Editing Economic history (section)

== Scope and focus of economic history today ==
The past three decades have witnessed the widespread closure of separate economic history departments and programmes in the UK and the integration of the discipline into either history or economics departments.<ref>{{Citation|last1=Blum|first1=Matthias|title=Introduction, or Why We Started This Project|date=2018|work=An Economist's Guide to Economic History|pages=1–10|editor-last=Blum|editor-first=Matthias|series=Palgrave Studies in Economic History|publisher=Springer International Publishing|language=en|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-96568-0_1|isbn=978-3-319-96568-0|last2=Colvin|first2=Christopher L.|editor2-last=Colvin|editor2-first=Christopher L.}}</ref> Only the London School of Economics ([[London School of Economics|LSE]]) retains a separate economic history department and stand-alone undergraduate and graduate programme in economic history. [[University of Cambridge|Cambridge]], [[University of Glasgow|Glasgow]], [[London School of Economics|LSE]], [[University of Oxford|Oxford]], [[Queen's University Belfast|Queen's]], and [[University of Warwick|Warwick]] together train the vast majority of economic historians coming through the British [[Universities in the United Kingdom|higher education system]] today, but do so as part of economics or history degrees. Meanwhile, there have never been specialist economic history graduate programs at universities anywhere in the US. However, economic history remains a special field component of leading economics PhD programs, including [[University of California, Berkeley]], [[Harvard University]], [[Northwestern University]], [[Princeton University]], the [[University of Chicago]] and [[Yale University]].

Despite the pessimistic view on the state of the discipline espoused by many of its practitioners, economic history remains an active field of social scientific inquiry. Indeed, it has seen something of a resurgence in interest since 2000, perhaps driven by research conducted at universities in continental Europe rather than the UK and the US.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://voxeu.org/article/network-analysis-economic-history|title=The past's long shadow: A network analysis of economic history|last=Galofré Vilà|first=Gregori|date=13 January 2020|website=VoxEU|access-date=19 April 2020|archive-date=14 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200114010649/https://voxeu.org/article/network-analysis-economic-history|url-status=live}}</ref> The overall number of economic historians in the world is estimated at 10,400, with Japan and China as well as the U.K and the U.S. ranking highest in numbers. Some less developed countries, however, are not sufficiently integrated in the world economic history community, among others, Senegal, Brazil and Vietnam.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Baten|first1=Jörg|last2=Muschallik|first2=Julia|date=2012|title=On the Status and Future of Economic History|journal=Economic History of Developing Regions|volume=27|pages=93–113|doi=10.1080/20780389.2012.682390 |s2cid=155697900 }}</ref>

Part of the growth in economic history is driven by the continued interest in big policy-relevant questions on the history of economic growth and development. [[MIT]] [[economist]] [[Peter Temin]] noted that development economics is intricately connected with economic history, as it explores the growth of economies with different technologies, innovations, and institutions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cliometrie.org/images/wp/AFC_WP_04_2018.pdf |last1=Diebolt |first1=Claude |last2=Haupert |first2=Michael |title=We are Ninjas: How Economic History has Infiltrated Economics |website=American Economic Association |access-date=2020-02-22 |archive-date=2020-02-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200222094632/http://www.cliometrie.org/images/wp/AFC_WP_04_2018.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Studying economic growth has been popular for years among economists and historians who have sought to understand why some economies have grown faster than others. Some of the early texts in the field include [[Walt Whitman Rostow]]'s ''[[Rostow's stages of growth|The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto]]'' (1971) which described how advanced economies grow after overcoming certain hurdles and advancing to the next stage in development. Another economic historian, [[Alexander Gerschenkron]], complicated this theory with works on how economies develop in non-Western countries, as discussed in ''Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective: A Book of Essays'' (1962). A more recent work is [[Daron Acemoglu]] and [[James A. Robinson (economist)|James A. Robinson]]'s ''[[Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty]]'' (2012) which pioneered a new field of [[persistence studies]], emphasizing the path-dependent stages of growth.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last1=Cirone |first1=Alexandra |last2=Pepinsky |first2=Thomas B. |date=2022 |title=Historical Persistence |journal=Annual Review of Political Science |language=en |volume=25 |issue=1 |pages=241–259 |doi=10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-104325 |issn=1094-2939 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Other notable books on the topic include [[Kenneth Pomeranz]]'s ''[[The Great Divergence|The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy]]'' (2000) and [[David S. Landes]]'s ''[[The Wealth and Poverty of Nations|The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some are So Rich and Some So Poor]]'' (1998).

Since the [[2008 financial crisis]], scholars have become more interested in a field which may be called ''new'' 'new economic history'. Scholars have tended to move away from narrowly quantitative studies toward institutional, [[Social history|social]], and [[cultural history]] affecting the evolution of economies.<ref>Douglass C. North (1965). "The State of Economic History", ''American Economic Review'', 55(1/2)  pp. [https://www.jstor.org/pss/1816246 86–91] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115105823/https://www.jstor.org/stable/1816246 |date=2023-01-15 }}.

* _____ (1994)."Economic Performance through Time", ''American Economic Review'', 84(3), [https://www.jstor.org/pss/2118057 pp. 359–68] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115105823/https://www.jstor.org/stable/2118057 |date=2023-01-15 }}. Also published as Nobel [http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1993/north-lecture.html Prize Lecture.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110805051340/http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1993/north-lecture.html |date=2011-08-05 }}</ref><ref group="a">For example:<br />&nbsp;&nbsp; • [[Gregory Clark (economist)|Gregory Clark]] (2006),  ''A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World'',
[http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8461.html Description] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111018192608/http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8461.html |date=2011-10-18 }}, [http://press.princeton.edu/TOCs/c8461.html contents] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111230050400/http://press.princeton.edu/TOCs/c8461.html |date=2011-12-30 }}, ch. 1 [http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8461.pdf link] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111230040353/http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8461.pdf |date=2011-12-30 }},  and [https://books.google.com/books?id=i-PLg2PsNd4C&dq=+Long-run+equilibrium&pg=PT1 Google preview] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115105823/https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=i-PLg2PsNd4C&oi=fnd&pg=PT1&dq=+Long-run+equilibrium&ots=fF5GxnCIYm&sig=3ZpUcXAStipXCCAcIZvOwFh7aCM |date=2023-01-15 }}.<br />&nbsp;&nbsp; • E. Aerts and [[Herman Van der Wee|H. Van der Wee]], 2002. "Economic History", ''[[International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences]]'' pp. 4102–410. [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767026401 Abstract] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111028220210/http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767026401 |date=2011-10-28 }}.</ref> The focus of these studies is frequently on "persistence", as past events are linked to present outcomes.<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2021-01-01|title=Why Africa is not that poor|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128158746000356|journal=The Handbook of Historical Economics|language=en|pages=557–584|doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-815874-6.00035-6|last1=Frankema|first1=Ewout|isbn=9780128158746|s2cid=236697047|access-date=2021-05-06|archive-date=2021-05-06|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506143033/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128158746000356|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|date=2021-01-01|chapter=Persistence – myth and mystery|chapter-url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128158746000150|journal=The Handbook of Historical Economics|language=en|pages=243–267|doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-815874-6.00015-0|last1=Voth|first1=Hans-Joachim|publisher=Academic Press|isbn=9780128158746|s2cid=235911335|url=https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/198736/1/CEPR-DP15417.pdf|title=Archived copy|access-date=2022-11-23|archive-date=2022-12-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221222175602/https://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/198736/1/CEPR-DP15417.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Columbia University]] [[economist]] [[Charles Calomiris]] argued that this new field showed 'how historical (path-dependent) processes governed changes in institutions and markets.'<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Calomiris|first1=Charles W.|s2cid=154817653|date=2000|title=Financial History and the Long Reach of the Second 30 Years War|journal=Political Science}}</ref> However, this trend has been criticized, most forcefully by [[Francesco Boldizzoni]], as a form of economic imperialism "extending the neoclassical explanatory model to the realm of social relations."<ref>{{cite book|last=Boldizzoni|first=Francesco|url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9476.html|title=The Poverty of Clio: Resurrecting Economic History|publisher=Princeton University Press|year=2011|isbn=9780691144009|page=18|author-link=Francesco Boldizzoni|access-date=2012-05-05|archive-date=2012-05-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120505135735/http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9476.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

Conversely, economists in other specializations have started to write a new kind of economic history which makes use of historical data to understand the present day.<ref group="a">For example: [[Carmen M. Reinhart]] and [[Kenneth S. Rogoff]] (2009),  ''This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly''. Princeton. [http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8973.html Description] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130118213207/http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8973.html |date=2013-01-18 }}, ch. 1 ("Varieties of Crises and their Dates", pp. [http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8973.pdf 3–20)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120925065855/http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8973.pdf |date=2012-09-25 }}, and chapter-preview [https://books.google.com/books?id=ak5fLB24ircC&pg=PR7GBS_ATB links.] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115105829/https://books.google.com/books?id=ak5fLB24ircC&printsec=frontcover&source=find&pg=PR7gbs_atb |date=2023-01-15 }}</ref> A major development in this genre was the publication of Thomas Piketty's ''[[Capital in the Twenty-First Century]]'' (2013). The book described the rise in [[Wealth inequality|wealth]] and [[income inequality]] since the 18th century, arguing that large concentrations of wealth lead to social and economic instability. Piketty also advocated a system of global [[Wealth tax|progressive wealth taxes]] to correct rising inequality. The book was selected as a [[The New York Times Best Seller list|''New York Times'' best seller]] and received numerous awards. The book was well received by some of the world's major economists, including [[Paul Krugman]], [[Robert Solow]], and [[Ben Bernanke]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/upshot/now-that-ben-bernanke-is-blogging-heres-what-he-should-write-about.html|title=The New York Times|last1=Irwin|first1=Neil|website=Now That Ben Bernanke Is Blogging, Here's What He Should Write About|date=30 March 2015|access-date=17 December 2019|archive-date=17 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191217234418/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/31/upshot/now-that-ben-bernanke-is-blogging-heres-what-he-should-write-about.html|url-status=live}}</ref> Books in response to Piketty's book include ''After Piketty: The Agenda for Economics and Inequality'', by Heather Boushey, J. Bradford DeLong, and Marshall Steinbaum (eds.) (2017), ''Pocket Piketty'' by Jesper Roine (2017), and ''Anti-Piketty: Capital for the 21st Century'', by Jean-Philippe Delsol, Nicolas Lecaussin, Emmanuel Martin (2017). One economist argued that Piketty's book was "Nobel-Prize worthy" and noted that it had changed the global discussion on how economic historians study inequality.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/05/22/thomas-piketty-data-make-it-open/|title=Thomas Piketty's Capital changed the global discussion about inequality because of its great data – now make it open.|last1=Atz|first1=Ulrich|website=LSE Impact Blog|date=22 May 2014|access-date=17 December 2019|archive-date=17 December 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191217234422/https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/05/22/thomas-piketty-data-make-it-open/|url-status=live}}</ref> It has also sparked new conversations in the disciplines of public policy.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/05/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/|title=Why We're in a New Gilded Age|last1=Krugman|first1=Paul|magazine=The New York Review of Books|date=8 May 2014|access-date=22 February 2020|archive-date=4 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150404042325/http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/may/08/thomas-piketty-new-gilded-age/|url-status=live}}</ref>

In addition to the mainstream in economic history, there is a parallel development in the field influenced by [[Karl Marx]] and [[Marxian economics]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Heller |first1=Henry |title=A Marxist History of Capitalism |date=2018 |publisher=Routledge}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Meek |first1=Ronald L. |title=Studies in the Labour Theory of Value |date=1956 |location=New York}}</ref> Marx used historical analysis to interpret the role of class and class as a central issue in history. He debated with the "classical" economists (a term he coined), including [[Adam Smith]] and [[David Ricardo]]. In turn, Marx's legacy in economic history has been to critique the findings of neoclassical economists.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Brewer |first1=Anthony |title=The Marxist Tradition in the History of Economics |journal=  History of Political Economy|year=2002 |volume=34 |pages=361–377 |url=http://www3.amherst.edu/~pmachala/endnotelibs/Endnote%20Bibliography/MarxSeminar/Marx%20for%2007%20students/Marxcourse-general-archive.Data/PDF/Brewer,The%20Marxist%20Tradition%20in%20the%20History%20of%20Economics-0597073408/Brewer,The%20Marxist%20Tradition%20in%20the%20History%20of%20Economics.pdf |access-date=2020-01-06 |archive-date=2019-07-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190710214123/http://www3.amherst.edu/~pmachala/endnotelibs/Endnote%20Bibliography/MarxSeminar/Marx%20for%2007%20students/Marxcourse-general-archive.Data/PDF/Brewer,The%20Marxist%20Tradition%20in%20the%20History%20of%20Economics-0597073408/Brewer,The%20Marxist%20Tradition%20in%20the%20History%20of%20Economics.pdf |url-status=live |doi=10.1215/00182702-34-Suppl_1-361|s2cid=88510540 }}</ref> Marxist analysis also confronts [[economic determinism]], the theory that economic relationships are the foundation of political and societal institutions. Marx abstracted the idea of a "capitalist mode of production" as a way of identifying the transition from [[feudalism]] to [[capitalism]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cohen |first1=Jon S. |title=The Achievements of Economic History: The Marxist School |journal=The Journal of Economic History |date=1978 |volume=38 |issue=1|pages=29–57 |doi=10.1017/S002205070008815X |s2cid=153934134 }}</ref> This has influenced some scholars, such as [[Maurice Dobb]], to argue that feudalism declined because of peasants' struggles for freedom and the growing inefficiency of feudalism as a system of production.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Dobb |first1=Maurice |title=Studies in the Development of Capitalism |date=1946 |publisher=Routledge}}</ref> In turn, in what was later coined the [[Brenner debate]], [[Paul Sweezy]], a Marxian economist, challenged Dobb's definition of feudalism and its focus only on [[western Europe]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sweezy |first1=Paul |title=The Transition From Feudalism To Capitalism |journal=Science & Society |date=1950 |volume=14 |issue=2}}</ref>

[[File:Thomas Piketty no Fronteiras do Pensamento São Paulo 2017 (37517067951).jpg|thumb|right|300px|Thomas Piketty, economist and author of ''[[Capital in the Twenty-First Century]]'']]