we contend that Buchanan’s approach would have benefited from further ontological elaboration, in two ways: first, because his arguments would have been stronger had he said more about the attributes of the human agent that help to secure their engagement in thinking creatively about themselves and the rules of society (‘the constitutional moment’); and second because his account would benefit from a deeper discussion of the interplay between human agency and social structure, especially with regard to the question of which structures might constrain or facilitate creative choices of the kind by which he set such great store. A Controversy About Pluralism: of Anthony Downs's Influence on Gordon Tullock. Julien Grandjean The history of the public choice theory and/or its founding fathers is the subject of a growing number of works from economists such as, inter alia, Boettke (1998), Boettke & Palagashvili (2014), Fleury & Marciano (2018), Lemieux (2004, 2015), Marciano (2009, 2013, 2015, 2016), Medema (2000, 2011, 2013) or Wagner (2003, 2005, 2018); to other social scientists like the sociologist Milan Zafirovski (2002) or even the controverted historian Nancy McLean (2017). This paper participates in the formation of this history. In particular, it will focus on the role of Gordon Tullock and the anti-majoritarian view of the decision-making process promoted in the famous Calculus of Consent, written along with James M. Buchanan. This paper shows that Tullock has already worked on the issue of majority voting prior to the writing of his common book with Buchanan. Between 1959 and 1961 in particular, while Tullock was a postdoctoral fellow at the Thomas Jefferson Center for Studies in Political Economy and Social Philosophy at the University of Virginia, he had an interesting interaction with Anthony Downs about majority decision-making process in a democracy. This interaction that consists in a correspondence between Tullock, Downs and their editors can be found for a part in the Gordon Tullock papers of the Hoover Institution archives. It gave birth to some major articles by the two authors such as The Problem of Majority Voting by Tullock in 1959, Why the Government Budget is Too Small in a Democracy and Problems of Majority Voting: In Defense of Majority Voting by Downs and Problems of Majority Voting: Reply to a Traditionalist by Tullock in 1960. Our purpose is to highlight the interaction which forms the basis of these publications and shows the way Tullock reinforced his view about the majoritarian rule – one of the cornerstones of the public choice theory – at this time.

27


Session 3C Session: Economics in Postwar France Constructing Markets: The Case of the Postwar French Economic Thought. Ivan Boldyrev The storyline for this paper is as follows. Already before the WWII, at the famous Lippman colloquium, which marked the birth of neoliberalism, the standard opposition between 'the market' and 'the state', between the policy of 'laissez-faire' and interventionism in the spirit of German corporatism or Soviet planning, has been considered obsolete, and there were calls to rethink the ideas of market liberalism. The postwar reconstruction only added new urgency to this problem. Perhaps the most siginificant intellectual contribution that emerged in French economic thought in response to this events came from the future Nobel prize winner Maurice Allais who defended the idea of competitive planning (planification concurentielle). Allais was an active member of the Mont Pelerin society, but did not sign the final statement – precisely because he refused to redically adhere to the idea of private property and was not sure this idea would be significant enough in future. But Allais was also an adversary of traditional forms of planning and instead, sought to reconcile market thinking with the pressing problems that required state intervention and were in line with the French tradition of regulation. Another influential French tradition – the one of economic engineering – became relevant here. Allais and his disciples – in particular, Jacques Lesourne and Marcel Boiteux – started to implement the ideas of competitive market economics in practice and embarked upon the reform of tariffs at the huge natural monopolies – notably, Électricité de France and Charbonnages de France. This was the way, in which, first, free-market economics has been explicitly invoked in the policy context of implementing ‘competitive planning’ (implementation being for a long period in the hands of academic economists); and, second, it demonstrated how ‘markets’ could be constructed and maintained in the postwar policy context of French planning (that was predominantly Keynesian). In the 1970-1980s, the theories and practices developed by this group of economists will give way to other ways of economic regulation that will be informed by different, more complex theories. One of them, developed by Jean-Jacques Laffont and Jean Tirole, will bring to one of its originators another Nobel Prize. Importantly, there was a direct way – both conceptual and, arguably, institutional – leading from the policies of the kind developed by Boiteux to the more complex regulation frameworks involving agency theory and new approach to industrial organization, of the kind suggested by the scholars from Toulouse school of economics. The paper will trace the intellectual and policy contexts of this transformation – and, in particular, will concentrate on the interplay between policy challenges

28


and academic innovations, as well on market values implied in (and nurtured by) this interaction. Promoting economic expertise: The Rockefeller foundation and French economics after World War II. Serge Benest It is commonplace for commentators to emphasize the isolation of the French economists from the rest of the world following the Second World War. Yet, at the Liberation, the director of the social sciences division at the Rockefeller Foundation (RF), the economist Joseph H. Willits, thought it important to extend its activities to Europe, especially France. Before long, almost all economic research centers in France were funded by RF. It is the purpose of this article to describe the attempts of the foundation to promote expertise and to review their consequences on the nature of French economics. Following the war, French economists were under pressure: not only jurists from the faculty of law controlled economic training, but Durkheimian sociologists and Annales historians challenged the analysis of economic phenomena produced by economists. In this context, Willits’ efforts made a difference. By funding research centers free of jurists’ influence, RF helped academic economists gain greater institutional autonomy from law faculty. By supporting the move of academic economists toward expertise, it facilitated their rapprochement with the state economic administration. More importantly, RF helped reshape the identity of French economics. Most RF grants were directed toward “economistes realistes,” who favored the integration of economic, sociological and historical approaches, which eventually led to a redefinition of economics’ boundaries with other social sciences. About Some Feedback Effects of Expertise on Macroeconomics: Edmond Malinvaud’s Testimony. Matthieu Renault In this paper, I explore Edmond Malinvaud’s (1927-2015) retrospect views on economic expertise. Such views would be incidental if the economist at stake had not taken an active part in the establishment of economics after WWII in France, and had not had several expertise responsibilities throughout his career, whether in the economic institutions of the French planning or more directly as an adviser towards policy-makers. Accordingly, Malinvaud testified how far macroeconomics has developed in close connection with expertise since WWII. Unlike the prevailing view on the alleged influential role of economic expertise, Malinvaud’s views on expertise do not substantiate the claim whereby macroeconomics (thanks to experts) has exerted some influence on the definition of economic policies over the years. Instead, his testimony illustrates that the reverse relation is significant, that is expertise – by the feedback effects it generates – has exerted some influence on the way macroeconomics has evolved since WWII. I develop three of the feedback effects that expertise has generated on macroeconomics. First, expertise has made macroeconomics more

29


receptive to the external sanction (composed of both the policy-makers and the public opinion) so as the reliability of its scientific proposals now depends on the economic policies performances. Second, expertise has pushed macroeconomics to behave more as a decision-making tool. Third, expertise has been the incentive in the persistent search for consensus (or synthesis) in macroeconomics since WWII. Session 3D Session: Welfare Economics The cultural and aesthetic roots of The Joyless Economy. Viviana Di Giovinazzo Standard accounts of the evolution of Tibor Scitovsky’s ideas in The Joyless Economy (1976) emphasize the influence of psychological theory as proposed by the motivational psychologists of the 1950s and 1960s. There is no doubt that it was indeed important for the development of his innovative monograph, though its influence needs to be understood in the context of his troubled perceptions of 20th century mass society. This paper draws on Scitovsky’s Memoirs, unpublished in English, to explore his sustained critique of economic progress, developed both by his move to post-war consumer-oriented America and his engagement with the some of the past century’s most influential cultural commentators. These include Erich Fromm and the members of the Frankfurt School, Bertrand de Jouvenel, Raymond Aron, Lewis Mumford, Sigfried Giedion and Bernard Rudofsky. Fear and Envy as Ideological Motives for the Pursuit of Economic Growth. David Franklin Mitch The pursuit of economic growth has come to be taken for granted as a policy goal with the motive commonly presumed to be improvement of human welfare. However, a historical perspective points to ulterior motives such as military upheaval threats as motives for governments to pursue economic growth. .In societies as diverse as Qin and Han dynasty China, early modern Europe, Meiji era Japan, the Soviet Union in the early Stalinist years, and post-war U.S. and OEEC Europe, the desire to provide resources to support military activity was a central motive in setting economic growth as an important policy goal. Nevertheless, it can hardly be claimed that militarization has always been the dominant motive for the pursuit of economic growth. While civil wars and domestic violence were endemic in Latin America and sub-Saharan Africa during the twentieth century, the combination of a lack of interstate competition and of weak state legitimacy implied no attempt to pursue growth as a means of military mobilization. Instead growth as a policy goal was pursued both regions from a perspective of backwardness and catch-up. In the cases both post-independence India and post-war South Korea, the pursuit of industrial self-sufficiency for security purposes was balanced by populist motives of poverty alleviation. The cases of India and South Korea as well as that of early modern

30


Europe illustrate Jacob Viner’s claim of a long-run harmony between the pursuit of wealth and power as ultimate ends of national policy. William J. Baumol and the New Welfare Economics Debate: 1940 – 1970. Anna Noci This paper explores the role of William J. Baumol in the New Welfare Economics debate and the legacy of welfare economics on his subsequent works. Baumol was an extremely eclectic scholar. He began his academic career writing on welfare economics and economic dynamic. He was admitted as a master student at LSE in 1947, becoming a Ph.D. candidate and a member of the faculty after few weeks. His supervisor was Lionel Robbins and being at LSE put him at the center of the New Welfare Economics debate. This debate was, in the 1940s, a war between institutions and scholars, across the two sides of the Atlantic Ocean. However, after the 1970s and definitively after the 1980s, the welfare economics theoretical debate faded away and also faded Baumol’s production in this field. We argue that his interest for this branch of economics was rooted in his personal beliefs and convictions and that it left a legacy on his interest for specific topics. Coherent with his conception of economics as an applied science, his interest for welfare analysis shifted from the theoretical analysis to the applied one. Particularly in his first book, we find the awareness of a series of topics that will become his objects of study, for example the rising costs of services, the pollution of cities and the regulation or deregulation of utilities. Session 3E Session: Adam Smith - I Crime and Punishment: Adam Smith’s Theory of Sentiments. Maria Pia Paganelli and Fabrizio Simon For Adam Smith a crime is not the result of a rational calculation of loss and gain, but the consequence of a vain desire to parade wealth to attract the approbation of others combined with a natural systematic bias in overestimating the probability of success. Similarly, Smith does not conceive of legal sanctions as a rational deterrent, but as deriving from the feeling of resentment. While the prevailing approach of the eighteenth century is a rational explanation of crime and a utilitarian use of punishment, Adam Smith instead builds his theory of criminal behavior and legal prosecution consistently on the sentiments. A well-functioning legal system is thus an unintended consequence of our desire to bring justice to the individual, not the result of a rational calculation to promote the public good, just like a well-functioning economic system is the unintended consequence of our desire to better our own condition, not the result of a rational calculation to promote public good. The Origin of Civil Government: Smith’s criticism of Hobbes. José de la Cruz Garrido

31


This article examines through Skinner’s contextualist methodology (1969) the objections that Smith makes to the Hobbesian approach based on the two questions presented in the Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS) and Lectures of Jurisprudence (LJ).

1. What are the motivations or incentives that individuals have to enter into society and how these psychological faculties are connected with the “senses” that approve and disapprove the conduct of others (TMS VIII.iii.2)

2. How obedience to the civil government emerges and how that government establishes the social norms (LJ (B))

This paper focuses on point 2), finding an answer in the fourfold stages theory of social development exposed in LJ (A) and, mainly, in the WN. Indeed, Smith provides a “natural” model of institutional balances between authority and subjects for each level, being of particular interest the path from the agricultural society (3rd level) to the commercial society (4th level). Smith explains this "historical process" by a “non-contractual” theory (insofar as it does not hypostatize to a "state of nature" or "natural condition" or to a contract) to explain the emergence of civil government, in a context of violence or “state of war”. With this “historical approach”, Smith enriches two aspects of Hobbesian political theory. First, in what concerns the desire for peace and prosperity as an incentive to obey authority, and second the function of a contract in the relationship between political authority and property.

32


Saturday, June 22 Session 4A Session: Factoring ‘Impact’ in H.E.T., Part II: Uses Understanding the Effects of Journal Impact Factors on the Publishing Behavior of Historians of Economics. Jimena Hurtado and Erich Pinzón-Fuchs Historians of economics as well as their journals, departments, and institutes, are measured, compared, and ranked both inside and outside our discipline. We aim to understand how this global system of evaluation affect both historians of economics, as individuals, and the configuration of our discipline. We use data collected from an anonymous online survey of historians of economics in order to understand the effects that this system of evaluation exerts on our scholarly practices. Despite the global character of these evaluation systems, there are local specificities that produce what other scholars have called a “creative deviation from a given path” of universalizing and global models. We want to understand these local specificities in two senses: first, in the sense of our local community of historians of economics; second, in the sense of the localities that we might find within our community in terms of both geographical location and institutional positioning. We also want to reflect on questions that go beyond the direct use of these mechanisms of measurement and classification, such as: Does the use of these numbers reflect the existence of “distrust” and “the absence of a secure an autonomous community” in the history of economics as Ted Porter suggests? Finally, we hope that a thorough and sincere reflection on the Clarivate issue might allow us to get a better picture of the current state of our discipline, the current state of our scholarly practices, and the position of our field in the broader academic landscape. The Reduced Impact of Impact Factors in the History of Economics Community. José Luís Cardoso Unlike economists, historians of economics are not obsessed with measuring the value of their contributions by means of impact factors. Nor are they eager to sacrifice the quality assessment of their writings to any imposed metric rule. One of the reasons for this characteristic is the modest performance of the history of economic thought as registered through the current citations indexes. This may prove problematic to the career development of young scholars and even, therefore, to the future of the discipline. To replicate and improve good practices of increasing references to articles published by other journals is a mere defensive response that should not be encouraged as a single viable solution. The publication culture of this community is to a large extent based on the weight attributed by authors to books and chapters published in edited volumes. Though the publishing practices are subject to considerable and permanent change, there is still a great amount of innovative contributions that are channelled through authored and edited books. In order to pay justice to this feature it is therefore indispensable to increase the visibility of such platforms of

33


publication. The development of new assessment instruments that take into account the role and place of books and their impact in knowledge formation and diffusion should be considered as a strategic challenge, so as to improve the quality of measuring impact factors in our field of research. Impact Factor Pressures, Scientific Practices, and the Place of Survey Articles in the History of Economics. Erich Pinzón-Fuchs, Cléo Chassonnery-Zaïgouche, and Catherine Herfeld The literature in the history of economics discipline has grown to an extent that it is almost impossible for an individual to read, study, and assimilate all the recent works even in a specialized area. Other disciplines have coped with similar growth by developing mechanisms that help members keep up-to-date with the latest scholarly contributions and methodological trends – mechanisms including survey articles. But in the history of economics, and in the larger academic context that increasingly develops ways to measure the impact of publications and authors, survey articles bring serious challenges. One challenge is their unwanted consequences for rankings of history of economics journals on the basis of citation measures, as evidenced by the Clarviate case. In this paper, we take this case as representative for illustrating the advantages and challenges of survey articles. We argue that, given its absolute size and structure, the history of economics has become a discipline in which survey articles should play an important role. First, we discuss the role of survey articles in our field in light of the Clarivate case. Second, we provide a short history of survey articles as a scientific practice. Third, we critically discuss the important roles that survey articles play today in the natural and social sciences as well as in the humanities in greater detail. Finally, we make some suggestions for both the kind of survey articles that historians of economics should publish. Session 4B Session: Where Economics Went Wrong: Chicago’s Abandonment of Classical Liberalism Roundtable Discussion Participants: Ross Emmett, Andrew Farrant, Marianne Johnson, Joe Persky, David Colander. The proposed roundtable would bring together a diverse group of perspectives on Colander and Freedman’s book, Where Economics Went Wrong: Chicago’s Abandonment of Classical Liberalism (2018). Though the University of Chicago provides the case study for an examination of the classically liberal approach to policy making, John Stuart Mill is the hero of the book. Thus, the panel attempts to balance expertise on specific aspects of the book – either on Chicago School Economics or on J.S. Mill’s political economy. In bringing together economists with a diversity of opinions on Classical economics and the Chicago School, we hope to consider broad ideas, including the nature and meaning of (a) Classical liberalism as compared to Chicago

34


liberalism, (b) the Chicago ‘School,’ old and new, and (c) Chicago’s role in the development of mid-century economics, as compared to other schools or approaches. We will also consider the merit of the authors’ central claim: abandoning the clear divide established by J.S. Mill between scientific economic theory and the unscientific artfulness of economic policy is where economics went wrong. Session 4C Session: Topics in Classical Economics Rereading Adam Smith on Labor Commanded: Value from different points of view. David Andrews This paper revisits the question of labor commanded and bestowed as standards of value in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. David Ricardo criticized Smith’s use of the labor commanded standard of value, claiming that Smith erred by restricting the labor bestowed theory to the “early and rude state of society,” rejecting labor bestowed as a standard of value in the case including capital accumulation and rent and he erred again when he conflated two standards, of treating them mistakenly as if they were equivalent. This essay explores an alternative interpretation according to which both these criticisms miss their target. Smith did not restrict labor bestowed as a standard of value for economies with capital and rent and he did not conflate the two standards. The basic problem seems to have resulted from the different projects that Smith and Ricardo were engaged in. While Ricardo and later writers were concerned to establish the scientifically appropriate standard for measuring value, Smith was concerned with what standards people actually used to measure value. He concluded that different groups of people used different standards. For Ricardo’s purpose it was necessary to settle on a unique measure—just as it would be absurd to do physics without settling the question of how to measure mass. For Smith the multiplicity of standards used by different people is not contradictory. Smith believed that the fact that both groups focused on quantities of labor showed that this was the correct measure of value. Smith associated the labor bestowed standard with those who do not have commodities and want to acquire them and he associated the labor commanded standard with those who possess commodities and want to sell them rather than consume. Smith believed that buyers and sellers used the different standards in both the “early and rude state of society” and later states. In the former, the significance of labor bestowed is easier to see, although even in that case there were some adjustments, as for hardship and skill involved in production, that render relations between the proportions of labor bestowed on various commodities less visible. The same principles continue to operate in civilized society, but the obscurity becomes much greater with the accumulation of capital and full settlement of land, and the relation between labor The two perspectives

35


are merged in the concept of natural price, which expresses a commodity’s worth to the person who brings it to market. Turgot's theory of capital and interest in its contemporary context. Richard van den Berg The Réflexions sur la formation et la distribution des richesses, written at the end of 1766 but not published until early 1770, is A. R. J. Turgot’s most enduring contribution to economic theory. The work has often been interpreted as a kind of bridge between François Quesnay’s theory of the predominantly agricultural economy as a single reproductive system and Adam Smith’s conception of the commercial economy with its ‘three constituents orders’. Especially Turgot’s analysis of capital and his ideas about the establishment of ‘kind of equilibrium’ between the returns on different employments of capital can be seen as introducing the notion of a tendency towards a ‘uniform rate of profit’, which came to play a crucial role in subsequent (especially British) political economy. While this longer-term context of the emergence of ‘classical’ political economy is indeed important for an appreciation of the Réflexions, it was clearly not part of Turgot’s intentions to provide a ‘bridge’ with future, i.e., not-yet-existing economic thought. Instead, to understand what motivated Turgot to write this work it is better to see it as a (not completely seamless) attempt to reconcile physiocratic theories, to which he was exposed from the late 1750s, with his earlier and evolving views on the role of money capital and interest on economic activity. In this paper three little know sources are used to reconstruct the contemporary context of the development of Turgot’s theories of capital and interest. First, after having been inaccessible for nearly half a century, Turgot’s private papers have recently been opened to researchers. Amongst these papers, a few manuscript drafts reveal new details about the likely inspirations of his early views about capital and interest. Second, the manuscripts of André Morellet, a close friend and collaborator of Turgot, provide further insights. Although these manuscripts have been known for several decades, they have been underused as sources for contemporary commentary of Turgot’s ideas. Third, and most significant in providing a contemporary context to Turgot’s thinking about capital and interest are the monetary theories of François Véron de Forbonnais. Recently, Forbonnais’s writings have started to attract more attention and it is argued in this paper that his monetary theories have a special relevance in comparison with those of Turgot. In the early 1750s Forbonnais developed precise (and at the time widely known) theories about the roles of money circulation and of interest rates in general economic activity. Especially his ideas about the relation between the formation of monetary fortunes by rich citizens and their lending to government, requiring the enticement of interest payments, formed the most advanced French theory of the ‘capital market’ at the time Turgot started to contemplate these issues. Eventually, in the mid-1760s

36


Forbonnais’s views about the role of money savings became part of his polemic with Quesnay and his supporters. By this time, however, Turgot had developed his own broader ideas about capital accumulation, savings, investments and interest rates. These ‘mature’ views, while not without their own contradictions, can be seen not as a development of physiocratic theory but also as an attempt to counter Forbonnais’s views about the role of money capital within the economic system. Session 4D Session: Cycles and Crises Friedrich A. Lutz’ epistemological and methodological messages during the German-speaking business cycle debate. Lachezar Grudev Friedrich A. Lutz’ 1932 habilitation is considered the last highlight in the business cycle debate that took place in Germany during the interwar period. This debate was caused by Adolf Löwe claiming that the cyclical fluctuations cannot be explained by the static propositions derived from economic theory based on equilibrium. Löwe’s solution to this antinomic problem between theory and reality was to abolish the concept of equilibrium within economic theory and to develop dynamic assumptions from which these propositions can be derived that can explain the observed dynamics of cyclical fluctuations. Lutz criticized such attempts to construct a deductive theory of business cycles. For Lutz, each crisis represents a unique historical event caused by specific causal factors whose impact on the economy depends on its institutional framework. This paper examines Lutz’ habilitation thesis as a response to Löwe’s solution, a response consisting of an epistemological and a methodological part that will become central for the later Freiburg School’s methodological program. Understanding business cycles - Kurt Singer's concept of statistics as a synthesis of theoretical and empirical methodology. Julia Lücke The German economist Kurt Singer (1886-1962) introduced a business cycle analysis at the Wirtschaftsdienst, a Hamburg-based economic weekly, in 1926. Although Singer explicitly referred to the business cycle theory of the prominent German economist Arthur Spiethoff, he substantially contributed to a unique concept of business cycle statistics. Singer conceptualized business cycle statistics as a synthesis of theoretical and empirical methods. Based on a historically perceptive business cycle theory, appropriate indicators of the cycle were identified that guided the empirical observation. Singer who had a descriptive understanding of statistics criticized contemporary approaches that used statistics as a mathematical-analytical method to discover statistical regularities and underlying economic laws. Against this background, Singer attacked the business cycle research of the Institut für Konjunkturforschung in Berlin. In a dispute between Singer and Adolph Lowe, published in the Wirtschaftsdienst, Singer also rejected Lowe’s concept of statistics. Lowe regarded statistics as a subordinate empirical tool to prove explanations of the business cycle that were constructed purely theoretically in the first place. For

37


Singer the mere empirical as well as the predominantly theoretical approach were insufficient to understand business cycle phenomena. Investigating the ‘Debt-Money-Prices’ Triangle: Irving Fisher’s Long Journey Toward the 100% Money Proposal. Samuel Demeulemeester This paper aims to shed light on how the 100% money proposal, which Irving Fisher came to support in his 1935 book 100% Money, can be connected to the rest of his work on monetary instability—in particular, to his early analysis of credit cycles developed between 1896 and 1912, and to his debt-deflation theory exposed in 1932-33. We argue that, behind these successive analyses, a common explanatory pattern of short-run monetary fluctuations can be identified. We call this the ‘debt-money-prices’ triangle, designating the interplay between three key variables: the debt-volume, the volume of deposit currency, and the general price level. Using this pattern, we endeavor to show how Fisher’s explanations of short-run monetary instability evolved between 1896 and 1935, and how the 100% money proposal came, in our view, to be the logical conclusion of this long analytical journey. Session 4E Session: Development Economics & Politics

From "Economist as Plumber" to Economist as Surgeon. Judith Favereau

Randomized field experiments (RFEs) in development economics have been

massively promoted for their strong internal validity, namely their ability to

produce evidence. Esther Duflo is one of the leading figures of such promotion.

Recently in her presidential address to the American Economic Association,

Duflo claims that economists should be like and act as plumbers. The aim of this

paper is to build an epistemological analysis of such metaphor in order to

highlight its implications for development economics. First, we scrutinize this

metaphor and show that actually Duflo’s experimenters in development

economics are not like plumbers but are more like surgeons of the 19th century.

Plumbers, for Duflo, are tinkering; whereas surgeons of the 19th century are

observing through experiments. Thus, we highlight that RFEs in development

economics have mostly produced symptoms of poverty rather than remedies as

initially intended. In that sense, RFEs in development economics enable to

observe rather than to tinker. Finally, we propose alternative methods to

complement RFEs in order for development economists to be more like surgeons

of the 21st century. That is to say methods that would allow the surgeon not only

to observe but also to propose remedy.

38


The second development decade: ECLAC, ILO and ECOSOC economic

development programmes for the 1970s. Nicolas Dvoskin

The history of economic thought usually takes into account the great minds, but

when it analyzes the thinking of policy makers or agencies -rather than thinkers-

it usually focuses those that actually fulfilled their goals, or at least those that

were able to pursue some policies. In this paper I analyze the history of a broken

dream: “the second development decade”. Since the end of the 1960s we can

observe a shift in the way economists analyze the problem of

underdevelopment: they tend to discard the modernization theories that

suggested that underdevelopment was quite an easy issue regarding low

workforce productivity and embrace new theories, which pay attention to

structural heterogeneity, lack of integration and, most importantly, social issues.

These new ideas will become the key framework of a worldwide consensus,

which, perhaps, relies more on the policy-makers than on the textbooks,

academic papers and university curricula. In this sense, the role played by the

major international organisations regarding both academic analysis and policy

recommendations is huge. So huge, that during the late 60s the concept of

"second development decade" is born. The first decade -the 60s- consisted of the

abandonment of the comparative-advantages theories and the adoption of

modernization theories, which explained that an accelerated economic growth

financed by foreign investment would be enough to solve every

underdevelopment-related issue. The second decade -the 70s- would recognize

the achievements of the first one, but it would also criticize its lack of social

perspective. The second development decade would be the decade of not only

economic but social development as well.

In my PhD dissertation at the University of Buenos Aires I analyzed the economic

ideas which sustained the debates regarding the Argentinean social security

reforms during the second half of the 20th century. Without using the words

“second development decade”, among other things I recognized the previously

exposed shift around the mid-60s, and an abrupt end of these debates around

the mid-70s. My post-doc research project in Germany started with an attempt to

compare this period with similar Latin American countries -initially, such as

Brazil, Chile or Mexico-, but the archive work led me to realize that this agenda

was rather international than Latin American, and that the international

organizations were playing a huge role. Congresses, conferences, resolutions,

economic policy guidelines: the major organizations, such as ECLAC, ILO and

ECOSOC, were fully dedicated to these issues.

However, during the mid-70s the world changed, and the second development

decade was replaced by the neoliberal dreams. Thus, it ended up as nothing

39


more than a broken dream. It happened in Latin America and it happened in the

organizations’ agenda too.

In this paper I show some preliminary results of my post-doc research project,

from a history of economic thought perspective: a study on the role of these

agencies, its ideas and foundations, regarding the problems of

underdevelopment towards this "second development decade".

Session 4F Session: Liberalism

Liberalism and the Problem of Policymaker Ignorance. Scott Scheall

As generations of Austrians have pointed out with regard to the administrators

of a centrally-planned economy, policymakers might not possess all of the

knowledge necessary to deliberately plan and control the economy well enough

to bring about, in combination with whatever spontaneous forces might be at

work, desired results.

I have argued in recent work that the Austrians’ socialist-calculation argument

generalizes to all policymaking contexts in which politicians are in some sense

expected to act on their constituents’ interests (indeed, it generalizes to all proxy

relationships). As a generalization, this thesis applies to political action directed

toward more as to less liberal objectives.

There are difficult questions relevant to liberalism that are susceptible to the

problem of policymaker ignorance:

How to create a more liberal order in a relatively illiberal environment? How to

create a rule-of-law system, given that the current system often ignores the rule

of law? How do we limit rent-seeking, starting from a rent-seeking world? How

to create a “robust” system, when the existing system is not especially robust?

Generally, how do we transition from less to more liberal environments?

Here I consider the significance of the socialist-calculation argument for the

Austrians’ political liberalism.

The Epistemological Conditions of the Constitution of a Neoliberal Consensus

in the 1930s and 1940s. Nathanaël Colin-Jaeger

Neoliberalism has received increasing attention and spurred many studies from

various historians, philosophers or other social scientists, especially since the

1990s. If the term is very often used, it is not always clear – to say the least –

40


what it refers to. In the field of Intellectual History, or History of Economic

Thought, some critics recently highlighted the convergence of views of central

liberal thinkers such as Hayek, Lippmann, Eucken or Simons (see for example

Kohler & Kolev, 2011 ; Audier, 2012 ; Cristoph, 2012 ; Jackson, 2012 ; Bedeleem,

2017). According to these studies, the convergence was made explicit on two

occasions: the Lippmann Colloquium of 1938, organised by Louis Rougier in

Paris - and extensively studied by Audier (2008) - and the creation of the Mont-

Pélerin Society, founded by Hayek in 1947, which is under study in Mirowski &

Plewhe (2009).

The context of crisis is often stressed in order to understand the relative

unification of liberal thinkers in the thirties and forties (Burgin, 2012). Indeed

the economic crisis, combined with the ideological crisis of classical liberalism,

provided fertile ground to build a theory on new foundations, and led to the

publications of important texts : A Positive Program for Laissez-faire by Simons

in 1934, the Ordo Manifesto by Böhm, Eucken and Grossmann-Doerth in 1936,

The Good society by Lippmann in 1937, The Crisis of our time by Röpke in 1942

and The Road to Serfdom by Hayek in 1944.

To study these texts, many common theories are usually put forward to

underline the identity of the different streams of liberalism (Austrian with

Hayek, Ordoliberals with Eucken and Röpke, Chicagoan with Simons, Lippman’s

liberalism etc.) at that time, in spite of their differences : the criticism of the

principle of laissez-faire, the theory of the rule of law, the emphasis put on the

rules of the game as opposed to the plays of the game, the opposition to the rise

of fascism and Nazism or to the possibility of economic planning. Furthermore,

many works have shown the links between these different authors, who actively

communicated and exchanged ideas in the 1930s and the 1940s.

This paper aims to offer additional elements to this narrative, underscoring the

common ground found in these various liberal authors who sometimes came

from very different backgrounds. I intend to show how the two central neoliberal

authors of this period, Hayek and Lippmann – but I will also include Simons and

the Ordoliberals writers or the French philosopher Louis Rougier, in a less

systematic fashion – were able to influence each other because they addressed

the same problematic situation which is not only contextual but also theoretical.

The problem they shared was the epistemic problem of coordination based on

the acknowledgment of anthropology as characterised by the limitations of the

cognitive abilities of the individuals. It is because they shared some

epistemological propositions that the dialogue between their theories could

become fruitful and influential. The positive elements of the liberal program that

41


emerged then is determined philosophically by these anthropological and

epistemological theses.

This paper will therefore provide a solution to the question of the relative unity

of a neoliberal movement beyond diverse positions and methodologies, stressing

the importance of the historiographic acknowledgment of a common

problematic situation in order to understand the field of compossible theories.

Session 5A Session: Hidden Agencies: Economists and Political Economy under Authoritarian Rule - II Isolation in Albanian Economic Thought. Marianne Johnson and Doriana Matraku One of the more unusual cases of a planned economy, Albania was isolated from the world for more than forty years under the authoritarian rule of Enver Hoxha. In this paper, we consider the interplay between the Hoxha’s policy of economic isolationism and the economics produced in isolation. Several conclusions can be drawn. First, much like in other authoritarian regimes, economic theory did not drive economic policy; rather political ideology determined policy; economic theories were retroactively constructed and used as justification. Second, authoritarian-decreed economic theory (dogma) meant that the job of Albanian economists was distinctly different from what we observe elsewhere. Albanian economists played two roles – propaganda for regime positions and technical support for regime policies. Third, and most uniquely Albanian, economic and political isolation created an echo-chamber where theory was functionally irrelevant to policy making or practice. Decreed economic theory was substantively empty, and new ideas were shut out. This had profound implications for Albania’s eventual transition to a market economy. Vichy as an Opportunity: Perroux’s Intellectual Entrepreneurship (1934-1944). Raphaël Fèvre In this communication, I will focus on François Perroux, one of the most active economists of that period. A brief part of the communication will analyse Perroux’s corporatist thought build in the 1930s. As a Rockefeller Fellow, Perroux embarked on a Grand Tour of European authoritarian regimes (Austria, Germany, Italy and Portugal). His writings of the interwar period will help us to understand his (mainly) enthusiastic reception of Pétain’s government, and why he tried to guide the Vichist reforms so that they would satisfy his “communitarian” ideal. Perroux participated in many institutional activities of the Vichy regime as an economic expert. He also wrote dozens of articles in academic journals, newspapers and brochures, and gave lectures to various audiences (both academic and non-academic), as evidenced by texts found in his archive (IMEC). What emerges from Perroux’s institutional and intellectual entrepreneurship is the manner he pushed the economic discipline in two

42


different ways. On the one hand, French economists had to catch up with the most recent and specialized achievements of theoretical economics on an international scale. While, on the other hand, Perroux supported the building of a “science de l’homme” where economics should be open to other social sciences, but also to biology. This communication aims at showing that the Vichy regime was a suitable vehicle to the growth of Perroux’s ideas, and that he managed to make the best of a highly uncertain situation. Debating Socialism, Constructing Nkrumaism: Economists’ agencies and the regime in 1960s Ghana. Gerardo Serra The paper reconstructs the intellectual landscape of the political economy of socialism in 1960s Ghana. Leading the country to independence in 1957, in the 1960s the government of Kwame Nkrumah turned Ghana into a pioneer experiment in African socialism and in postcolonial authoritarianism. On the basis of published material and archival sources collected in Ghana, Britain and Ireland, the article reconstructs the fluid relationship between economic discussions on socialism and the dream of constructing ‘Nkrumaism’ as the official ideology of the party-state. Specifically, the paper focuses on the economists associated with two educational institutions, the University of Ghana (which came to be seen by the regime as a stronghold of reactionary and neo-colonial ideas) and the newly founded Kwame Nkrumah Ideological Institute, which became the lynchpin of the fusion between Nkrumah’s personality cult and ‘scientific socialism’. The discussion of these institutions is complemented by a critical analysis of economic debates in a wide range of journals and newspapers, including the academic Economic Bulletin of Ghana and the party weekly The Spark. Bringing to life these debates allows to reach two main goals: a more nuanced understanding of how economic and political ideas travelled during the Cold War and acquired local political connotations, and a more precise understanding of how economists mobilised discussions of socialism to refashion their personal and ideological identities in an authoritarian context. Session 5B Session: Hume David Hume as a Proto-Weberian: Commerce, Protestantism, and Secular Culture. Margaret Schabas David Hume wrote prolifically and influentially on economics and was an enthusiast for the modern era of manufacturing and trade. As a non-Christian and possibly a non-believer, Hume positioned commerce at the vanguard of secularism. I here argue that Hume broached ideas that gesture toward those offered by Max Weber in his famous Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904-5). Hume discerns a strong correlation between economic flourishing and Protestantism, and he points to a “spirit of the age” that is built on modern commerce and fuelled by religious tolerance. The Roman Catholic Church, by contrast, came under considerable attack by Hume, for fostering intolerance and draining and diverting funds. Hume went beyond a mere correlation and

43


recognized several of the Protestant dispositions that later appealed to Weber: an increased work ethic and a tendency to promote frugality, enterprise, and investment. A neo-Weberian literature now points to additional factors, the spread of literacy and the fostering of a network of trust among strangers, both of which Hume makes note. Insofar as modern commerce both feeds upon and fosters more liberties and representative government, Hume also linked these with the advent and spread of Protestantism. My aim is not to suggest that these arguments have merit—there is good reason to question each and every assertion under the historical microscope—but rather to highlight the broader religious and cultural context in which Hume’s economics was broached. James Steuart on David Hume: Making the Case for Mercantilism. Yutaka Furuya It has been well established that James Steuart and David Hume were good friends and that Hume's writings on the subject of economy had a marked influence on Steuart when Steuart wrote the Principles of Political Economy. Studies on the influence of Hume's argument on Steuart has so far focused on arguments such as on population, on luxury, and on the quantity theory of money and the price-specie flow mechanism; arguments that were brought forward by Hume mainly in his Political Discourses. This paper, by shedding a light on how Steuart received Hume’s economic arguments in the History of England, attempts to demonstrate that Hume’s influence on Steuart was much pervasive. In his Principles Steuart does not cite Hume’s History; nevertheless during the time he was writing the Principles Steuart made an extensive annotation on volume three and four of Hume’s History. A close study of the annotation shows that much of Steuart’s argument in his annotation is reflected in his Principles and that the most commonly repeated argument in the annotation was Steuart’s defense of the economic policy that was employed by the English Monarchy in the past. What the annotation makes clear is that the Principles was to a certain extent Steuart’s response to Hume’s dismissal of mercantilism. Session 5C Session: Keynesian and Schumpeterian Themes Interpreting Say’s Law of Markets or Outlets Correctly: The Impediments of Keynes’s Influence. James C.W. Ahiakpor That John Maynard Keynes misrepresented Say’s law of markets as “Supply creates its own Demand” (1936: 25) easily can be established; see for example, Steven Kates (1998), William Baumol (1999, 2003), Petur Jonsson (1999), James Ahiakpor (2003, 2018), Samuel Hollander (2005a, 2011), and Alain Béraud and Guy Numa (2018a, 2018b). However, there is less agreement among the interpreters of Jean-Baptiste Say’s own statement of the law of markets or outlets. Thus, some still side with Keynes’s view of the law’s inapplicability, at least in the short run, e.g. Baumol, Hollander (2005a), and Béraud and Numa

44


(2018a, and 2018b), while some others interpret the law differently than Say meant, e.g. Steven Kates (1998, 2003, 2015, 2018). This paper will argue that the persistence of dispute over the correct interpretation of Say’s Law is due mainly to the influence of Keynes’s changed meaning of saving, capital, investment, and money, from their classical meanings, besides Keynes’s having attributed the assumption of always full employment of labor to the law. The law of markets deserves the prominence in modern macroeconomic analysis that it lost, following its having been misrepresented by Keynes (1936, 1937, and 1939). Understanding the impediments of Keynes’s influence over the correct interpretation of Say’s Law will help to relieve that influence and promote a more consistent macroeconomic analysis and policy formulation for efficient economic management, as Say intended. (In)-stability at the Cowles Commission (1939-1944). Michaël Assous Oskar Lange (1938, 1944) interpretation of Keynes’s General Theory touched off extensive discussions at Cowles in the early 1940s. Lange asserted the existence of a continuity between Keynes and Walras (Rubin 2016) and argued effectively that the existence of a stationary equilibrium with involuntary unemployment could be proven when the labor supply elasticity is infinite (Lange 1938, p. 31, 1944, p. 6). Though, claimed Lange, by resorting to a static analysis, Keynes chose the wrong battlefield. For one thing, The General Theory is confined to a time period in which the capital stock is constant while its model produces a solution which alter it (Lange 1938). Most importantly, a point on which Lange insisted, is that as soon as one assumes excess supply of goods and labor cause wages and prices to fall, one must be willing to acknowledge the phenomena Keynes described are better regarded as disequilibrium dynamics. Promoting that modeling strategy at the Cowles Commission in the early 1940s, Lange intensively relied on Samuelson’s stability analysis (1941, 1942) and strove to prove full employment equilibrium may be unstable. In this paper, we want to examine the vision embedded in his writings published during his stay at the Cowles. More generally, based on a comparison of Lange with Cowles scholars who were simultaneously developing new dynamic models, the hope is to identify a specific vision of aggregate instability developed at the Cowles in the mid 1940s. Democracy and Autonomy in Schumpeter’s Theory of Democracy. Stephane Longuet and Odile Lakomski-Laguerre Schumpeter’s theory of democracy has recently been studied as grounded on a cognitive theory of individual behaviors, making it close to cognitive or behavioral economics. In this paper, in line with these perspectives, we emphasize Schumpeter's original assumptions and approach to individual behavior in the political sphere. But we expand the subject, stressing that Schumpeter's theory of democracy can be analyzed through the lens of the concept of autonomy. As a key argument in Schumpeter's discussion of the collapse of capitalism, the interaction of both political and economic spheres, as

45


two systems led by their own operating modes, can therefore be analyzed with the help of autopoietic system theory. Comparing Schumpeter and Luhmann, we emphasize a Schumpeter-Parsons-Luhmann connection, and show that re-reading Schumpeter’s theory of democracy in terms of complex system theory could help to overcome the elitist conception of Schumpeter's model of democracy and give theoretical keys to build a bridge between individual and collective cognitive processes and integrate a theory of ideology. Session 5D Session: Institutionalism Perspectives on Antitrust of the American Institutional Economists. Matthew Panhans When the initial anti-trust laws were passed in the United States in 1890 and 1914, the field of economics in the United States was broad and diverse in terms of methods of inquiry and ideological underpinnings. The standardization of theoretical framing and econometric methods across economics departments in the United States found today did not yet exist, and indeed a graduate student in economics could have a very different training depending on the department or even advisor that they ended up working with. One set of economists in this earlier period was the American Institutionalists. Though an eclectic group that is difficult to characterize, research by self-identified Institutionalists tended to focus on the role of institutions in shaping incentives and behavior, while also drawing on social psychology to characterize human behavior and pragmatist philosophy to characterize their approach to defining problems and methods of investigation. Importantly, the American Institutionalists were not a marginal group during the interwar years. As described by Rutherford (2011), Institutionalists in this period “published regularly in the leading journals of economics, held positions in major research universities (dominating the faculty at two of the top four PhD-granting universities in the country), were highly active in the creation of institutions for research and education in the social sciences, had excellent links to funding agencies, were deeply involved in economic policy making, and became presidents of the American Economics Association and American Statistical Association.” Contrary to many conventional accounts of the history of American economics, the Institutionalist movement was more than simply dissent of the mainstream during this time period. As such, the Institutionalist perspective was part of the mainstream of economic thought during the time that the original anti-trust laws were passed in the United States. This paper investigates the views on monopoly, competition, and anti-trust of the American Institutionalists during the first half of the 20th century. In doing so, this paper explores an alternative perspective on anti-trust issues to those of what later would become the mainstream economic approach to antitrust analysis.

46


The Shared Theoretical Capital of Post Keynesianism and Institutionalism, and its Application to Central Banking History. Daniyal Khan The contribution of the paper is to synthesize the neglected but shared theoretical capital of the Post Keynesian and institutionalist approaches to the study of capitalism, and to apply the synthesis to the explanation of an important historical sub-process in the evolution of capitalism: the historical development of central banking. By mining the theoretical ground historically shared by Post Keynesianism and institutionalism, such as an emphasis on historical process and path dependency, the paper argues that two key stylized facts in the historical evolution of central banking can be explained through the interaction of endogenous money and endogenous institutions. The first stylized fact is that the development of central banks tends to be either market-led or state-led. The second stylized fact is that there are long-run swings in central bank independence. In addressing the first stylized fact, the paper will draw on the histories of the Bank of England and the State Bank of Pakistan as typifying the two tendencies in the development of central banking. In addressing the second stylized fact, the paper will explore how the long-run swings in central bank independence may or may not interact with the Polanyian pendulum swing, with the development of central banking being interpreted as a story of a social protection mechanism which is endogenous to the economy. Session 5E Session: Justice Von Thünen’s Political Economy of Justice. Joseph Persky While von Thünen has been much praised for his agricultural economics and his contributions to marginal productivity theory, his political economy of justice has only rarely been taken seriously. Thünen’s political economy puts forth a normative theoretical structure, a positive analysis of the real world barriers that prevent that structure from emerging, and a reform program to begin addressing the issues of distributional justice in a capitalist economy. He deserves recognition as one of the first economists to attempt a rigorous description of economic justice in a market context. Whatever its mathematical errors, his theory of natural wages is a path breaking attempt to formalize a normative theory of justice. Moreover his discussion in the European context of the practical barriers to achieving a more just distribution represents an important and nuanced positive contribution. The final component of Thünen’s political economy of justice is his practical reform program. While that program may fall short of the more elaborate suggestions put forward by his contemporary, John Stuart Mill, it shows a sincere sensitivity to the welfare of the working classes.

47


Antonio Rosmini's Classical Liberal Elements as found in The Constitution under Social Justice. Joseph A. Weglarz Although Antonio Rosmini is known for his founding of a new religious order in the early part of the nineteenth century as well as his contributions to philosophy, his seminal work, The Constitution under Social Justice was a tour de force of classical liberal ideas and principles. This paper will examine the political and economic ideas and concepts, including individual freedom, human liberty, private property rights, and economic freedom found in this very important work. The Just-Virtuous Economy: John Ruskin’s Constructive Contribution to Political Economy. Kirsten Kara Madden In 1860, John Ruskin publishes four essays on the just-virtuous economy in Cornhill Magazine, re-published in 1862 as Unto This Last. Ruskin’s work includes a scathing critique of mid-19th century political economy. It is the critique which consumes the attention of political economists with detrimental consequences for their receipt of Ruskin’s constructive program. Regardless, Ruskin’s four essays have substantial impact on the thinking and actions of many, including Mohandes Gandhi. The current paper disentangles Ruskin’s constructive program of the just-virtuous economy from his critique of political economy. Specifically, this paper makes explicit the various meanings of “justice” as Ruskin understands the term and explains the other main virtues, particularly affection. To understand Ruskin’s system, this paper explores his specific definitions of wealth, value, and prosperity, and then describes Ruskin’s just-virtuous economy in production, distribution, and consumption. This paper details Ruskin’s hypothesized outcomes for a political economy centered on justice: welfare gains (for the general ecosystem as well as for humans), its implications for power and inequality, and for product quality. This paper concludes with a preliminary assessment of the feasibility of Ruskin’s just-virtuous economy to generate the hypothesized outcomes. Session 6A Session: Subfields of Economics Infectious Ideas: The Transformation of Economic Epidemiology. Byron Carson Economic epidemiology has undergone a significant transformation since the early 1990s, from a rational choice analysis of the HIV epidemic to a growing subfield in health economics, which develops better epidemiological models and better means of prevention. Despite important advances, it is difficult to distinguish the current literature from mathematical epidemiology, a field earlier economists purposefully distinguished themselves from. The current essay suggests constraints on human agency, the presumption of an omniscient and benevolent public health planner, and a misunderstanding of institutions facilitated the transformation, which narrows the scope for human behavior. To

48


better understand this transformation and its implications, the essay details how economists view the relationships between individuals, institutions, and infectious diseases, starting with the seminal work of Richard Posner and Tomas Philipson (1993), “Private Choices and Public Health: The AIDS Epidemic in an Economic Perspective.” In light of this transformation, the essay suggests alternative ways of developing economic epidemiology. Specifically, it discusses how institutional economists and economic historians provide theoretically sound and evidence-based explanations for the complex relationships people have with institutions and infectious diseases. Physics Transfer and the Rise of Econophysics. Adrian K. Yee Econophysics is the sub-discipline of economics which attempts to utilize the models and methods of mainstream physics in order to predict and explain economic and financial phenomena (Pereira et al., 2017). Econophysics remains an active research program with dozens of articles, several textbooks (McCauley, 2004; Stanley et al., 2007; Cockshott et al., 2009), and a major annual conference - the 13th Econophysics Colloquium to be held in Warsaw this July 5-7th, 2019. Econophysics has even influenced contemporary philosophers of science and their approach to the metaphysical status of agents (Jhun et al., 2018) as well as ecological modelling (Annila & Salthe, 2009; Pueyo, 2014). Hence, econophysics continues to be an appealing methodology for econometricians and social scientists in their attempts to render economics and finance as rigorous as the natural sciences. Comparatively little work has been done toward understanding the history of contemporary econophysics. While Weatherall’s book (2013) charts the history of the rise of econophysics specifically through the work of early 20th-century French mathematicians Louis Bachelier and Benoit B. Mandelbrot, specifically the theories of brownian motion and chaos theory, I offer an alternative but related story through the influence of physicists such as Josiah Willard Gibbs and Paul Ehrenfest, among others, and their influence on proto econophysicists Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, Jan Tinbergen, and Paul Samuelson, and contemporary econophysicists Victor Yakovenko and H. Eugene Stanley. The central thesis of my paper is that econophysicists and their acolytes chose to reject the once popular view in early 20th-century philosophy of science known as ‘Operationalism’: that a theoretical concept is fully constituted by the set of physical operations required to go about obtaining measurement outcomes of values related to the extension of the concept (Bridgman, 1927). Instead, proto-econophysicists like Paul Samuelson believed that interdisciplinary economic models were justified so long as they were empirically confirmed and fit the existing data. I trace the rejection of operationalism through several popular methods in modern econophysics.

49


Session 6B Session: Education and Economics Talking to the Discipline or Broadening Audiences? The dilemmas and the debates of the Economics of Education in its initial development (1960-1980). Pedro Teixeira The emergence of economics of education as an autonomous field of study is usually associated with Theodore Schultz’s presidential address to the annual meeting of the American Economic Association in 1960. Throughout the sixties, we find evidence of increasing attention to this new perspective. The seventies saw a burgeoning of publication of textbooks in the economics of education (see Blaug, 1976) and the increasing importance of these issues, in the second half of the sixties, was visible in the meetings of the American Economic Association. This was also illustrated by the classification indexes used by the AEA and the JEL. On the other hand, some international institutions, in particular the World Bank and the OECD, eventually paid increasing attention to this new field (Teixeira, 2017; Papadopoulos, 1994). Since the early sixties, economists working on educational topics have tried to play a double role. On the one hand, they attempted to consolidate their links with the economics discipline, namely through its interactions with other fields in economics, with the strongest ones being forged with other applied fields like labour, population, and health economics and with growth economics. On other hand, they tried to interact with other researchers working on education. This was not easy since the so-called the economic approach to thinking about education did not immediately raise enthusiastic reactions from other social scientists, who, in most cases, remained rather sceptical towards it. In this paper we will analyse the first two decades in the development of the economics of education as a field of research and teaching and the tensions between forging greater links with economics, thus becoming another specialised applied field (Backhouse and Biddle, 2000; Backhouse and Cherrier, 2014), and the attempts to create a space in non-economics networks (departments, publications, conferences). This will be done by looking at several different aspects of its institutional developments such as textbooks, institutional affiliations, and publication outlets. Teaching institutional economics in 1930s Chicago: A closer look at Frank Knight’s course. Felipe Almeida, Marindia Brites, and Gustavo Goulart In 1928, Frank Knight joined the faculty of the Department of Economics at the University of Chicago. Despite the fact that Knight’s studies strongly supported the rise of neoclassical economics, when he joined the University of Chicago, it was expected that he would teach courses on institutional economics. In 1937, Knight wrote a letter to Clarence Ayres, a prominent American institutionalist of that time. In his letter, Knight addressed the content of a course on “Economics from an Institutionalist Standpoint,” seeking critical comments from Ayres. In

50


response, he received a five-page letter from Ayres. This brief letter exchange illustrates the perspective of a key contributor to neoclassical economics about institutional approaches—American institutionalism included—and the reactions of a prominent American Institutionalist of the 1930s. The aim of this study is to analyze the content of Knight’s course on “Economics from an Institutionalist Standpoint.” The study looks to contribute to the discussion on Knight’s perspective on institutional approaches. Ayres’s comments on Knight’s course carry instrumental significance for this paper, and help highlight how Knight’s perspective differed from that of a noted American institutionalist. Session 6C Session: Economics and Other Disciplines - II Untangling Credit Theories of Money. Michael Beggs The old idea of a ‘credit theory of money’ has seen a resurgence since the 1990s, especially within sociology, but also in some strands of economics. The phrase means different things to different people, and the classic sources of the ‘credit theory’ (Mitchell-Innes, Schumpter, Wicksell, Hawtrey, Hicks) are at odds with one another. This paper disentangles and clarifies various claims contributing to the broader vision of money as credit: (1) ‘All money is credit, because the money holder is “owed goods”; (2) ‘Most money today is credit-money, so we must understand credit to understand modern money’; (3) ‘All money is credit, because it is someone’s debt’; and (4) ‘We understand money better by starting from credit’. I discuss the original contexts for each of these claims, raise problems with mixing them together into a single ‘credit vision of money’. I suggest that a ‘liquidity vision of money’ is better able to explain why most modern money is also credit, while most credit is not money. That Old Time Religion: Why Economists Used to Say that Psychology Should Stay Out of Economics. Mario Rizzo The case for not including psychology in economics rested on several pillars. The first was an attempt to escape the peculiarities of hedonic psychology and to construct a general theory compatible with many psychological perspectives. The second was part of the general philosophical escape from psychologism and acceptance of the logic of choice as analogous to pure logic. The third was the movement to disregard the axioms of rationality as a description of the behavior of real individuals but as simply animating principles of constructs designed to explain aggregate market behavior. And the fourth was the idea (promoted by the earlier neoclassical theorists) of rationality as descriptive of equilibrium behavior only -- combined with the view that the world was not always in equilibrium. This paper will discuss all four aspects of the “case against psychology” to determine which may still have validity.

51


Session 6D Session: Radical Reformers and Economists in the US Programmes of Radical Social Reform in the U.S. Economics Curriculum: 1883-1955. Irwin Collier In a famous essay written in 1906 Werner Sombart wondered why there was no socialism in the United States. Yet even a casual examination of the historical record reveals that the specters of programmes of radical social reform, covering the entire range of socialist thought from its utopian origins through the existing realities of Stalinist central planning by the mid-twentieth century, were haunting the economics curricula in the colleges and universities across the land both before and after Sombart’s essay. While never the principal object of mainstream or conventional economics, such schemes of radical social reform at least managed to seize the niche once occupied by the agricultural system (i.e., Physiocracy) and the commercial or mercantile system (i.e., mercantilism) in Smith’s Wealth of Nations — whipping boys for the dismal scientists. Yet critical spirits and even progressive poseurs from time to time have attracted the serious attention of economists, enough so, that a field was established that would ultimately evolve into a (minor) field of “comparative economic systems” within economics departments. The purpose of this paper is to survey that part of the economics curriculum in the United States dedicated to these “radical programmes of social reform”. Syllabi, reading lists, examination questions and lecture notes for courses taught by Richard Ely, Thorstein Veblen, and John Bates Clark through Paul Douglas, Paul Sweezy, and Joseph Schumpeter found in university publications, archived papers of economists, and department records from university archives provide the foundation of source material for the paper. Living Wages and Universal Incomes: radical activism in neoliberal America. Tiago Mata While the involvement of economists at the highest levels of government, as advisers and advocates, is well known and understood, historians have only just began to ask what role economists have played in grassroots activism. My essay is a comparison of two campaigns that drew together economists and laypersons in close collaboration. Both Universal Basic Income and the Living Wage Movements have long and distinguished intellectual genealogies. At the turn of the twenty-first century both have become centerpieces for popular engagement with the political economy. I ask how social movements have recruited social scientists and how these movements have been shaped by their mobilisation of economic expertise. I argue that while the living wage movement has narrowly drawn on economic numeracy for its advocacy, the UBI movement has called upon future making to make its case.

52


Session 6E Session: Adam Smith - II Adam Smith on Modern Colonial Slavery: the love of domination in a “mercantile system”. Ana Paula Londe Silva Adam Smith was known, in his time and later on, as a harsh critic of slavery. His approach departs from the idea that slaves are less productive and more costly compared to freeman, in other words, slavery is inefficient from an economic point of view. These economic disadvantages, however, do not ensure the general abolition of slavery. Smith recognizes that slavery was the rule rather than the exception throughout time, and explains this tendency due to a natural willingness of mankind – the love of domination. It is the love to domineer and tyrannize that drives masters to employ slaves wherever the law allows it and the nature of the work can afford it. Then, a question arises: does Smith justify the existence of the modern Colonial Slavery using a natural and universal inclination of mankind? The paper proposed will deal with this issue by organizing and contextualizing Smith’s main arguments regarding colonies and slavery, both in the Lectures on Jurisprudence and in the Wealth of Nations. Smith’s approach to modern colonization is inserted in his broader and well-known critique to the “mercantile system”, which also underlies his comprehension of the Atlantic Slavery. The employment of slaves was only affordable in sugar-cane and tobacco plantations, where there were extraordinary profits derived from monopolies ensured by mercantilist policies. In other words, it is high profitability that affords the domineering willingness of the colonists. Then, Smith’s criticism on mercantilism can be the key to understand how he deals with colonial slavery. Adam Smith’s Demographic and Geographic Theory of the Bounds on the Division of Labour: why the division of labour is REALLY limited by the extent of the market. Jérôme Lange According to Adam Smith, a nation’s per capita wealth depends principally on the extent of its market (which limits both division of labour and capital accumulation). The concept of the market, indeed, may well be the single most important concept of the Wealth of Nations. But what does Smith exactly mean by “the market”, and what then defines its extent? Modern-day economics is a poor guide to address this question. There is indeed a general deficiency of definition of “the market” in present-day economics (Hodgson 2008 ; Satz 2015). The concept’s meaning has also changed, losing its primary sense as place and physical means of exchange to designate principally an institution. Probably the most eminent treatment of Smith’s concept of the “extent of the market” is the one by Allyn Young (1928). Young’s 1928 paper, by offering an operational definition of this concept, filled the definitional void and was consequentially adopted by economists, including by historians of economic thought, as a useful analytic tool. But the verification of its applicability to Smith’s work was neglected. The fact that transport costs are an important part

53


of Smith’s conception of the market is widely acknowledged (Groenewegen 1977; Myint 1977; West 1978)(Groenewegen 1977 , West 1978). But how geographical factors more widely enter the Smithian definition of markets is rarely enunciated clearly in the secondary literature. The relationship with population, moreover, is almost universally disregarded. Smith saw the extent of the market as embodying the possible extent of trade. This is related to, but distinct from, both aggregate demand and “the economy” as a whole. The possible extent of trade, in turn, is determined primarily by population and space, while wealth and technology enter only later, and indirectly, into the definition of the extent of the market. The extension of the market by the growth of population is related to Smith’s description of how a society evolves through the different stages of economic progress, on which the relation between size of population and extent of the market sheds further light. The growth of population thereby acts on the size of the market through two compounding effects: the multiplication of possible trade relations (by the multiplication of potential trade partners) and the facilitation of trade relations by the diminution of the mean distance between trading partners (an effect of the population concentration accompanying population growth). In this, too, we can find Smith’s theory of urbanisation fuelled by the social (and geographical) division of labour. Session 6F Session: Samuelson Not a Behaviorist. Samuelson’s Contributions to Utility Theory in the Harvard Years, 1936–1940. Ivan Moscati In this paper I review the contributions to utility theory that Samuelson made when he was a Ph.D. student at Harvard, from the first scientific papers he began writing in 1936 to the Ph.D. dissertation he submitted in November 1940. Based on this review, I make three points: (1) after exploring contrasting research paths during the years 1936–1937, Samuelson’s stance on utility analysis quickly stabilized and, from around mid-1938, he became an advocate of an ordinal-utility approach to choice theory; (2) accordingly, the widespread image of the young Samuelson as a committed behaviorist who wanted to free economic analysis from the utility concept is misleading; (3) the so-called Das Paul Samuelson Problem, that is, the question of whether Samuelson changed his mind on utility analysis between 1938 and 1948–1950, has either a negative answer or is ill-posed. Reacting to Samuelson: Early Development Economics and the Factor Price Equalisation Theorem. Mauro Boianovsky Paul Samuelson’s famous 1948 “factor price equalization theorem” was his main contribution to international trade theory. He demonstrated conditions under which trade in goods would lead to full equalization of wages and rates of return on capital across countries. In practice, factor price equalization has not been a

54


feature of the international economy, as Samuelson acknowledged. His theorem came out when development economics was starting to emerge as a new field of research and policy, based on the perceived international income asymmetries between poor and rich countries. The paper investigates how development economists reacted mostly (but not always) critically to that theorem, with attention to the methodological issues involved. Session 7A Session: Macro Agent-based vs. DSGE Modeling: a short history of two competing approaches to macroeconomics Building an ‘Empirical Discipline’: How Agent-Based Models integrated the Macroeconomist’s Toolkit? Romain Plassard Agent-based modelling has become a tool for explaining how capitalist economies work and for guiding economic policy (Arthur Turrell, 2016). However, when imported in economics, this simulation technique was not used to address macroeconomic issues (Leigh Tesfatsion, 2001: p. 284). Moreover, there was a resistance to deduce economic policies from agent-based models (Herbert Dawid and Giorgio Fagiolo, 2008: pp. 352-352). It follows a puzzle: how agent-based models ended up in the macroeconomist’s toolkit? My article aims to address this puzzle. To this end, I focus on the issues raised by the empirical validation of agent-based models. There were debates on how to choose the behavioral rules of the models, on how to check the robustness of the simulations, and on how to formulate economic policy. The challenge was to build an “empirical discipline”. I argue that the construction of this “empirical discipline” was central to the emergence and the development of agent-based macroeconomics. Is Cross-fertilization Possible in Macroeconomics? DSGE Confronted to MABM Models. Muriel Dal Pont Legrand This paper proposes to examine the nature of the influence MABM may have on macroeconomics research agenda. First, we propose to identify the different topics investigated by both approaches and then to determine whether there is a convergence in their respective research agenda. This (potential) influence may nevertheless tend towards the superficial, we then propose at a second stage to examine to what extent more precise ideas, or concepts, initially developed by MABM have been in fine absorbed (and how) by the DSGE models. We can show that the DSGE approach is less monolithic than it used to be at the time of the New Synthesis: one can indeed identify a growing literature which developed at the margin of DSGE approach, including elements of heterogeneous agent modelling and social interactions, bounded rationality, macroeconomics experiments, expectation formation and learning etc. Beyond this specific debate, the paper questions the capacity of the current dominant approach to benefit from cross-fertilization and to define more precisely the nature of that process.

55


Macroeconometric Modelling at the International Monetary Fund (1998-2008): From MULTIMOD Mark III to GEM. Francesco Sergi This paper investigates the development between 2001 and 2004 of a macroeconometric model (named “Global Economy Model”, GEM) within the Research department of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The development of the GEM aimed at “improv[ing] the Fund policy analysis” by “using recent economic research based on explicit microeconomic framework” (Bayoumi, 2004, 1). The GEM was expected to replace the “MULTI-region econometric MODel” (MULTIMOD) Mark III (Laxton et al. 1998). The MULTIMOD was the last model in a lineage of similar “Keynesian” macroeconometric models introduced at the Fund in the 1970s (Boughton, 2001). By contrast, the GEM represented the first model in a lineage of dynamic stochastic general equilibrium (DSGE) models. The development of the GEM coincided indeed with the rise of the DSGE approach, or the “new neoclassical synthesis” as it is also called both by macroeconomists (e.g. Goodfriend and King, 1997) and historians (e.g. De Vroey and Duarte, 2013). The existing historical accounts covered the academic literature of the “new synthesis”, making clear the theoretical and methodological transformation that it entailed. Much less is known about how this approach was implemented within the policy-making and policy-advice process of national and international institutions. This paper investigates this issue, taking the GEM as a case study. It also shows how the development of the GEM played a key role in the spreading of DSGE models across policy-making institutions. The building of the GEM gathered indeed a wide community of modelers, which acted then as a network for the development of DSGE models in other institutions. The paper starts by presenting the theoretical content, the methodology, and the empirical methods of the GEM; then these characteristics are compared with those of the MULTIMOD III. This comparison focuses especially on the ways to approach international trade, international financial markets, and the international transmission mechanisms of monetary policy. These features have been so far overlooked by the historical literature on the “new neoclassical synthesis”. Therefore, the contribution of this paper is to suggest that dealing with “open economy” issues has been precisely the key for the widespread adoption of DSGE models for policy analysis by institutions like the IMF. Session 7B Session: Classical Dynamics Say's Law and the Classical Theory of Depressions. David Glasner Say’s Law occupies a prominent, but equivocal, position in the history of economics, having been the object of repeated controversies about its meaning and significance since it was originally propounded early in the nineteenth century. It has been variously defined, and arguments about its meaning and

56


validity have failed to reach consensus about just what was being attacked or defended. This paper proposes a unifying interpretation of Say’s Law based on the idea that the monetary sector of an economy with a competitively supplied money involves at least two distinct markets not just one. Thus, contrary to the Lange-Patinkin interpretation of Say’s Law, an excess supply or demand for money does not necessarily imply an excess supply or demand for goods in a Walrasian GE model. Beyond modifying the standard interpretation of the inconsistency between Say’s Law and a monetary economy, the paper challenges another standard interpretation of Say’s Law as being empirically refuted by the existence of lapses from full employment and economic depressions. Under the alternative interpretation, originally suggested by Hutt, and by Clower and Leijonhufvud Say’s Law actually provides a theory whereby disequilibrium in one market, causing the actual amount supplied to fall short of the amount that had been planned to reduce demand in other markets potentially initiating a cumulative process of shrinking demand and supply. This cumulative process of contracting supply is in fact analogous to the Keynesian multiplier whereby a reduction in demand initiates a cumulative process of declining demand. A Reconsideration of the Role of Demand in Malthus's Theory of Accumulation. Matthew Luke Smith This paper is concerned with the role of effective demand in Malthus’s theory of accumulation expounded in his Principles of Political Economy. As is well known, Keynes praised Malthus for being a forerunner in identifying a lack of effective demand as a cause of depression in economic activity and a constraint on growth. There have since been many interpretations in the literature of Malthus’s position by reference to his arguments against Says Law in contending the possibility of ‘general gluts’, and to his theory of capital accumulation. We begin by examining Malthus’s conception of the supply-side factors which determine what we call, ‘potential accumulation’, being accumulation that is not constrained by demand. The paper then considers the role of effective demand in Malthus’s well known contention of the possibility of ‘general gluts’ and, connectedly, in his theory of demand-constrained capital accumulation. On this basis we then appraise the Keynesian antecedence of Malthus’s theory by reference to some aspects of the debate in the literature, showing that whilst it lacked a meaningful saving-investment analysis it does provide insights important to the modern demand-led approach to growth. In conclusion we argue that Malthus’s demand-constrained theory of accumulation is as valid as the supply-side theories of classical contemporaries but like them was not coherent in any Keynesian sense, nor altogether plausible. We agree with Keynes that Malthus is an early and prominent under-consumption theorist but who stands out for anticipating some important aspects of modern demand-led growth theory after Keynes (and Kalecki).

57


National Security and Economic Growth in Adam Smith. Hiroyuki Furuya Istvan Hont argued that The Wealth of Nations was a book not about Kantian perpetual peace, but rather, about national survival in a global market and competitive economic strategy. Indeed, Adam Smith wrote it in a century dubbed the ‘Second Hundred Years’ War’ between Britain and France, and described national defence as ‘the first duty of the sovereign’ (WN, V. i. a. 1). He did not hesitate to endorse the political protection of trade if it genuinely served national security, and approved state support, raised from taxation, for the domestic production of strategic goods that could not be left to the mercy of foreign suppliers in wartime (WN, IV. v. a. 36). It is well known that Smith justified the English Navigation Acts, not as commercial policies designed for mere economic advantage, but rather as indispensable national security measures in the sense that ‘defence, however, is of much more importance than opulence’ (WN, IV. ii. 30). Smith did not underestimate the fact that national defence is funded by taxation, and the tax revenue of the state increases or decreases in proportion to the productivity of the wealth of the nation. This means that the pursuit of the wealth and power of the nation, or what Smith agreed was the object of political economy, ultimately establishes national security (WN, II. iii. 2). This paper highlights the reality that war could not be feasible and sustainable for the early modern state unless its foreign trade, manufacturing and commerce succeeded. Session 7C Session: Economists and the Corn Trade On the Difficult Transition from the Mediterranean to European Economic Thought: The Fortunes of Ferdinando Galiani’s Della Moneta and Dialogues sur le Commerce des Bleds. Cınla Akdere, Eyup Ozveren, and Seven Agir If any issue has troubled most of the Georgian (republic) families in the last few years, it has definitely been debt in foreign currency (mostly US Dollar). Foreign currency household debt has been increasing since 2005 and the level of dollarization has been remaining persistently high (more than 60%, 2018). The currency crisis, that started in 2014, made foreign currency loans even heavier burden for debtors, as they mostly earn in national currency. Protests, hunger strikes and suicide attempts by debtors finally let the dollarization Gini out of the bottle and shifted the historical but ignored issue of foreign currency loans to the public and political spotlight. However, the development of the financial sector has been considered as a success story of economic transition and praised by international institutions. Over time the key financial institutions – commercial banks - have turned out in foreign ownership and the dependency of the financial sector on foreign capital has reached 80%. The paper argues that the development of the financial sector in Georgia has been accompanied by the process of peripheral financialization. Furthermore, this process has encouraged and strengthened financial dollarization in the country. Peripheral financialization is analysed across three main dimensions:

58


financialization of accumulation process, monetary policy and daily life. However, most of the developments in these spheres cannot be understood without the role of the state apparatus, as the government enabled the process of financialization partly through deregulation of legal framework and partly by not doing anything against certain trends. Thus, on the one hand, the paper explains the process of financialization across the dimensions mentioned above and on the other hand it shows the linkages of each aspect with dollarization persistence. Free trade against protection: Parliamentary speeches, political economy and the repeal of the Corn Laws. Rogério Arthmar Even though classical economics has been reputed too abstract to offer useful guidance for practical policy, the debates surrounding the ultimate repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 bear testimony to the influence of economists in shaping the fate of British politics in the first half of the nineteenth century. Their ideas, either for free trade or some measure of protection of domestic agriculture, provided support to the most distinguished representatives on either side of the controversy in the Commons. To assess how the views on this issue entertained by Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas R. Malthus and Robert Torrens found their way into the arguments put forward by both camps in dispute, some of the most important speeches in Parliament at the occasion are canvassed. Prior to that, though, an initial section presents how the mentioned economists had evaluated the consequences of the Corn Laws over the performance of the British economy. Following that, the speeches of the Tory leaders Lord George Bentinck and Benjamin Disraeli are inspected to single out the influence of Malthus and Torrens on the convenience of protection for preserving the constitutional arrangement of British society. Next, the reasons for free-trade advanced by Richard Cobden and, especially, Prime-Minister Robert Peel, both of whom gave significant weight to the harmful effects of the so-called bread-tax on the welfare of the working population, are considered to gauge how Smith’s and Ricardo’s messages were assimilated by both politicians. After this inquiry, it is shown that a substantial degree of adaptation was necessary by both camps when invoking the precepts of classical economics within the fierce environment of political struggle. Lastly, some reflections are laid out on the motives behind Peel’s decisive gambit for free trade at the time. Corn-Exporting Countries and the Gains from Trade: David Ricardo’s Non-Universal Case for Free Trade. Reinhard Schumacher and Gonçalo Fonseca David Ricardo is best-known today for his theory of international trade, which he describes in chapter 7 of his Principles of Political Economy and Taxation. His trade theory has gained some attention in the history of economic thought recently, and some common misrepresentations of it have been highlighted. However, one aspect of it has surprisingly gained no attention, namely that his case for free trade is not a universal case. In his Principles, he argues that free international trade would be the best policy for Great Britain, because of two

59


possible benefits from trade. These two benefits are usually labeled static and dynamic gains from trade respectively. The static gain consists of the greater availability of commodities, due to specialization and an increase in the overall production of commodities. While the static gain applies to all international trade and all participating countries, the dynamic gain has an effect only when trade in wage goods takes place. Based on his theory of value and wealth distribution, Ricardo assumes that profits increase when wages fall. If foreign trade leads to the import of cheaper wage-goods – above all corn – from abroad, wages will fall and thus profits will increase. Thus, countries importing cheaper corn from abroad benefit by increased capital accumulation and thus economic growth. However, the question arises, what happens to countries exporting corn? Ricardo does not address this question in his Principles, but the logical answer is already given in his Principles and he does address it elsewhere in his writing and correspondence, which we will discuss. Ricardo’s well-known law of rent comes into play here. If a country starts exporting agricultural products as a result of trade, it has to increase its production in it. This means, worse plots of land have to be cultivated, increasing domestic rents and wages, and at the same time lowering domestic profits. Thus, a corn-exporting country will not enjoy the dynamic gain of Ricardo’s theory, but even worse, it will actually have a dynamic loss. A falling rate of profit leads to a lower rate of capital accumulation and thus to slower economic growth. Ricardo’s theory is by no means a universal theory of the benefits of international trade, as it is usual portrayed. Rather, he was very much arguing from the perspective of Great Britain, the leading industrial country at the time. For poorer, agricultural countries, his theory suggests that they should be wary of foreign trade. Session 7D Session: Keynes and Others Did Hiferding influence Keynes. Matari Pierre and Abdelkader Sliffi This paper aims at comparing Hilferding's explanation of the way financial markets influences output level to Keynes' explanation of this phenomenon. While Hilferding (1910), in Finance Capital, develops a theory of fictitious capital in its link to industrial capital, Keynes (1930), in Book IV, Chapter 15 of the Treatise on Money, distinguishes between financial circulation and industrial circulation. Hilferding (1910) differentiates capital ownership from capital management, while Keynes' (1936) Chapter 11 of the General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money puts forward a marshallian study of the equilibrium between supply price and demand price of capital. Uncertainty is reintroduced by Keynes (1936) in chapter 12 dealing with long run expectations. Besides analogies and differences between the two authors’ designs of finance and investment decision, we argue that the role of uncertainty is relevant in both analysis of stock exchange speculation.

60


Triffin's Dilemma and his Proposals for a "True" International Monetary System (1951-1993). Ivo Maes In 1951, Triffin became a professor at Yale. However, notwithstanding his return to academia, he retained a very strong interest in policy issues, especially regarding the international monetary system. By the end of the 1950s, Triffin became more and more worried about the international reserve position of the United States due to the US gold losses and the increase in dollar liabilities. In his view, the continued deterioration in the US net reserve position would undermine foreigners' confidence in the dollar as a safe medium for reserve accumulation. So, the Bretton Woods system was not sustainable, leading to his famous dilemma: “The gold exchange standard may ... help in relieving a shortage of world monetary reserves. It does so only to the extent that the key currency countries are willing to let their net reserve position decline through increases in their own gross reserves. If they allow this to happen, however, and to continue indefinitely, they tend to bring about a collapse of the system itself through the gradual weakening of foreigners' confidence in the key currencies” (Triffin 1960)..Triffin did not fear a dollar collapse, but the return of a liquidity shortage and a repeat of the gloom and doom of the 1930s. Like Keynes, Triffin sought a more “international” solution for the world liquidity problem, “the true ‘internationalization’ of the foreign exchange component of the world's international reserves”. While Triffin correctly predicted the breakdown of Bretton Woods, the 1970s did not see a depression, as in the 1930s, but were marked by a strong inflation, partly due to strongly expansionary US economic policies. Session 7E Session: Economists and Gender Alfred Marshall on household work: at the boundaries of Economics. Virginie Gouverneur Marshall was one of the first economists to address the question of women’s role in family and society within Economics. In his Principles of Economics (1890), Political Economy appears as an applied social ethics of which the object is to identify the elements favourable to the well-being of the humanity. Among these means, women and family are at the forefront. But Marshall argues also that “the raison d'être of economics as a separate science is that it deals chieflly with that part of man’s action which is most under the control of measurable motives”, emphasizing the role of money in this measure (1890[1920] : 34, Macmillan & Co). Then, in his analysis of women’s role in society, the question is not so much the one of an absolute boundary between the economic and the non-economic as that of the difficulty of reconciling two visions of economics. The first part shows how Marshall introduced the question of women’s role in family and society within Principles by defending a conception of the moral and economic progress combining eugenics and utilitarianism. The second part considers the elements establishing the family as a basic economic unit. In a cost-benefit analysis of the restrictions of women’s employment, Marshall presents the family as a place of

61


production source of income. The third part focuses on Marshall’s distinction between two questions relating to parents’ expenditure on their children: the motivations which lead them to invest in children’s human capital and the measurability of the resulting investment return. John Stuart Mill’s Subjection of Women: A 150th Anniversary Retrospective. Sarah Faustina Small and Steven Pressman This year marks the 150th anniversary of the publication of John Stuart Mill’s 1869 book The Subjection of Women. The book is among the first focused feminism in economic thought. This sesquicentennial provides an opportunity to reflect upon Mill’s work, and to offer a deeper, more current reading of it. The main objective of this paper is to provide this. According to Mill, in 1869 England “there remain no legal slaves, except the mistress of every house.” J.S. Mill, largely inspired by his close friend and eventual wife Harriet Taylor Mill, sought to change this through his writing and through his role in the British Parliament from 1865 to 1868. This paper seeks to place Mill’s essay into both an historical and a contemporary perspective, and thereby to shed light and understanding on the essay and its historical role, as well as on the work of J.S. Mill. We begin by summarizing the main argument of the work and describing the times during which Mill wrote the essay, and what he was responding to and trying to change. Interestingly, Mill wrote the piece in 1861, but postponed its publication. We next discuss the possible reasons that Mill delayed publication of this work for 8 years. We conclude with an assessment of what Mill may have got right (and wrong) in light of recent research on both inequality and feminist economic thought. Session 7F Session: Methodology and Modelling Economic Theory and (ontological) Reductionism: some pitfalls in the road of the microfoundations project. José Ricardo Fucidji and Celso Neris Jr This paper aims to survey the literature on the theoretical enterprise of providing the “microfoundations of macroeconomics”. To do so, it evaluates that project from the viewpoint of economic methodology, mostly of critical realism. Its novelty lies in analysing the reductionism inbuilt in the project and its unsuitability both to its own terms and to the purpose of illuminating socioeconomic reality. We also stress that, in addition to a project of science (the sound or rigorous way of doing ‘scientific’ economics), this project includes an implicit ontology of market sociability that establishes links between microfoundations and the neoliberal ideology. Some attempts at overcoming the reductionist individualism of microfondations are also evaluated, such as complexity theory and institutionalism, pointing out its potential and shortcomings. To do justice to a complex, hierarchically multi-level structured and open reality economic theory should not adopt explanations that give precedence to a single level. It should instead prefer approaches in which micro and macro levels are mutually conditioned and relatively autonomous.

62


The Discontinuous Turn in Financial Risk Modelling. Christian Walter Heterodox economics has, since its inception, stressed the extreme importance of financial crises to understand the nature of finance. Both the French school of regulation and the economics of conventions sought to leave the framework of analysis imposed by the dominant paradigm of neoclassical finance, that of the all-powerful exchange in a financial world without crises. In a completely different way, the fundamental role of financial crises has been emphasized by Benoît Mandelbrot in his work on the mathematical modelling of stock market dynamics with fractals, a new approach which characterised heterodox modelling in financial economics. Initially, heterodox economics and fractals were unaware of each other, while each in its own discipline sought to propose another paradigm for finance. Heterodox economics and heterodox modelling seemed to await a new mathematical tool for rebuilding finance on new foundations. Heterodox modelling challenged a very important representation of the dominant paradigm of neoclassical finance, the continuity of stock market fluctuations. With this assumption, whose mathematical translation is the Brownian representation of market dynamics, finance refrained from thinking about crises. This finance “empty of crisis” has produced the illusion of a taming of the risks of which we understand now how it was associated with the continuity assumption. For example, it is possible to consider the 2008 crisis as a cognitive unexpected consequence of the continuity assumption in risk modelling. I propose to focus on one aspect of these debates that seems to me crucial: the “leptokurtic crisis” and its consequences in challenging the dominant paradigm of neoclassical finance. Leptokurtic (leptos, peaked, and kurtosis, curvature) means that the empirical distributions are more peaked than the Gaussian bell, the theoretical distribution expected in Brownian representation of the neoclassical finance, with the result that extreme events like financial crises are more likely than under a Gaussian distribution. The Mandelbrot solution to solve the leptokurtic puzzle with fractals exploded the field of neoclassical modelling and launched violent controversies dividing the academic community into two opposite camps: pro and cons the discontinuity, which became the hinge of the debates. The crisis started the quest for refinements of the Brownian representation that is for new models that could solve the leptokurtic problem with saving the “mild randomness” assumption of Brownian motion. Two distinct research programmes were currently established in financial modelling to tackle the leptokurtic issue: the first Mandelbrot programme based on stable Lévy processes and the alternative non-stable Lévy processes approach based on the Merton’s view. I name these two programmes: the radical programme (RP) and the pragmatic programme (PP). During more than thirty years, these two programmes were incompatible in the sense that Mandelbrot and its opponents speak from “incommensurable” viewpoints in the Kuhn’s words. After presenting the main hinges of these debates, I will argue that, for solving the leptokurtic problem, Mandelbrot has introduced what I name the

63


“discontinuous turn” in financial modelling: a discontinuity principle which clashes with the empirical grounding of neoclassical finance. Reconsidering the Philosophy of Modelling. Melissa Vergara Fernández If, as Hands (2015) has suggested, economic methodology is an inferior good, the years of the recession should have been gold for the discipline. Indeed, much has been written about macroeconomics, particularly its incapacity to model the economy accurately. Yet, the protagonists of these discussions have seldom been economic methodologists or philosophers. The young discipline missed a chance. I argue that this situation is due to the project in which philosophers of economics, particularly those working on models, have embarked. This is a philosophical project. It satisfies philosophical curiosity but is not relevant for the practice. It attempts to explain what makes models, despite their patent falsities, successful. Traditionally, philosophers of science regarded theories to be what mattered in science: they were the vehicles of scientific knowledge. A good theory made models redundant, temporary. While philosophers now agree that models are the vehicles of scientific knowledge, they disagree about the reasons. They debate with each other. Here I suggest that engaging in a project that aims at relevance for economic practice involves addressing at least three aspects that, until now, have been neglected. First, the relation between theoretical and empirical models. Philosophers have ignored empirical models because these pose no mystery. Second, a notion of model failure and its potential sources. The foil of success, failure, is as ubiquitous in science. It is even more important to understand––its consequences can be dire. Finally, the role of practical aspects of modelling, particularly in policy contexts.

64


Sunday, June 23 Session 8A Session: History of Macroeconometric Modeling The Place of the Phillips Curve in Macroeconometric Models: the case of the Fed-MIT-Penn model. Antonella Rancan The paper investigates how the Fed-MIT-Penn model integrated the Phillips curve after Friedman’s Presidential Address (1968). My departure point is James Forder (2014) who examines a wide range of literature to demonstrate that the standard narrative on the Phillips curve is a myth. However, Forder devotes little attention to the macroeconometric models of the 1960s and 1970s, arguing that they were mainly short run forecasting models and thus little affected by the debate on the vertical Phillips curve. My aim is to integrate Forder’s reconstruction looking at the Fed MIT Penn model. It represents an interesting perspective both because not merely conceived as a forecasting model, and because it testified since the 1970s an increasing gap between the economic research carried out within the academia and within economic institutions (the Fed Board). The Brookings Model, 1960-1972. Juan Acosta and Erich Pinzón-Fuchs In this paper we trace the construction of the Brookings model, from its start as part of the activities of the SSRC’s Committee on Economic Stability in 1960 to the end of the project in 1972. The Brookings model was the largest of the macroeconometric models produced during the 1960s and the team behind it faced for the first time many of the problems associated with such an enterprise. We focus on the challenges related to the material circumstances in which the project was carried out (institutional setting, data and computing requirements, etc.) to provide a detailed characterization of the project and of the practice of macroeconometric modeling in the 1960s Development Planning in Turkey. Erwin Dekker The paper studies the role of Jan Tinbergen and the State Planning Organization in Turkey during the period 1960-1966. It demonstrates how macro-econometric modelling was institutionally embedded in a contested expert institution, and how planning took place given the very serious data-constraints. These data-constraints led to repeated simplifications and adjustment in the planning procedure, and an increased reliance on expert committees. The paper details how data limitations were overcome and led to new modelling practices in particular the semi input-output method.

65


Session 8B Session: Austrian Economics Positions of the Austrian School on Currency Policy in the Last Decades of the Hapsburg Monarchy (1892-1914). Günther Chaloupek The “gold standard mentality” as a fundamental characteristic of the Austrian School originates from Carl Menger’s theory of money and its postulate of constancy of the value of money. Even though this constancy cannot be expected as automatic result of a currency based on gold or silver, Menger thought that “the dangers inherent in fluctuations of the prices of precious metals appear smaller than regulation of the exchange value of money by governments or political parties.” When, after a long period of disorder in its monetary system, the Habsburg monarchy prepared for adoption of the gold standard in 1892, Menger was one of the expert members of a special commission of the Austrian parliament. He supported the introduction of the gold standard, he advised to fix the gold content after a period of “floating” in order to avoid negative effects on economic activity which could result not only from a decrease of the value of money but also from an increase. When the gold agio reappeared in 1893, reaching its peak at 6,75%, this was a matter of great concern for economists and politicians. Menger argued that the national bank should have used its gold reserves immediately, whereas Friedrich Wieser took the event more lightly arguing that the bank should carry on with the execution of the project strictly according to plan. In view of historical records, payment in specie (Barzahlung) was introduced only on a voluntary basis in 1892. To make it obligatory required a joint decision of the parliaments of Austria and Hungary. The gradual disappearance of the agio until 1895 and the easy maintenance of payments in specie thereafter justified a more optimistic attitude towards the state’s ability to preserve monetary stability. Obligatory payment in specie supported by Hungary became an issue of economic policy debates in 1903, and again around 1910. Beginning in 1907, Ludwig von Mises published four articles on the currency reform of 1892. He based his arguments on careful empirical investigation which made extensive use of all available statistical material, and also of the existing literature. Mises concluded that time was ripe for legal specie payments. The main advantage would be the strengthening of international credit of the monarchy urgently needed given the monarchy’s enormous foreign debts. Moreover, it would demonstrate the reality of the currency reform’s success. The contribution will present and discuss these findings in detail in comparison with other interventions and findings of economic history literature.

66


Carl Menger and the Currency Commission of 1892 on the Gold Standard in Austria-Hungary. Andreas M. Kramer The Currency Commission of 1892 on the implementation of a gold standard monetary system in the Austro-Hungarian Empire brought together thirty-six experts, among them central bankers, private bankers, other civil servants, professors of political economy, merchants, lawyers, a writer, and an abbot. This article chronicles the most interesting parts of around 300 pages of transcripts of the meetings. The founder of the Austrian School of economics, Carl Menger, was one of the experts of the commission and spoke more than any of the other participants. His contribution is put into the context of the contributions of the other participants and the article also provides some background information about the participants themselves and the general historical context of the commission. The transcripts give a rare insight into Carl Menger’s views on public policy and interesting insights on the general intellectual climate of the time concerning monetary and other economic issues and insights into the way the Austro-Hungarian government designed such a commission. Versuchsstation des Weltuntergangs: Viennese Origins of the Debate on Capitalist Decline in Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek. Alexander Ebner This paper addresses the Viennese intellectual origins of the debate on the decline of contemporary capitalism in the key works of Joseph A. Schumpeter (1883-1950), Karl Polanyi (1886-1964), and Friedrich A. von Hayek (1899-1992). Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek have each provided major impulses to the theory of capitalist development, which remain of utmost relevance for current discourses on this subject. Their work is characterized by a common interest in the institutional conditions and long-run perspectives of modern capitalism. In fact, their contributions stand for specific paradigmatic visions, pragmatically approximated in terms of Schumpeterian conservatism, Polanyian social democratic institutionalism, and Hayekian liberalism. Even in outlining the differences between their approaches, one needs to account for complementary orientations. Schumpeter highlighted the historically specific role of entrepreneurship and innovation in economic development. According to him, the economic process would breed an institutional and cultural decomposition of modern capitalism. Polanyi’s work contributed to the groundwork of institutionalist reasoning on the relationship between market, state and social community. Its key concern addressed the embeddedness of market processes in non-market institutions as a means of societal stabilisation in the face of market-driven uncertainty. Hayek put a focus on rule-based based market competition as a mechanism of knowledge coordination. An interventionist state would hinder the functioning of the market system and thus threaten the liberal order. In reiterating crucial commonalities between Schumpeter, Polanyi, and Hayek, one might outline the parallel publication of their most popular works, namely

67


Schumpeter’s “Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy”, Polanyi’s “Great Transformation”, and Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom”, during the most catastrophic years of World War II in the early 1940s. Each of these books addressed the contemporary crisis of Western economies and societies with its key ingredients of the interlinked domains of market and democracy under attack by authoritarian forces. Moreover, in terms of their intellectual biography, Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek originated from the former Austro-Hungarian Empire. All of them experienced their academic education under the critical influence of the Viennese School of economics, they were exposed to the contemporary ideological challenges of Marxism, and they witnessed the political dissolution of the Empire after World War I. All of them went on to seek academic positions in the United States, by doing so bridging the intellectual worlds of European traditionalism and American modernity. Indeed, they shared a certain kind of cultural scepticism reflecting the idea that the economic dynamism of the market system may be confronted by endogenously caused social, cultural and political hindrances that would come to endanger its existence, potentially replacing it with an authoritarian setting of both political and economic affairs that would inevitable endanger individual liberty. In basic terms, this cultural scepticism was characteristic of the Viennese intellectual milieu of the late Austro-Hungarian Empire, resonating with a contemporary Zeitgeist of the Austrian epoch of early modernity that has informed the labelling of Vienna between the turn of the century and World War I as Versuchsstation des Weltuntergangs – experimental station of world demise – by Viennese satirical writer Karl Kraus (1874-1936). This term was meant to address a certain mindset that would view the long-run perspective of cultural decomposition and demise as an inevitable outcome of modern affairs. When it comes to Schumpeter, Polanyi, and Hayek, this specific kind of mindset can be traced in their distinct approaches to the projected decline of capitalist civilization. Indeed, in their diagnoses of the perspectives of capitalism in the early 1940s, the allocative workability of the market mechanism as such was basically confirmed. Instead, it was the incursions of interventionist policies and regulations that were viewed as incompatible with the market system, thus leading to an ever more pressing mismatch between market economy and democratic polity. The looming crisis of liberalism, which was a leitmotif in the assessments of Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek alike, would be paralleled by the rise of authoritarian forces and solutions. Crucially, this viewpoint was paralleled by lamenting the encompassing decomposition of the cultural setting. Schumpeter’s conservatism informed a distanced sarcasm on this issue, which is most prominent in his opus magnum “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy” where the demise of the values and structures of bourgeois civilization is a prominent motive. Polanyi’s social democratic views shaped the moral indignation and despair that fuelled the reasoning on the coincidence of the crisis of liberalism, endemic societal uncertainty and the endangerment of liberty in his “Great Transformation”. Also, Hayek’s liberal alarmism addressed most

68


prominently the collectivist onslaught on individual liberty, as outlined in his “Road to Serfdom”. Basically, these lines of reasoning reiterated the motive of the persistent demise of the bourgeois age that was coined in the Versuchsstation des Weltuntergangs of Post-World War I Vienna. The ingredients of this Zeitgeist cocktail combined the crisis of political and economic liberalism with the fear of a pending socialist revolution, altogether highlighting the question of capitalist survival in the face of radical transformative forces. This Viennese scenario would return with a vengeance in the context of World War II. Again, the future of capitalist order and bourgeois civilisation as well as the contested relationship between market economy and democratic polity were subjects of a fierce debate that seemed to project Viennese intellectual constellations widely into Western academic and political circles. In fact, one might conclude, the very same concerns seem to persist even nowadays in the global age of anti-liberalism and post-democracy. In discussing these topics, the paper proceeds as follows. First, the Viennese intellectual setting of the early 20th Century, and especially the phase after World War I, is taken to the fore with a focus on the prevalent cultural scepticism concerning economic and political issues. Second, the paper places Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek biographically in this specific intellectual milieu of Post World War I Vienna and follows their intellectual trajectories up to the Anglo-American setting of the early 1940s. Third, it discusses the conceptualization of the precarious relationship between market economy and democratic policy in the works of Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek with an emphasis on Schumpeter’s “Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy”, Polanyi’s “Great Transformation” and Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom”. Fourth, in the same vain, the paper proceeds with a reconstruction of the matter of bourgeois cultural demise and the rise of authoritarianism as outlined by Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek. Fifth, the conclusion assesses Schumpeter, Polanyi and Hayek as exponents of the Viennese Versuchsstation des Weltuntergangs. In doing so, it also points at the relevance of their particular ideas for current debates on the future of capitalism and democracy. Session 8C Session: Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit What Can We Learn about Frank Knight’s Economic Theory from the Prefaces to the Reprints of Risk, Uncertainty and Profit? Ross Emmett Frank H. Knight’s Risk, Uncertainty and Profit is an iconic text in the history of neoclassical economic theory. In 2021, we celebrate the 100th anniversary of Risk, Uncertainty and Profit’s publication. But twelve years after its publication, Houghton Mifflin had decided not to continue printing the book, and copies had come to be in short supply. Lionel Robbins asked Knight’s permission to reprint the book in the LSE Reprint series. Knight agreed, and hurriedly wrote a preface outlining the changes that were emerging from his teaching of the University of Chicago’s price theory course. In 1940, Knight added an “Additional Note” to the

69


preface. And in 1948, with some time for reflection available to him only 4 years before his retirement, Knight wrote a summary of the key changes that had occurred in his thinking over his career. The result was a theoretical framework that differed significantly from that offered in Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. The 1948 preface, with a few emendations in 1957, became the basis for the prefaces published in the Spanish, Italian and Japanese translations. What we find as we examine the prefaces are four key themes. First, Knight re-iterates his lifelong interest in the study of imperfect competition, but acknowledges that his approach to the topic has shifted away from the theme of uncertainty. The second theme is related to the first. The source of his shift away from uncertainty as the basis for imperfect competition is primarily found in his methodological shift from a Millian to a Weberian perspective. Thirdly, the prefaces reveal the changes Knight made in his theory of the factors of production, especially in capital theory. While the text continues to refer to a period of production-based theory of capital (often associated with Austrian economics), Knight collapsed the usual three factors of production into one, and adopted the homogeneous capital theory that he is known for. Finally, the prefaces also reveal the connections Knight saw between the study of economic theory and a theory of social economic organization. Rather than produce new editions of his famous book, Knight chose to write prefaces that suggested the emendations, as well as the outright rejections, of some of the theoretical core of the book. In many ways, the prefaces provide succinct guide to the changes of Knight’s economic theory over his career. Risk, Uncertainty, and (Entrepreneurial) Profit before Knight: Insurers, Capitalists, and Speculators in American Theories of Entrepreneurial Profit, 1892-1907. Robert Kaminski The first line in Frank Knight’s Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit reads “There is little that is fundamentally new in this book.” He self-consciously drew upon earlier works examining the source of the economic profit that distinguished perfect competition from “the remote approach which is made to it by the actual competition.” The economist particularly built upon a debate that raged in the nascent American academy for a decade and a half after businessman-economist Frederick B. Hawley published “The Fundamental Error of ‘Kapital und Kapitalzins’” in 1892. Hawley contended that profits represented entrepreneurs’ reward for risk-taking—a part of industrial distribution “flowing from a source of its own and radically distinct from all other forms of income.” Though Knight crucially moved the boundary of entrepreneur’s “radically distinct” reward from Hawley’s undifferentiated “reward for the assumption of risk” to the limits of quantifiability and therefore insurability, I contend that Knight drew more closely from Hawley than scholars have previously acknowledged. This contention has implications beyond mere historical attribution. The bulk of Hawley’s debates with John Bates Clark, Henry Crosby Emery, T.N. Carver, and Clark’s students was devoted to teasing out the definition of entrepreneurship—

70


one of the more vexed questions in Knight-scholarship and the history of economic thought more broadly. A definition placing “the assumption of responsibility…as the only fundamental function of the enterpriser, ‘as such,’” underlays Hawley’s and by extension Knight’s position on profit’s origin—that is, that ownership and not control represents entrepreneurship’s fundamental feature for both thinkers. The Crisis of Profit in the History of Economic Thought. Roni Hirsch In the history of economic thought and business practice, profits have assumed a central place in the way capitalist market-societies are imagined and understood. And yet, the fraught history of the concept of profit reveals not only dramatic historical transformation, but a deepening crisis. In the paper, I argue that both Marx and the early marginalists were united in their rejection of the centrality of profit in economic explanation. Marx, with his idea of profit as an exploitative monopoly rent, and the marginalists, with their assumption of perfect, remainderless competition, have reduced profit almost out of existence, a surprising convergence that has yet to be explored by historians and theorists. This rejection of profit, moreover, formed a central part of these intellectual movements’ broader repudiation of the labor theory of value and its distributive project. Why did profit emerge as a theoretical and normative problem by the mid-nineteenth century, and how did it bring together such disparate views of capitalism and economics? To answer these questions, the paper traces the evolution of profit in the labor theory of value from the work of Adam Smith to his increasingly skeptical successors. In the tradition of classical political economy, profit was defined as a naturally limited, uniform ratio on capital invested. This ratio, moreover, tended to diminish with economic progress, as capital was concentrated, and thus acted as a powerful constraint on business behavior and investment decisions. As the paper shows, what Smith saw as an important feature of the system—namely the natural downward pressure on profits and upward pressure on wages— came to be seen as the system’s greatest liability: the crisis of diminishing rates of return. In particular, the article points to Malthusian doubts, industrialization, and colonialism as the main drivers of this mounting pessimism around the profit-driven system and eventual decline of classical political economy. Session 8D Session: Classical Monetary Economics Joseph Harris and James Steuart on Debasement and Money. Mauricio Coutinho In his Principles of Political Economy (1767), James Steuart more than once refers to Joseph Harris' Money and Coins (1757-57). Specifically, in Book III Part I of The Principles, Steuart adds to the presentation of his general view on money some chapters commenting the current (1758) 'disorders' of the British coin,

71


illustrated by a criticism of Harris' proposals for circumventing the same 'disorders'. Both Harris and Steuart reenact the many decades old debates on debasement, submitting to a review some proposals for reforming the British monetary system. The paper will contrast Harris' and Steuart's perceptions of money, by means of a review of their opinions on the ongoing (1758) British monetary debates. Besides identifying Steuart's references to Harris, the paper will try to review the major tenets of Harris' and Steuart's understanding of money. In the case of Harris, it will be made an attempt to connect his general approach to money, in Part I of Money and Coins (1757), with the concentrated treatment of the monetary 'disorders', in Part II (1758). The Bank of England Operations on Public Debt Securities: the early debate. Nesrine Bentemessek By the beginning of the nineteenth century, British public debt, accumulated over the eighteenth century and during the Napoleonic Wars, had attained extremely high levels. In this respect, the Bank of England had played a crucial role. In fact, in addition to its role of financing the State, it followed an active policy of public debt management. The Bank of England's interventions on the public debt can be classified into three financial operations: First, it financed public expenditure through loans or advances on government securities. Second, it put in place measures to restructure the public debt in order to homogenize it and reduce its cost. Finally, during this period, the Bank used debt securities as a means of monetary policy in order to regulate the money supply. The underlying aim in examining the Bank's operations on the public debt is to identify the extent to which the State's financing and debt restructuring on the one hand and monetary issue and regulation on the other are linked. In this paper, we propose to study these financial operations in the light of the comments of two authors, known a priori for having different visions on the principles of currency circulation: David Ricardo and Thomas Tooke. We expect this study to provide two insights. First, it would highlight the originality of the BoE’s operations on public debt. Second, it would shed light on Ricardo and Tooke's monetary thoughts through their analysis of the Bank's interventions on public finance. The Classical Policy of the Bank of England and the Peel’s Act of 1844 Revisited. Laurent Le Maux and Carol Brunet Little research has been done on the gold specie regime and the Bank of England’s policy from 1821 to 1844 in Britain. Several reasons may be listed for this. One is the lack of data. Another reason concerns institutional design. The rule of the game does not clearly appear at first sight in the conduct of the Bank

72


of England, which is commonly viewed as the “rule of thumb” (Goodhart, 2011, p. 136). It is well known that the Bank’s director, Horsley Palmer, suggested to the 1832 Parliamentary Inquiry that the Bank should keep a ratio of the metallic reserve to the Bank’s liabilities equal to one-third in normal circumstances, and it is also recognized that such a rule of conduct was suspected to have proved impracticable and was not strictly applied (Hawtrey, 1932, p. 137). Nonetheless, another of Palmer’s declarations has been neglected in the literature and was related to the fixed Bank rate policy. Such a Bank rate policy was implemented from 1821 to 1844 and, as we shows in this paper, merits much more consideration. So there are reasons to believe that the Bank’s fixed rate policy under the Old or Classical system fell well short of conforming to the “rule of thumb” and was well expounded at the time. Robert Palmer (Parliamentary Papers, 1832, 1848) as one of the directors of the Bank of England, and Thomas Tooke (1840, 1848; Parliamentary Papers, 1848) as one of the theorists of the classical monetary tradition, respectively conducted and illuminated the Bank’s policy under the Old system. So we look to fill a void by examining the Bank of England’s policy after the Resumption in 1821 and to compare it with the discount department policy after the 1844 Act. Such a comparison is relevant inasmuch as the convertibility at face value into gold specie was effective in Britain throughout the period, from 1821 to 1914. Thus, we shall draw the distinction between the Old (or classical) system founded in 1694 and characterized by the unity of the Bank of England and the fixed Bank rate policy, and the Peel (or new) system created in 1844 and characterized by the separation of the Bank and the active discount rate policy. We shall determine whether the reaction function of the central bank was different or not over the two periods respectively, that is, the last twelve years of the Old system (1832–44) and the first twelve years of the Peel system (1844–56). Our study relies on the Parliamentary Inquiry declarations of two generations of the Bank directors: one governing the Old system, and the other governing the Peel system. From the Bank directors’ declarations, we shall build the reaction function of the Bank for each period: one for the 1832–44 period and the other for the 1844–56 period. Session 8E Session: John Smithin’s Rethinking the Theory of Money, Credit and Macroeconomics: A New Statement for the 21st Century Presentations by Robert Dimand, Nina Eichacker, and Steven Pressman

73


Session 8F Session: Marginalism/Neoclassicism Conceptions of the Natural and the Social in Walras’ Economic Thought. Mark Silverman The neoclassical school of economics is sometimes said to overlook the institutional character of markets, treating them instead as something “natural.” I address here the extent to which this criticism applies to the philosophical system of Léon Walras. Walras’ position on this question is complex, and, in some respects, contradictory. Walras argues that the market is “artificial.” However, simultaneously, he claims that exchange-value is “natural.” I argue that the latter position undermines the former (Walras’ attempts to synthesize the two notwithstanding.) I additionally argue that implicit in the latter is a form of commodity fetishism. I suggest an explanation for these simultaneous and contradictory positions in terms of his desire to evaluate the market from a normative perspective, while also wanting to draw necessary conclusions about the market. This last goal leads him to use the natural sciences as a model for his science of economics. His mistake, I argue, is to assume that using the natural sciences as a formal model requires that he find an ontologically natural predicate. I conclude by discussing Walras’ Baconian view of his “economics,” and whether it forestalls conceptions of economic change not limited by the metaphor of the Baconian engineer. The Marginalist Revolution and Physics: The Mirowski-thesis Reconsidered. Gergely Kőhegyi The paper attempts to explain certain historical facts of the marginalist revolution with inspirations from other sciences. From this aspect, it is similar to the so called Mirowski-thesis, which derives the facts of the marginalist revolution mostly from the development in 19th century physics, first of all, from the annexation of the energy conservation principle by an analogy. The Mirowski-thesis is based on the one hand, on a formal analogy between the structure and concepts of rational mechanics and microeconomics, and on the other hand, on biographical and publication related evidences. I will show that this formal analogy --- that can be considered a rational reconstruction in a Lakatosian sense --- is both syntactically and semantically inconsistent. The inconsistency implies that the externalist arguments that are intended to support the conclusions derived from the rational reconstruction distort the interpretation of many historical facts. However, I will also show that the formal analogy of the Mirowski-thesis can be made consistent by a proper modification. Moreover, this modified version fits into the pattern of the historical facts without distortions. The conclusion is that certain works of the protagonists had been motivated by the variational principles instead of the energy conservation principle, i.e., the developments of the 18th and not of the 19th century physics.

74


Session 9A Session: New Insights in the “Thinking in Orders” Paradigm The Search for the Stable Order: Jan Tinbergen and Institutional Design. Erwin Dekker This paper argues that Jan Tinbergen soon abandoned the early economic project, concerned with laws of motion and stable structure of the economy, in favor of creating a stable structure in the national economy. For this, more important than economic planning was changing the institutional decision-making structure to ensure coordination and stability. His work in the immediate post-war years was primarily concerned with institutional design, and resulted in his work on economic policy. Creating a stable order is central in his oeuvre, including his work on an international economic order. The paper problematizes the idea of Tinbergen as economic engineer and econometrician The Institutionalism of Ludwig Lachmann: A Narrow Path between Seemingly Irreconcilable Traditions. Roland Fritz and Rok Novak Ludwig Lachmann is best known for radical subjectivism in his capital theory and for the role of uncertainty. In this paper we explore his take on emergence and evolution of institutional frameworks, with a focus on his specific notion of “neutral institutions”. We demonstrates how Lachmann’s institutionalism evolves from his days at LSE, influenced by F. A. Hayek and G. L. S. Shackle, to his later years, when his research on Max Weber re-connects him to his intellectual roots in the German Historical School. The paper includes insights from Lachmann’s private library, outlining how seemingly heterogeneous traditions merge in his oeuvre. The Roads to Mont Pèlerin: Parallel Quests for Order in "Old Chicago" and Freiburg. Ekkehard Kohler and Stefan Kolev This paper studies the nexus between the “Old Chicago” School around Frank Knight and the Freiburg School around Walter Eucken, focusing on the 1930s and 1940s. In particular, the works of Henry Simons show the stunningly parallel lines of thought on both sides of the Atlantic. F. A. Hayek and F. A. Lutz are highlighted as focal scholars and conduits within these quests for order-based political economy. The first meeting of the Mont Pèlerin Society in 1947 constitutes a cornerstone, especially its focus on the notions of the “competitive order” as an alternative to 19th century laissez faire. Archival materials from numerous collections are incorporated in our analysis. German Economists and Value Freedom: The Case of Walter Eucken. Daniel Nientiedt Walter Eucken is best known for his ordoliberal political economy. A recurring theme in secondary literature is the notion of “crypto-normativity”, i.e. hidden value judgments. This paper investigates Eucken’s position on value freedom and

75


contextualizes his view in the German methodological debates of the early 20th century, especially vis-à-vis the views of Gustav Schmoller’s Younger Historical School and National Socialist economics. Eucken rejected the Weberian notion of value freedom, understood as complete abstinence from value judgments, because he believed that it would hinder the use of scientific results to solve practical problems. Session 9B Session: From the Economic Man to the Economic Agent Heterogeneity and Economic Man: The Oxford-Mill debate. Gonçalo Fonseca This paper dates the birth of homo economicus and the ancestral origins of Robbins's familiar definition of economics in 19th Century English economics. It visits the 1830s methodological debates between Whately and Senior ("the Oxford School") on the one hand, and Lloyd and Mill on the other. It is here where we find the roots of a dramatic change in the definition of economics, and the rupture between the "catallactic" (exchange-theoretic) and "oikonomic" (allocation-theoretic) perspectives. The Oxford School emphasized the heterogeneity of utility as the motor of exchange and cause of value, with man as a statistical-contextual conception, limiting the scope of economics narrowly to market situations. In response, Lloyd and Mill re-defined economics as a psychological-allocational problem, and erected the familiar hypothetical archetype of "rational economic man", expanding the boundaries of economics to a wider range. We also show how many of the later differences between Jevons and Marshall can be ascribed to their inheriting two distinct and rival English traditions. The Representative Agent in Macroeconomics: the Samuelson-Koopmans Thread. Hugo Chu The article identifies the emergence of the representative agent in the development of the optimal growth literature. Although Paul Samuelson used infinitely-lived representative consumers to shed light on macroeconomic topics in his works from the mid-1930s to the early 1950s, this tool only gained more adepts after it was “agreed upon” at the beginning of the 1960s. It is shown that the main center of research in growth economics at the time, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), by congregating faculty members and graduate students working with the golden-rule of growth as well as the turnpike theory, helped sanction the representative agent as a legitimate tool for macroeconomic investigations. Furthermore, in communities beyond MIT, economists such as Koopmans and Lionel McKenzie could have also played a role in spreading the methodological device, given the possible sway Samuelson had on them.

76


On the Origins of the Homo Oeconomicus. Michele Bee and Maxime Desmarais-Tremblay References to the homo œconomicus are ubiquitous in economics, and yet no comprehensive genealogy of the concept has been constructed so far. This paper contributes to filling this gap. We argue that the expression, together with that of “Economic Man”, were not coined by John Stuart Mill or any of his direct followers, as often stated, but by critics of the narrowness of the British classical political economy. This debate included at least French, German, American, Italian, Irish and English contributions, who use these expressions to reject Mill’s methodological project set forward in his essay On the Definition of Political Economy (1936). It took several decades for the methodological prescriptions of Mill to be followed in a systematic fashion. Only at the end of the century did Maffeo Pantaleoni and above all Vilfredo Pareto put an end to the debate by “purifying” the concept of homo œconomicus. Neoclassical economists provided new foundations for economics by embracing this concept, which was crystallised by Lionel Robbins in the formal definition of economics as the study of means-end actions. Session 9C Session: English Economists Seeing like a Fellow Traveller: How Joan Robinson Observed Maoist China, 1953-1978. Gerardo Serra and Mauro Boianovsky Joan Robinson’s vocal endorsement of Mao’s China remains the most controversial aspect of the Cambridge’s economist life and work. While some commentators have emphasised Robinson’s political naïveté to treat her as a paradigmatic example of ‘fellow traveller’, more sympathetic scholars have ‘normalised’ this phase of her life by inscribing it within an assessment of Robinson as a development economist. Yet, all these discussions neglect a fundamental aspect of the relationship between Robinson’s understanding of the Chinese economy and society and her political beliefs: what did she actually know? How did she ‘observe’, both first-hand and at a distance, Chinese economic life and the impact of Mao’s policies? Drawing on the historiography on observation and the sociological literature on ‘fellow travellers’ and travel writing, this paper’s contribution is threefold. Firstly, on the basis of an examination of Robinson’s unpublished travel notes, the article reconstructs the ways in which her first-hand observation of plants, factories and farms informed her travel accounts. Secondly, through an intensive look at Robinson’s correspondence, the article discusses her network of contacts and informants. Particular attention is paid to Solomon Adler, a British economist and ‘fellow traveller’ who lived in China and played an instrumental role in shaping Robinson’s perceptions. Finally, the paper develops a more nuanced perspective on how to judge Robinson’s relationship with China. Rather than simply condemning the economist’s naïveté’, or detaching her writings from

77


her political faith, the article applies to Robinson her own methodological criteria on the relationship between ideology and observation. Robinson, Andrews, and Marshall: a case of arguing at cross purposes? Lowell R Jacobsen The ascendancy of neoclassical economics featuring the imperfect competition revolution during the 1930s in part precipitated the establishment of the Oxford Economists’ Research Group in 1935 under the leadership of Roy Harrod. The Group was determined to push the pendulum away from an emphasis on deductive pure theory and back towards positive theory based on grounded empiricism featuring extensive interviews with businessmen. They learnt (amongst other things) that businessmen did not apply, nor were they familiar with, marginal analysis in setting prices. The concern of the businessmen was not profit-maximization but, rather price stability and normal profits. Hall and Hitch (1939) “Price Theory and Business Behaviour” and Andrews (1949) Manufacturing Business, two principal products of the OERG’s research, introduced the full cost principle and normal cost theory, respectively, attracted considerable critical attention notably from the “Cambridge critics” featuring Austin Robinson. Robinson remained resolute in his criticism for decades, until the end of his long life. Andrews fervently defended the OERG’s work for years, until his untimely death. Curiously, Robinson and Andrews were at such odds, and passionately so, as they were both dedicated Marshallian industrial economists who embraced ‘real economics’ and eschewed pure theory. John Stuart Mill and China: A Review of Mill’s Writings on China. Yue Xiao Current literature on John Stuart Mill’s writings about Asia has mainly focused on his relationship with India because of Mill’s 35-year career in the East India Company. Mill’s views on China has not been paid enough attention by scholars in either China or the West. This paper collects Mill’s writings on China and reviews Mill’s thought on China from four aspects: 1. On the capital accumulation; 2. On liberty and individuality; 3. On democratic government; and 4. On Chinese immigrants. At root Mill saw China as an example of a stationary state, but a stationary state far different from the one he anticipated for Great Britain.

1. Introduction The study of Mill’s influence in Asia has mainly focused on his relationship with India because of Mill’s 35-years’ service in the East India Company (Moore 1991; Majeed 1992; Zastoupil 1994; Moir, Peers, and Zastoupil 1999; Tunick 2006; Bell 2010). Working as the “chief conductor of correspondence” in the political department of the home government of India over the years, Mill contributed a lot to the company’s policies making and the essential principles for governing the British Raj (Harris 1964). However, Mill’s writings on China are overlooked by scholars in both China and the West. Western scholars rarely pay attention to Mill’s views on China, and Chinese scholars seldom study Mill’s thought.

78


Though Mill’s writings on China is much less than his writings on India, Mill analyzed China’s situation in all his major works. By examining the related keywords throughout the Collected Works of Mill, it is surprising to see that Mill mentioned “China” and “Chinese” many times in his works, including “Principles of Political Economy,” “On Liberty,” “Considerations on Representative Government,” and other collected works. On the whole, Mill used the thesis of a stationary state to analyze China’s economic, social, political, and labor situations. It is worth noting that the stationary state of China is entirely different from Mill’s ideal stationary state of an advanced society. This paper collects and categorizes Mill’s writings on China into four aspects according to its content: 1. On the capital accumulation; 2. On liberty and individuality; 3. On democratic government; and 4. On Chinese immigrants. In each section, this work reviews whether Mill’s discussion of China makes sense by providing solid empirics for his theory or it largely reflects his lack of information and his biases on China. The first section reveals Mill’s weak argument on the low desire for capital accumulation of Chinese by exploring the answers to these questions: Why was the interest rate so high in China? Why did not this high-interest rate stimulate the desire for capital accumulation? Moreover, why did not accumulation breed capitalism in China? In the second and third sections, this research discusses Mill’s usage of China as a negative example to show how a liberal and democratic society should not be. This study claims that Mill has a strong argument in the discussion that the stationary state prevents China from social and political advancement. The fourth section shows Mill’s biased position on the Chinese immigrants in the United States based on his idea of the stationary state of the population. Apart from some of the imperialistic views Mill held on China, his thought on how a stationary state obstruct the liberal, individual and political advancement was an insightful analysis of China’s situation, especially in times of a great transformation from a feudal society towards a capitalist country in the late half of the 19th century and the early 20th century. Session 9D Session: Modern Economics and Economists What is Heterodox Economics? An oral account of its recent history. Danielle Guizzo, Andrew Mearman, and Sebastian Berger This paper revisits the trajectory of heterodox economics as identified by Lee (2009) from its recent oral history, presenting findings from a series of interviews carried out between 2017-18 with leading economists whom we have identified as heterodox. Many of our interviewees reflect the common view that heterodox economics is essentially oppositional, as being opposed to the mainstream. However, many respondents reject or feel uneasy about this positioning, either for believing that an alternative research program is possible, or because some disagree with its oppositional nature. Further, heterodox economists often identify with a particular school of thought and although many see some synthesis as desirable, few express the view that integration is

79


occurring or indeed possible. Interestingly, younger generations of heterodox economists express some reluctance when adopting the label, which sparks some doubt whether heterodoxy will continue to hold an oppositional stance, or if it will seek compromise with mainstream approaches. The interviews therefore clarify several themes in the notion of what heterodox economics is, if it is currently under change, and what one can expect from the future, offering a potential instrument to assess change within the history of the discipline. The Disciplinary Mobility of Core Behavioral Economists. Alexandre Truc Behavioral economics was founded by two psychologists, Kahneman and Tversky who acquired disciplinary mobility - the ability to publish in multiple disciplines. The goal of this paper is to investigate how disciplinary mobility evolved among core members of the Behavioral Economic Roundtable, an institution central to the history of BE. Using publications patterns, networks, and topical analysis, we show that after the Kahneman’s initial mobility, the second generation of behavioral economists understood the interdisciplinarity in two different manners. While some focused on the integration of the early work of KT within economics as a way to revert back to ‘normal science’, others focused instead on extending BE’s interdisciplinarity to the full cognitive sciences’ nebula. Despite the differences in the way these two communities approached interdisciplinarity, we show that the new disciplinary mobility displayed by some behavioral economists is less integrated with the historical publications of BE, but also that these mobile economists also have a more difficult time integrating their own outside work within economics. Session 9E Session: Market Imperfections A Rational Reconstruction for The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society (Boulding 1956): Through the Lens of Recent Expressive Voter Theory and the ‘Good’ Image in Modern Politics and Society. Cameron Morris Weber Reading Boulding (1956) with knowledge of recent work in public choice homo politicus theory sheds light on today’s partisan polities. While voting may be rational (Eusepi and Wagner 2017), or semi-rational (Boulding 1956), it is not logical. Complex depersonalized societies and limited time in the democratic process means that voters make non-logical decisions based on expressive (or ideological) images as simple as ‘good’ and ‘bad’ (Brennan 2008). “The basic bond of any society, culture, subculture, or organization is a ‘public image,’ that is, an image the essential characteristics of which are shared by the individuals participating in the group” (Boulding, 64). The image is also a hierarchical social role-(re)ordering process, in which politicians create images including state solutions to social problems. “Authority, however, is now supposed to proceed from below. The higher roles are supposed to act on behalf of and to be responsible to the lower roles…. That is to say, hypothetical decisions are made and communicated to the lower roles” (Boulding, 99). We find that this reconstruction can help explain the increasing politicization of society, and, the

80


rise of ‘experts’ in the administrative state (Levy and Peart 2016). We agree that Boulding 1956 is “an insightful examination of the significance of images for thinking about society and social processes” (Eusepi and Wagner 2017) and that The Image might provide useful insights for interdisciplinary historians of economic thought. Creating Noise and Relocating Market Objectivity. New Keynesians, quality uncertainty and market failures. Jean-Sébastien Lenfant Attempts at going away from the perfectly competitive paradigm open to several difficulties for neoclassical economics. It assumes to build a representation of market coordination in which new concepts are introduced which were not part of the standard theory. The aim of this contribution is to highlight the specific treatment of the concept of quality during the heyday of the New-Keynesian movement in economics. The paper will focus specifically on the ways to assess the concept of quality and to use it as a new device to deal with the failures of market coordination (suboptimal outcomes). The introduction of some uncertainty regarding the quality of goods exchanged (Akerlof, 1970) has been the starting point for critical situations reducing the number of markets or involving new coordination mechanisms. The contribution first identifies the structuration of this field of inquiry and the results obtained from quality uncertainty or other kinds of information uncertainty or costs (and their link with quality). Then, it questions its influence, mainly by discussing some literature that tended to downplay the importance of markets failures based on quality information and by discussing empirical work done along a New Keynesian perspective. Third, the article discusses the consequences of this field of inquiry for policy issues at the microeconomic and macroeconomic levels. The Insomniac Gambler – optimization, welfare and the Monopoly game in Harold Hotelling’s economic thought. Thomas Mueller The coordination of individuals, in an unconscious, welfare enhancing mechanism has always been the core question of economic thought, and its main matter of dispute. The problem has, clearly, many facets: the most obvious is probably the dichotomy between market equilibrium and central planning. Yet, another famous one is to find a fiscal policy that would both be efficacious and just. Welfare economics and its impossibility theorem are another proof of the very complex task of individual coordination. Finally, in recent times we have become more aware of the problem of environmental sustainability, showing the centrality of the tragedy of the commons for economic policies. Harold Hotelling dealt with each and every one of those complex problems, sometimes decades before they spread into public debate; a talented and well-trained mathematician, Hotelling was one of the first, jointly with Ramsey, Evans, Roos and Tinbergen (Ingrao and Israel 1999; Weintraub 2002; Pomini 2018) and with Edgeworth as a precursor (Edgeworth 2003 (1881)) to exploit the calculus

81


of variations. He did it in a peculiar way: by proposing a systematic comparison between the optimum that is reachable through market coordination, when every agent is led free to pursue his own selfish interest, and social optimum, the greatest possibly attainable social welfare. Hotelling applied his method to spatial coordination of supply (Hotelling 1929), to exhaustible resources (Hotelling 1931), to optimal taxation (Hotelling 1932) and to welfare economics (Hotelling 1938). In many occasions, Hotelling did stress that “collective” optimum was reachable only through state intervention, therefore in contrast with a self-regulating market. He used a mixture of terms for this dichotomy: hedonistic, capitalistic or individualistic system contrast with eudemonistic, collectivistic, socialist or public welfare. Hotelling always insisted that both approaches were describable in terms of optimization and the calculus of variation. They were thus comparable in terms of efficacy and results. Hotelling did live in interesting times: pigeonholed between two world wars, the economic crisis and the first environmental concerns, but also between the great contrast between the capitalist and socialist models, Hotelling was deeply influenced by concerns aimed at building a widespread welfare, and their political and ethical legitimacy (Missemer and Gaspard, n.d.; Gaspard and Mueller, n.d.). Consequently, Hotelling did work on complex issues of intertemporal, interpersonal and even intergenerational equity. The ethical discourse will transform, under Hotelling’s feather into a rhetoric of integrals, Lagrangian multipliers and Hessian matrixes: numbers will supersede words. Nevertheless, Hotelling was neither afraid nor indifferent of moral and political issues. Mathematics did grant, for him, axiological neutrality, but the systematic comparison between individualistic and aggregated models will play a central role in almost every contribution he wrote. Hotelling considered that quantitative instruments allowed comparing between competing and opposite worldviews, therefore permitting commensurability between specular paradigms. The source of this interest for optimization and comparison of antithetic models – this is our thesis – must be found in two factors. First, there is Hotelling’s left wing, Georgist, political ideas. Hotelling will display opinions close to market socialism. Moreover, he will show in his papers results suggesting the superiority of state intervention compared to laissez-faire. Secondly Hotelling was an enthusiastic board game player, particularly of Monopoly. In its original version, the Monopoly Game was known as The Landlord Game – and was created by a Georgist activist, Elizabeth Magie, precisely with the purpose of comparing the Georgist model with the capitalist one. The game will be used, during Hotelling’s training as a mathematician and economist, as a pedagogical instrument at Princeton and Columbia, and was widely played at both universities. I believe that the game had an influence on Hotelling. I suggest that he did play again and again numerous imaginary matches, one for each economic paper, changing and adapting the rules to the problems he was facing, but maintaining intact the structural and illustrative purpose of the original game.

82


Session 9F Session: Monetary Policy A Reconsideration of the Doctrinal Foundations of Monetary-policy Rules. George Tavlas The literature on the development of monetary-policy rules has long presumed that the rules proposed by Irving Fisher in the 1920s and 1930s and by Chicagoans Henry Simons and Lloyd Mints in the 1930s and 1940s were identical; each of those economists proposed price-level stabilization frameworks with the aim of moderating the business cycle. I provide evidence showing that there were important differences in the frameworks put forward by Fisher and the Chicagoans. I also provide evidence showing that the Chicagoans did not consider Fisher, whose policy framework involved substantial discretion, to be a close forerunner of their rules-based framework. Moreover, and in contrast to Fisher, for the Chicagoans the primary objective of a rule was to tie the hands of the authorities in order to reduce monetary-policy uncertainty, which would lessen the possibility of policy mistakes. Again in contrast to Fisher, the Chicagoans: (1) provided comprehensive assessments of the workings of alternative rules-based regimes versus discretionary regimes, (2) assessed various criteria -- including simplicity and reduction of political pressures -- in the specifications of rules, and (3) concluded that rules would provide superior performance compared with what could be achieved under discretion. Each of these characteristics provides a direct link to the rules-based frameworks of Milton Friedman, Robert Lucas, and John Taylor. Finally, like the rules-based frameworks of Friedman and Taylor, Simons’s preferable rule was one that targeted a policy instrument (i.e., the level of the money supply in Simons’s case) instead of an ultimate objective. The Monetary Policy and the Formation of the State in Mexico: 1925-1933. Ismael Valverde-Ambriz The present investigation has the objective to analyse the development of the monetary policy and its influence in the public life in Mexico in a very complex period of its political history and that is, precisely, when the institutions that defined the economic policy in the rest of the twentieth century had been created. We chose that temporality because it corresponds with the creation of Banco de México (1925) and with the effects of the Great Depression on the Mexican economy (1933). It is a historical investigation that works with several planes and that correspond, precisely, to the divisions of work: in the first instance it is a question of specifying whether the Bank of Mexico, the central bank of the country, owes its creation to a corresponding evolutionary process to the formation of economic thought or if it is an institution that was deliberately created to respond to economic and political needs. In this sense, the research analyzes what the central banking projects had been in Mexico and what were the contexts in which they were presented, as well as addressing the economic-political conditions of the project that could finally be carried out. The second level focuses on determining the objectives and tools of the Mexican central bank

83


during that period (1925-1933) and determining the macroeconomic implications of the monetary policy decisions that were implemented; it is likewise an attempt to reconstruct statistical information linked to the balance of payments, interest rates, monetary base, bank reserves and the exchange rate. The third level develops the relationship between the establishment of a central bank and the question of the legitimacy of the State. In this case, the clear attempt of the Mexican State and the Secretary of the Treasury to impose an agenda on the Bank of Mexico, which obeys more to the political cycle than to the economic one, is very palpable. The (Un)orthodox Monetary Policies of Alberto J Pani in the 1920s and Early 1930s. Francisco J. Aldape This paper analyzes the economic thought of Alberto J. Pani (1878-1955) and the economic policies he implemented as Finance Minister of Mexico during the 1920s and early 1930s. It examines in particular the effects and motivation of the monetary and banking reforms he introduced in the aftermath of the Mexican Revolution and his policy response to the Great Depression. The paper makes two contributions. First, it argues that despite his deep ideological leanings towards positivism and liberal economic ideas, Pani was a very pragmatic individual whose engineering background proved quite useful to address effectively important monetary issues involving the reconstruction of the Mexican fiscal and financial system. Second, it provides an analysis of the organizational changes of the Banco de Mexico to explain the ability of the monetary authorities to achieve a rather smooth transition to paper currency after the Depression by considering the implications of Pani’s reforms. Session 10A: Refugee Economists at the New School for Social Research From Kiel, Heidelberg et al. to the ‘University in Exile’. Harald Hagemann Gerhard Colm and the Americanization of Weimar Economic Thought. Will Milberg Hans Neisser: The Guardian of Good Theory. Hans-Michael Trautwein Translating Social Insurance from Weimar to the US: Reflections on Frieda Wunderlich. Ellen Freeberg Session Abstract: The Kiel Institute of World Economics had already been founded in 1914 by Bernhard Harms who became a major organizer of economic research in the Weimar Republic. In April 1926 Harms hired Adolph Lowe to build up a new department for research in statistical economics and trade cycles. The research work of the Kiel group had a strong theoretical flavour, transcending far beyond trade cycle analysis and putting more emphasis on long-run growth and structural change. The Kiel group included such distinguished scholars as Gerhard Colm

84


(who served as chairman from 1930-3), Hans Neisser, Fritz Burchardt and, for a period of time, Wassily Leontief (1927-8 and 1930-1) and Jacob Marschak (1928-30). The work on cyclical growth being done in Kiel was financially supported by the Rockefeller Foundation. The same holds for the Oxford Institute of Statistics where Marschak became the founding director in 1935, and (meanwhile Frank) Burchardt the director in 1949. Marschak emigrated from Russia to Germany in 1919 where he got his PhD and habilitation at the University of Heidelberg. There Emil Lederer was his main mentor who became the founding Dean of the University in Exile at the New School in NY in 1933. Frieda Wunderlich was the sole woman in the original group of faculty recruited from Germany to the University in Exile. She created scholarship as a social-policy expert in Weimar Germany, determined to support humane and effective labor practices. Wunderlich acquired a reputation as a public champion for blocking cuts to welfare programs and supporting Germany´s social insurance programs. In 1933 the Nazis forced her out of public life at the pinnacle of her Weimar career where she had been Professor at the High School of Commerce in Berlin and a member of the Prussian Parliament for the SPD. Adolph Lowe’s obituary praise of Hans Neisser (1895-1975) is appropriate and yet an understatement. Neisser was not only a guardian, but also a creator of good theory. Already before his emigration from Germany to the United States in 1933, he had achieved international recognition for his contributions to monetary theory and general equilibrium analysis. This paper shows that, although emigration changed Neisser’s life dramatically, his scientific productivity remained remarkably unimpaired. In the spirit of his earlier research, Neisser developed a more general theory of business cycles and structural unemployment, and pioneered research and teaching in various fields of economics. Gerhard Colm had a remarkable career from a student of Max Weber and a leading statistician in Weimar´s statistical office, via the Kiel Institute and Professor at the New School (1933-39), to the Roosevelt and Truman administrations, authoring important US legislation as well as becoming the main architect of the currency reform in West Germany of 20 June 1948. Session 10B Session: Modern Perspectives on Classical Economics The Classical Contribution to Monetary Economics: A Retrospective Two Centuries after the Bullion Report. David Glasner This paper discusses five areas in monetary theory and policy in which the monetary debates of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries remain relevant. These Classical debates emerge from differences between the pre-classical quantity theory restated by Hume and the Classical theory of a competitive money supply advanced by Smith. The first series of Classical monetary debates, culminating in the celebrated Bullion Report of 1811, was triggered by the 1797 suspension of the convertibility of Bank of England notes.

85


Although not implemented for 10 years, the Report’s recommendation to restore convertibility defined the acceptable boundaries of monetary orthodoxy for over a century. Nevertheless, the problematic 1821 restoration of convertibility initiated a second series of debates between the Currency and Banking Schools, whose practical result -- the Bank Charter Act of 1844 – was based on an uncritical affirmation of the Humean theory, especially the price-specie-flow mechanism (PSFM). Combined with the Humean view of banks as inherently inflationary and destabilizing, PSFM implied, and the Bank Charter Act required that changes in gold reserves cause equal changes in the domestic currency. Opposing the Bank Charter Act, upholders of the Smithian view argued that the Law of Reflux serves as an equilibrating constraint on banks. Smith also recommended that banks lend only against real-bills, thereby providing the rationale for restricting commercial banks to a narrow set of operations. Recognizing that in financial panics liquidity dries up, leading members of the Banking School, following Thornton, argued that the Bank of England should serve as a lender of last resort, a doctrine subsequently endorsed, but also narrowed, by Bagehot. Current debates about the nature of the international monetary adjustment mechanism, the endogeneity of the money supply, the proper scope of banking, the appropriate policy for a lender of last resort and whether monetary policy should be guided or bound by fixed rules are rooted in the monetary debates of the Classical era. Why Modern Economists Need to Understand Classical Economic Theory: And Why it Matters. Steven Kates This paper is in response to criticisms of an earlier paper of mine explaining J.S. Mill’s notorious Fourth Proposition on Capital – “demand for commodities is not demand for labour”. If Mill is correct, his fourth proposition is a complete refutation of theories based on variations in aggregate demand as the basis for understanding variations in employment. Unfortunately the presuppositions and conceptual framework of modern macroeconomics make it virtually impossible for a modern economist to understand pre-Keynesian theory, therefore making it almost impossible to understand how economies actually work. How applicable is David Ricardo's Theory of Comparative Advantage to International Trade in 2019? Carl John Jensen David Ricardo’s Theory of Comparative Advantage was developed in the early 19th century assuming firms were engaged in perfect competition, experienced constant returns to scale, and labor was the only input in the production process. Based on these simplifying assumptions, countries specialized in what they produced at lowest opportunity cost and traded with other nations for what they produced at lowest opportunity cost. With free, fair, and open trade, countries could then consume outside of ( or to the right of) their domestic production possibilities frontier.

86


New Trade theory has made more realistic assumptions than Ricardo did (e.g. monopolistic competition and/or oligopoly instead of perfect competition, increasing returns instead of constant returns, and all factors of production, not just labor). This process of making theories of international trade more realistic began around the time that the twentieth century began and continues to this day. Yet in one form or another they all seem to revert back to Ricardo’s theory. So Ricardo gave us an intuition as to how free, fair, and open trade can benefit every nation, but it was far from complete. His theory is still relevant today, but with substantial changes. Session 10C Session: Economics and the Economy in Political Context American economists and the immigration debate during the Progressive Era. Annie Cot When, in 1887, the young American Economic Association launches a competition on the theme of “the devil effects of non-restricting immigration”, a violent and harsh debate on immigration was taking place in the American society – and Progressive economists were among the most active social scientists to discuss the evils – or, seldom, the benefits - of the Golden Door. Their positions form an excellent developer, in the photographic sense of the word, for some of the major stakes of the Progressive Era’s theoretical and methodological devices in economic theory. After a brief presentation of the general debate on immigration between 1882 and 1924., the paper aims at surveying some of the positions taken by progressive economists on the restriction of immigration issue : Francis Amasa Walker, William Z. Ripley, Carlos C. Closson, John Roger Commons, Frank Fetter, Henry Pratt Fairchild, Irving Fisher, Richmond Mayo-Smith, all link their restrictionist position with a paradoxical anti laissez-faire stance. What is the Economy? An Essay of Historical and Theoretical Inquiry. Henrique Alexandre Abreu Costa de Oliveira In the late modern period, certain scholars argue that both conflict and cooperation have been part of the State/Market relation. In doing so, they have also pointed out the difficulty in distinguishing the economical from the political domain, when represented through the Market and the State. Based on the works by Karl Polanyi, James Scott and Timothy Mitchell (and others), I attempt to explore such relations in a historical and theoretical way, in order to question the uniformity, the cohesion and distinction which are commonly attributed to both domains. Through this exercise, it also becomes apparent the need to question the nature of other close relations, such as the economy/economics, the natural/social, the human/non-human and the material/immaterial one. With such extension, I intend to demonstrate their

87


historical contingency, which seems to predicate on the distinction between the real world and its representation (in Mitchell’s words). Along with Michell Callon, Patrick Joyce and Bruno Latour (whose works I refer to, in order to support my argument extension), these authors seem to share what I chose to call the reversed methodology: a definition of a phenomenon’s ontology based on its epistemological contingency. Through such approach, I conclude that their (re)definition of the economy, the State and the social offers a fresh, interesting and renewed challenge for all social sciences, mainly due to the incomplete and processual nature attributed to the object of study. The Political Economies of the Greenback Debate. Sofia Valeonti The greenback was the paper money issued by the Union in order to finance the United States Civil War. During the Reconstruction period (1865-1877) a debate opposed the defenders of the maintenance of an inconvertible standard and those of a resumption of specie payments. Studies of this monetary debate have focused on long-term structural oppositions that were reflected in it (Sharkey 1959, Timberlake 1964, Unger 1964, Barreyre 2015). Long-term structural oppositions included the economic, ideological, political and cultural differences that determined the participants’ position. Those studies have neglected the role of economic theories and the visions of the U.S.’s economic future that those theories englobed. This paper suggests that the greenbacks debate did not only reflect long-term structural differences, but also different political economies. The greenbacks debate intensified a conversation about U.S. economic future and raised questions on its interregional commerce and its position in the world economy. The adherents of a fiat monetary standard endorsed U.S. domestic commerce and international independence. In contrast, the adherents of a specie money aimed to promote U.S. international integration. Each approach developed economic theories in order to defend its policy propositions. Focusing on the economic theories that were developed during that period and understanding their links to the long-term structural oppositions allows for a better understanding of the debate. It is also of historiographical interest as it offers an example on how the mid-1860’s U.S. economic theory developments were linked to the political and economic context of the Reconstruction period. Session 10D Session: Inflation Phillips' Averaging Procedure as a 'Crude' Version of the Haar Function. Marco Gallegati and James B. Ramsey Phillips’ (1958) unorthodox data transformation procedure shows an interesting analogy with the simplest type of wavelet basis developed by Haar in 1910. Using the Haar wavelet function we show that the application of Phillips’ averaging procedure is equivalent to extracting the long-term component of the growth rate of money wage rates and of the unemployment rate corresponding to fluctuations greater than 16 years.

88


The coarsest scale level coefficients provide a benchmark for analyzing the effects of averaging when using an arbitrarily choice of variable-width intervals and/or grouping observations in ascending order based on the values of the unemployment rate. We find two main results: first, the regularity of the non-linear pattern of the wage-unemployment relationship depends on the arbitrary selection of intervals. Second, when observations are ordered according to a chronological sequence the non-linear shape can be replaced by a simple linear relationship. Whatever Happened to Cost-push Inflation? James Forder The Formation of Modern Thought on Inflation in Brazil: from the Second World War to the Exchange Rate Crisis (1939 – 1947). Patrick Fontaine Reis de Araujo This article explores the controversy on money and inflation in Brazil from the eruption of the Second World War to the Exchange Crisis that occurred in 1947. It recovers, analyzes and organizes contributions from original authors of the period, and establishes a narrative to the development of money theory in Brazil. Authors are separated between liberals and interventionists, as literature has normally classified them. Liberals, on one hand, tended to interpret inflation as a result of public deficit expansion and of an overheating of the Brazilian economy, which was developing new industrial activities during the effort of war. The incapacity to access imported goods and excessive currency issuing - used to purchase dollars from trade surpluses - were particularly emphasized as potential causes to inflation during the world conflict. Interventionists, on the other hand, saw inflation as the result of sluggish supply expansion, due to the lack of capital available, but also as a result of an imbalanced growth process in a backward and incomplete economy. The article is organized in two sections that intend to isolate two different contexts. The first section is consecrated to the conflict period, while the second describes the post-war period - when international trade was normalized - until the emergence of the exchange crisis. Context movements seem to have influenced analyses elaborated by both sides of the controversy, and profoundly transformed the debate. Peace brought international trade normalization, but did not bring inflation to an end, and many of the arguments presented during the war could no longer sustain. The climax of the debate was reached when in 1947 international reserves were depleted and authors converged in suggesting the implementation of an administrative import license. Only essential goods, according to a priority criterion, would be allowed to be imported by the government. This solution was considered optimal by authors on both sides of the controversy, as it could potentially solve the exchange crisis and, at the same time, avoid an inflationary shock, which could eventually result from exchange devaluation.

89


Session 10E Session: Topics in International Economics Third Way Perspectives on International Order in Interwar France: personalism, corporatism and economic planning. Alexandre Mendes Cunha In an attempt of contribute to the debate on how economics was entangled in larger interwar discussions about international politics and social organization that contributed to laying the groundwork for European integration in the postwar era, this paper focuses specifically on the French debate on third way perspectives in the 1930s. The effects of the economic crisis that hit the country in particular from 1932 would be one of the main ingredients to motivate the search for alternatives between liberal capitalism and socialism, giving form to a wide range of third way discourses, some of them with interesting internationalist content. Starting with a reflection on the overlaps between the “communitarian personalism”, the neo-corporatist doctrines, and the development of the ideas on planning in France in the 1930s, our main goal is to understand how personalism, in particular, would end up providing important elements for the debates on European integration years later, namely with regard to Schuman Plan and Jean Monnet’s actions in the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community. The paper will offer both in an analysis of the contributions of different non-conformist authors that appear in the main personalist influenced journals of the period, such as Ordre Nouveau or Esprit, and, in a more vertical examination, the discussion of how several of these combined perspectives would find a particular arrangement in the ideas on regional integration developed since then by François Perroux. A History Debt Repayment Capacity Indicators. Christina Laskaridis The paper looks at how a small group of economists in the World Bank centred around Hollis Chenery began to capture measures of debt repayment capacity. Debt data began to get listed in the 1960s in the World Bank when the difficulties that increased loans to developing countries began to surface. The backdrop in policy was about a growing recognition in the International Development Association about the need for concessional loans. Dragoslav Avramović with other World Bank colleagues presented their material debt service charges and repayment capacity which found their way through various publications and commissions. The use of debt service indicators that emerged from the debt capacity approach gave rise to a host of ways of capturing how foreign borrowing weighed down on debtor countries. Actual policy practice in developing countries was not guided from the theoretical literature of the time, which simply did not have much purchase in the policy space. While these academic discussions took place, it was practical rule-of-thumbs that were still the preferred approach more or less until the 1980s debt crisis. This initial approach gradually gave way to more formalised approaches to measuring debt repayments.

90


Session 10F Session: Public Intellectuals The Political Economy of George Orwell. Don Mathews George Orwell (1903-1950) had keen insights on political economy. Contradictions, too – the most important of which he seemed well aware. This essay explores Orwell’s observations, insights and contradictions on matters of political economy. Not an Environmental Economist: E. F. Schumacher on economics and the natural world, 1940 – 1977. Robert Leonard E. F. Schumacher (1911 – 1977) occupies a curious place among the pantheon of economists interested in environmental matters. On the one hand, his 1973 book, Small is Beautiful, helped draw the attention of an entire generation to the negative effects of modern economic growth, not least its impact on the environment. He is viewed as a figure of symbolic importance in the environmental movement, ranking alongside such figures as Aldo Leopold, Rachel Carson or Arne Naess. On the other hand, the subtitle of his book, A Study of Economics as if People Mattered, points to his jaundiced view of the economics discipline, which he essentially viewed as part of the greater “problem” of modernity. For example, following his earlier adulation of the man, he grew to see J. M. Keynes as a pernicious influence, a promoter of greed and envy. In the early 1960’s, at Cambridge, when promoting his own idea of intermediate technology, he single-handedly challenged the resistance of Nicholas Kaldor and the development economists. He was a ferocious critic of Eugene Black, director of the World Bank, whom he regarded as an agent of cultural upheaval and destruction. When the Limits to Growth report came out in 1972, Schumacher bemoaned the fact that it was only with their unnecessarily sophisticated computer simulations that the economists could draw public attention to resource limitations: the diagnosis, so to speak, was part of the problem. He believed firmly, and admitted freely, that economic analysis could never be “neutral” – that it always reflected the political and philosophical preconceptions of the economist (Schumacher himself included). There is every reason to believe that he would have regarded as the height of human hubris the current use of the economic valuation of “ecosystem services” as an argument for environmental protection. In this paper I consider Schumacher’s singular, and somewhat uncomfortable, position among economists interested in environmental matters. This I do by examining the evolution of his ideas from roughly 1940, when he spent a year and a half working on an English farm, through his subsequent experiences in Burma and India, to the 1970’s, when the unexpected success of Small is Beautiful saw him catapulted into the public arena as a spokesman on matters environmental.

91


On Herbert A. Simon and Jorge Luis Borges. Ricardo F. Crespo In 1971 Herbert Simon had been invited by the Sociedad Argentina de Organización Industrial (SADOI), to deliver a set of speeches on ‘business management in the technological era’. On this occasion Simon asked an interview with Jorge Luis Borges, who was the Director of the Argentine National Library. Simon had read some Borges’s stories and was particularly impressed by ‘La biblioteca de Babel’ (Babel’s library), interpreting that Borges conceived life as a search through a labyrinth. In fact, the interview ended to be the reverse: in order to understand Simon’s concerns Borges asked more to Simon than Simon to Borges. The interview was published in an Argentine journal of that times called Primera Plana. In this paper I will show that this brief interview sheds light on some ideas of Simon about how he thinks about determinism and free will. Given his criticism of maximizing rationality and the proposal of a different method for decision making, Simon has enlarged the view of rationality of standard economics. Psychological and sociological dimensions enter into the game. Consequently, one might think that Simon is incorporating freedom in economics. In Crespo 2017 I asked whether Simon has escaped physicalism and acknowledged free will. Simon might personally have embraced this position, but this is not evident in his bounded rationality proposal. In the interview with Borges, Simon clarifies his personal position, which is consistent with his proposals.

Documents

HES - History of Economics Society...subject, especially the works of: Theotonio dos Santos, Ruy Mauro Marini, Andreas Gunder Frank, Vânia Bambirra, Orlando Caput and Roberto Pizarro,