Category: Harvard

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Division Exams for the economics A.B., January 1917

 

The philosophy behind the use of division examinations for undergraduate history, government, and economics majors at Harvard was documented in an earlier post providing excerpts from relevant passages in annual reports of the President of Harvard College. This post adds to the growing stock of division exams from Harvard collected here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Links to other exams are provided in the post along with the questions for four exams from the division examinations given in January 1917.

__________________

Background

A significant event of the year [1915-16] was the inauguration by the Division of History, Government, and Economics of its new examination of candidates for the Bachelor’s degree who have concentrated in the Division. This examination was devised “not in order to place an additional burden upon candidates for the A.B., but for the purpose of securing better correlation of the student’s work, encouraging better methods of study, and furnishing a more adequate test of real power and attainment.” In their preparation students have from the beginning of the Sophomore year special tutorial instruction. The examination embraces three tests: first, a general paper, with a large number of alternative questions, treating comprehensively the subjects of the Division; second, a special paper, covering a chosen specific field; and lastly, a supplementary oral examination which may relate to either the general or the special paper, but ordinarily bears upon the specific field. The results of the first examination, taken by a comparatively small group of men graduating in three years, are in no way conclusive. The members of the examining committee, however, think them distinctly encouraging. Twenty-four candidates appeared, of whom twenty-two passed and two failed. Their selection of questions from the general paper indicated breadth of preparation and their bearing at the oral examination showed more than a little clearness and independence of thought.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1915-16, pp.75-76.

__________________

April 1927 Division Examinations Not Included in Cole’s Volume of Exams

Handwritten note added to the Arthur H. Cole volume of collected division examinations, 1916-1927:

“This volume contains the January exams for 1916-17. The April 1917 exams are shelved separately”.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Divisional and general examinations, 1915-1975 (HUC 7000.18). Box 6, Bound Volume (stamped “Private Library Arthur H. Cole”) “Divisional Examinations 1916-1927”.

__________________

Other Harvard division exams transcribed and posted:

Division Examinations for the Degree of A.B.
Division of History, Government and Economics.

April/May 1916

History of Economic Thought, Public Finance, Labor 1931

Economic Theory 1939
Money and Government Finance 1939
Economic History (since 1750) 1939
Labor and Social Reform 1939

__________________

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMICS
FOR THE DEGREE OF A.B. DIVISION EXAMINATIONS
1916-17

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMICS
DIVISION GENERAL EXAMINATION
[January 6, 1917]

Part I

The treatment of one of the following questions will be regarded as equivalent to one-half of the examination and should therefore occupy one and one-half hours. Write on one question only.

  1. How does the federal form of government affect the life of a nation?
  2. Discuss the arguments for and against universal manhood suffrage.
  3. What influences have been exerted by the Catholic Church on political development since 1500?
  4. Sketch the life and work of two or three of the following: (a) Calvin, (b) Cavour, (c) Hildebrand, (d) Jefferson, (e) Kant, (f) Marx, (g) J. S. Mill, (h) Sir Thomas More, (i) Theodosius.
  5. What were the political and economic effects before 1750 of the discovery of America?
  6. How has the physiography of the states of Europe influenced (a) their economic development? (b) their political organization, and (c) their present problems?
  7. What has been the influence of France in the Western hemisphere?
  8. Discuss the merits and defects of lawyers as statesmen?
  9. Explain the reasons for the differences in British foreign and colonial policy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
  10. What have been the consequences of the guarantee of freedom of contract?
  11. Do periods of internal and external national greatness tend to coincide?
  12. Discuss sectionalism in the United States since the Civil War.

 

Part II

Three questions only from the following groups, A, B, and C, are to be answered, of which not more than two may be from one group.

A

  1. What were the chief features of the economic life of New England prior to the nineteenth century?
  2. Trace and explain the development of American agriculture since 1860.
  3. What have been the causes and results of the growth of cities?
  4. State the case for and against a federal income tax in the United States.
  5. In what ways and by what means does war affect government regulation of industry?
  6. Indicate points at which British economic policy has influenced German policy.

B

  1. Compare the characters and careers of Philip II of Spain, Louis XIV of France, and William II of Germany.
  2. How does the history of Holland and of Portugal illustrate the principle of balance of power?
  3. Should the French Revolution be regarded as the beginning or as the end of a period?
  4. “…With the governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.”
    From what document is this quotation taken? Give a brief account of the subsequent applications of this principle.
  5. In how far was the navy responsible for the victory of the North in the Civil War?
  6. Give an account of the political and economic relations of Germany and the United States, since the Declaration of American Independence.

C

  1. Compare the powers exercised by the President of the United States in 1800, in 1850, and in 1916.
  2. Why should Europe dominate Africa?
  3. What are the arguments for and against centralization and decentralization of political power?
  4. Should members of cabinets sit and vote in national legislative bodies?
  5. To what causes has the expansion of the United States since 1800 been due?
  6. Why has the status of Turkey been a matter of importance in international affairs?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATION
ECONOMIC THEORY
[January 10, 1917]

Answer six questions.

A

Take from this group at least two and not more than four.

  1. “The difference between producer’s and consumer’s goods is at bottom only a difference of degree.” Explain. What is the essential difference between these two classes of goods?
  2. Define and analyze: (a) consumer’s surplus; (b) producer’s surplus. Under what conditions of cost does producer’s surplus arise? How is monopoly profit to be distinguished from producer’s surplus? Illustrate throughout by diagram.
  3. What is meant by “overinvestment”? “overaccumulation”? How does over-investment in particular industries “bring its own remedy”? How does a tendency toward overaccumulation?
  4. “The exchanges between different countries are analogous to the exchanges between non-competing groups within a country.” Explain.
  5. Discuss the more important difficulties in the way of socialism.
  6. What methods of investigation may be employed in economic theory? Give an illustration of the use of one of these methods.

B

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Sketch and criticize the attitude of the English and American courts during the nineteenth century toward collective bargaining by labor.
  2. Trace the development of interest theories.
  3. To what extent were changes in the tariff policy of the United States during the nineteenth century based upon changes in the prevailing opinion concerning free trade and protection?

C

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Contrast the concepts of justice in taxation and justice in the distribution of wealth.
  2. What is the case for and against the Single Tax?
  3. To what extent and by what means can trade-unions influence (a) the wages paid in a given occupation? (b) the general level of wages?
  4. What has been the importance of the “American frontier” in the distribution of wealth in the United States?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATION
MONEY AND BANKING
[January 10, 1917]

Answer six questions.

A

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Analyze the relation of the value of gold to its cost of production. In what measure, if at all, is the indicated relation peculiar to gold?
  2. Discuss index numbers of prices with reference to (a) the purposes they may serve; (b) the various methods of construction; (c) the best index numbers for wholesale prices in the United States.
  3. Below is a combined statement of the 12 Federal Reserve Banks at a recent date.
    Explain the several items of the statement, and comment upon the more significant conditions disclosed.

RESOURCES

 LIABILITIES

(all items in thousands of dollars)
Gold coin and certificates in vaults

$283,730

 Capital paid in

$55,711
Gold settlement fund

$174,801

 Government deposits

$26,319
Gold redemption fund

$1,404

 Member bank deposits

$637,072
Legal tender notes, silver, etc.

$17,974

 Federal Reserve notes—net

$14,296
5 per cent redemption fund

$470

 Federal Reserve bank notes

$1,028
Bills discounted for members

$20, 501

 Other liabilities

$634
Bills bought

$102,092
United States bonds

$39,427
One-year Treasury notes

$11,167
Municipal warrants

$22,166
Federal Reserve notes—net

$15,414
Due from other Federal Reserve Banks—net

$43,263
Other resources

$2,651

$735,060

$735,060

B

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. What were some of the forms of primitive money? What functions were performed by each form?
  2. Describe the economic cycle culminating in the crisis of 1837.
  3. Trace and explain the inflationist movement in the United States from 1865 to 1900.
  4. What connections have existed since 1830 between the financial administration of the Federal Government and banks in the United States?

C

Take from this group at least two and not more than four.

  1. Would universal bimetallism conduce to a stable market ratio between gold and silver? to a stable price level? What have been the chief obstacles to universal bimetallism? Are these obstacles increasing or decreasing?
  2. When prices are rising how are the following affected: (a) farmers; (b) factor operatives; (c) manufacturers; (d) stockholders; (e) owners of gold mines?
  3. Give a detailed account of silver since 1890.
  4. Wherein is the Federal Reserve System like the banking system recommended by the National Monetary Commission? Wherein is it different? Discuss the differences.
  5. Trace and explain the course of foreign exchange rates since the beginning of the European War.
  6. What is meant by “agricultural credit”? Describe briefly and criticize the existing facilities for agricultural credit in the United States.

    *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATION
CORPORATE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING RAILROADS
[January 10, 1917]

Answer six questions.

A

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Define “monopoly.” In what ways, if at all, is monopoly price affected by (a) cost of production per unit? (b) potential competition? (c) an elastic demand for the product? (d) the existence of satisfactory substitutes for the product?
  2. What official statistics throw light upon industrial organization in the United States? Criticise the available statistics of this subject.
  3. Describe the general features of the uniform accounting system now prescribed for railroads by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Why was the Commission given power to prescribe and supervise such a uniform accounting system?
  4. Enumerate the principal sources of railway statistics at the present time, and show the content, importance, and deficiencies (if any) of each.

B

Take from this group at least one and not more than two.

  1. Trace any connections between the corporate form of organization and the later stages of the Industrial Revolution.
  2. Sketch the history of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law and its enforcement.
  3. Give a brief account of the Granger movement.
  4. “Railways have been the most important agents in increasing the disparities of wealth in modern times.” Explain.

C

Take from this group at least two and not more than four.

  1. If a corporation regularly earns 5 per cent on all its outstanding securities, can it be said to be overcapitalized? What constitutes overcapitalization? How, if at all, should the law attempt to deal with overcapitalization?
  2. Analyze the present policy of the Federal Government in its regulation of industrial combinations in the United States.
  3. What connections exist between banks and industrial combinations in the United States? Contrast the situation here with that in France.
  4. In railroading in the United States, what is the significance of the following: (a) large plant; (b) joint cost; (c) physical valuation; (d) competition of water routes; (e) division of powers between state and Federal governments?
  5. Discuss the forms and significance of discriminations in railway rate-making. Which of the discriminations, if any, tend to persist under government ownership?
  6. What provisions should be made for the settlement of wage disputes on interstate railroads in the United States?

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

DIVISION SPECIAL EXAMINATIONS
[not transcribed for this post]

MODERN HISTORY SINCE 1789, INCLUDING AMERICAN HISTORY
[January 10, 1917]

AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
[January 10, 1917]

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Divisional and general examinations, 1915-1975 (HUC 7000.18). Box 6, Bound Volume (stamped “Private Library Arthur H. Cole”) “Divisional Examinations 1916-1927”.

Image Source:  Harry Elkins Widener Memorial Library. Harvard Class Album 1920, p. 65.

 

Categories
Agricultural Economics Harvard Problem Sets

Harvard. Problem set from agricultural economics. Carver, ca. 1904

 

The problem set transcribed below was found in the Harvard University archives collection of syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003; box 1. It was (mis-)filed in the folder “Economics, 1904-05”.  The problem set is clearly identified as belonging to Economics 23. This semester course, “The Economics of Agriculture, with special reference to American conditions”, was taught by Professor Thomas Nixon Carver, but according to the annual report of the president of Harvard College, the course was not offered in 1904-05 though it was indeed offered during the immediately preceding academic year. I have assumed that the problem set was printed for the second term of the academic year 1903-1904. This is consistent with the library time stamp on the problem set (March 7, 1905), i.e. it cannot have come from later years.

From Carver’s autobiography, Recollections of an Unplanned Life, we know that his textbook, Principles of Rural Economics (1911) was based upon this course. For a long-form course reading list, one can consult the bibliography, pp. xi-xviii, in the textbook.

Previously transcribed and posted artifacts from Carver’s agricultural economics course:

Course enrollment and final exam for 1914-15.

Course syllabus for 1917.

Course examination from 1918.

________________________

Trace of the 1904 problem set found in Carver’s 1911 textbook

Note:  Column (Field A) is Table A p. 180; Column (Field C) is Table B p. 181

Source: Thomas Nixon Carver, Principles of Rural Economics, (1911).

________________________

From Thomas Nixon Carver’s Autobiography.

I have mentioned the three strenuous years 1900 to 1903, and that I served the three following years, 1903-1906, as chairman of the Division of History, Government, and Economics. Before leaving for my sabbatical year abroad in 1906, I had resigned as chairman of the Division. In the fall of 1907 I was back in Cambridge with no administrative responsibilities and ready to settle down to teaching and writing. By this time I had come to be recognized as one of the pioneers in this country in the field of agricultural economics. One of the difficulties in the teaching of that subject was the lack of written material. Textbooks were needed and I began to plan one of my own. Before I got well started Professor Liberty Hyde Bailey of Cornell asked me to write a brief historical sketch of American agriculture for his Cyclopedia of American Agriculture which he was preparing. I under took this, not realizing how much work it would require. The material, such as there was, was widely scattered and there was no guide to indicate where to look for it. However, with much toil and sweat I finished the chapter.

Then came a request for an account of the introduction of various crops and farm animals into this country. That was a still harder job but I finished it in time. I was able, later, to use a part of the material in my book, “Principles of Rural Economics,” which Ginn & Company published in 1911.

This book did a great deal to popularize agricultural economics in this country. Henry C. Taylor’s “Introduction to the Study of Agricultural Economics” had preceded it, but, while an excellent introduction, had not made much of an appeal outside the agricultural colleges. My “Principles” sold well. As I remember it, 40,000 copies were sold the first year, and it was favorably reviewed in a number of journals…

…The course on rural economics appealed to a limited number of students, but continued to be elected by enough to make a fair-sized class…

Source: Thomas Nixon Carver. Recollections of an Unplanned Life, p. 171.

________________________

Course description

[Economics] 23 2hf. The Economics of Agriculture, with special reference to American conditions. Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., at 1.30. Professor Carver.

Omitted in 1904-05.

            A study of the relation of agriculture to the whole industrial system, the relative importance of rural and urban economics, the conditions of rural life in different parts of the United States, the forms of land tenure and methods of rent payment, the comparative merits of large and small holdings, the status and wages of farm labor, the influence of farm machinery, farmers’ organizations, the marketing and distribution of farm products, agricultural credit, the economic aspects of public roads, irrigation, forestry, etc., the policy of the government toward agriculture, and the probable future of American agriculture.

The course will be conducted by means of lectures, discussions and reports, with some special investigations of local conditions.

 

Source: Harvard University. Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Division of History and Political Science comprising the Departments of History and Government and Economics, 1904-05. University Publications, New Series, No. 129 (May 16, 1904), p. 47.

________________________

Course enrollment, 1903-04

[Economics] 23 2hf. Professor Carver.—The Economics of Agriculture, with special reference to American conditions.

Total 99: 5 Graduates, 32 Seniors, 28 Juniors, 17 Sophomores, 2 Freshmen, 15 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1903-04, p. 67.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Note:  The course was indeed not offered in 1904-05, though course enrollments were reported for Carver’s courses Economic 3 “Principles of Sociology. Theories of Social Progress”; Economics 13 “Methods of Economic Investigation”; Economics 14a “The Distribution of Wealth”; Economics 14b “Methods of Social Reform. Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.”

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1904-05, pp. 74 ff.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Course enrollment, 1905-06

[Economics] 23 2hf. Professor Carver.—The Economics of Agriculture, with special reference to American conditions.

Total 42: 4 Graduates, 10 Seniors, 11 Juniors, 14 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 2 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1905-06, p. 73.

________________________

Time stamp: “Harvard College Library, MAR 7, 1905”

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 23

Amount of corn grown with varying amounts of labor on a given amount of land.

Number of days’ labor of a man and team with the appropriate tools.

 Product, in bushels, on each of four fields of ten acres each.
Field A. Field B. Field C.

Field D.

5

 50 45 40 35
10 150 140 130

120

15

 270 255 240 255 [sic]
20 380 360 300

280

25

 450 425 350 325
30 510 480 390

360

35

 560 520 420 385
40 600 550 440

400

45

 630 570 450 410
50 650 575 455

415

 

The following problems are based on the above table:—

Problem 1. Assuming that the labor of a man and team, with the appropriate tools, costs a farmer five dollars a day, and that corn is worth forty cents a bushel, how many days of such labor could he most profitably devote to the cultivation of each of the four fields?

Problem 2. Assuming that corn is worth only 33 1/3 cents a bushel, how much labor, etc., could he most profitably apply to the cultivation of each field,—the cost of labor, etc., remaining the same?

Problem 3. Assuming that a farmer has only 200 days’ labor to use, but that he can have rent free an indefinite amount of land of the grade of Field A, how much land could he most profitably use? How much land of the grade of Field C could he most profitably use?

Problem 4. How much land of each grade could he most profitably use if he had to pay five dollars an acre rent, corn being worth fifty cents a bushel, other conditions the same as in Problem 3?

Problem 5. Assuming that the two fields A and C are owned by the same farmer, and that he has but 20 days’ labor which he can devote to their cultivation, how could these 20 days be most profitably distributed among them? How could 25 days be most profitably distributed? 35 days? 50 days? 60 days? 70 days? 90 days?

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003. Box 1. Folder “Economics, 1904-05”.

Image Source: Thomas Nixon Carver in Harvard Class Album 1906.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. General Examinations in Micro- and Macroeconomic Theory, Fall 1992

 

 

The following general examinations for microeconomic and macroeconomic theory (Fall 1992) have been transcribed from a collection of general exams at Harvard from the 1990s provided to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror by Abigail Waggoner Wozniak (Harvard economics Ph.D., 2005). Abigail Wozniak was an associate professor of economics at Notre Dame before being appointed a senior research economist and the first director of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis’ Opportunity & Inclusive Growth Institute. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror is most grateful for her generosity in sharing this valuable material.

The “Wozniak collection” is over 90 pages long, so it will take some time for all the exams to get transcribed.

Transcriptions are available for:

Spring 1991 General Examinations in Microeconomic Theory and Macroeconomic Theory.

___________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MICROECONOMIC THEORY
FALL 1992

Instructions:

  1. You have FOUR
  2. Answer a total of FOUR questions subject to the following constraint:
    There are four sections (I, II, III, IV). You must answer ONE question from each section.
  3. Please use a separate blue book for each question.
  4. Please put only your EXAM NUMBER on the blue book.

 

PART I

  1. Suppose that the consumption set is X=\left\{ x\in \mathbb{R}_{+}^{2}:{{x}_{1}}+{{x}_{2}}\ge 1 \right\} and the utility function is u(x) = x2.
    1. Represent graphically the consumption set and the indifference map.
    2. State and show that the locally cheaper consumption test for demand fails at the price/wealth combination (p, w) = (1, 1, 1).
    3. Show that market demand is not continuous at the above price/wealth combination. Interpret economically.
  2. An individual has Bernoulli utility indicator u and initial wealth w. Let lottery L offer a payoff of G with probability q and a payoff of B with probability 1 – q.
    1. If the individual owns the lottery, what is the minimum price s/he would sell it for?
    2. If s/he does not own it. What is the maximum price s/he would be willing to pay for it?
    3. Are buying and selling prices equal? Give an economic interpretation for your answer. Find conditions on the parameters of the problem under which buying and selling prices are equal.
    4. Let G = 10, B = 5, w = 0 and u(x) = x0.5. Compute the buying and selling prices for this lottery and this utility indicator.

 

PART II

Consider a market with three identical firms. The three firms set quantities as strategies and do so simultaneously. Each firm has marginal cost c, and market price is

p=1-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{3}{{{q}_{i}}}, where qi is firm i’s quantity.

  1. What are the Cournot equilibrium quantities and prices in this model?
  2. Suppose that firms 1 and 2 consider merging to form a single firm, which would have access to the two firms’ technologies. The merged firm, if it forms, would compete as a Cournot duopolist with firm 3. Assuming that the owners of firms 1 and 2 split the merged firm’s profit equally, would they find such a merger advantageous?
  3. Now suppose that firm 1 sets its quantity (as a Stackelberg leader) first and that firms 2 and 3 then follow and set quantities simultaneously. The model is otherwise the same as before. Suppose that firms 1 and 2 contemplate forming a merged firm that would act as a Stackelberg leader vis a vis firm 3. Will the merged firm’s profit be higher or lower than the sum of firm 1’s and 2’s profits in the pre-merger equilibrium? The question should be answered without making any mathematical computations.

 

PART III

Consider the country of Ec, a country with a small open economy. Ec’s economy produces two outputs, x and y, from two immobile factors, capital (K) and labor (L). The prices of x and y, px and py, are determined on the world market and are not affected by anything that happens in Ec. The aggregate production function in Ec for x is fx(K,L) and that for y is fy(K,L). Both of these functions are homogeneous of degree one in (K,L), continuous, differentiable, and have strictly convex upper contour sets. Let the input price of K  in Ec be r and that for L be w(these are prices in Ec, not world prices).

  1. Display the set of efficient production plans in an Edgeworth Box. Argue that the contract curve must lie either all above, all below, or be coincident with the diagonal in the interior of this box.

Now assume that production of x is more capital intensive than is production of y in the sense that for any given ratio of input prices, r/w, the cost minimizing way to produce any given amount of output involves a strictly larger capital-labor ratio, K/L, in the production of x than in the production of y.

  1. What can you say about the shape of the contract curve now? How do the slopes of the isoquants of the two production processes vary at various points on the contract curve?

Now assume that Ec has a perfectly competitive economy.

  1. Show that there is a unique equilibrium input price ratio r/w.
  2. Prove that if the world price of the capital intensive good (px) rises, then the equilibrium input price ratio, r/w, increases.
  3. Prove that if the endowment of labor in Ec increases, the output of good y increases and output of good x

 

PART IV

  1. How is it that, even in a world of linear technologies, different theories of growth and distribution lead to different theories of value, i.e., different theories of relative prices? Doesn’t this violate the non-substitution theorem, which shows that, for a given cost of capital, the technology which minimizes costs will be chosen irrespective of demand? Is the existence of different theories of value compatible with the idea that competition eliminates any difference between price and cost of production? How does utility maximization enter into neoclassical and non-neoclassical theories of value?
  2. Overheard in the corridors of Littauer:
    “I took the best road home yesterday.”
    “How do you know that?”
    “If there had been a better one I would have taken it.”
    Analyze the above dialogue from the point of view of both partisans and critics of revealed preference theory.

 

Source: Department of Economics, Harvard University. Past General Exams Spring 1991-Spring 1999, pp. 72-77. Copy provided to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror by Abigail Wozniak.

___________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

GENERAL EXAMINATION IN MACROECONOMIC THEORY
FALL 1992

Instructions:

  1. You have FOUR
  2. Answer a total of SIX questions subject to the following constraint:
    There are four sections (I, II, III, IV). You must answer ONE question from each section.
  3. Please use a separate blue book for each question.
  4. Please put only your EXAM NUMBER on the blue book.

 

PART I

  1. Answer the question, “Does money affect output?” Support your answer with both theoretical arguments and empirical evidence. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence. Finally, include a detailed discussion of one theory that supports your position.
  2. The response among pundits to the recent reduction in German interest rates has been overwhelmingly positive. Evaluate this response in light of the Mundell-Flemming model. How does foreign monetary policy affect domestic output in the model? What other channel might American commentators have in mind. Speculate about the cause of this difference and give an opinion as to who is correct.

 

PART II

Problem 1

Consider the following dynamic version of the Mundell-Fleming model:

{{\dot{e}}}/{e}\;={{i}^{*}}-i

i=\alpha y-\beta m

\dot{y}=\gamma \left( d-y \right)

d=\lambda y-\theta e+g

where

e is the exchange rate (measured so that an appreciation of the domestic currency is an increase in e),
i* is the (exogenous) world interest rate,
i is the domestic interest rate,
y is output,
m is (exogenous) real money balances,
d is demand,
g is a measure of (exogenous) fiscal policy,
and \alpha >0,\,\,\beta >0,\,\,\gamma >0,\,\,0<\lambda <1,\,\,\theta >0.

  1. Give an interpretation of each equation.
  2. Write the model using two variables and two laws of motion. Identify the state (non-jumping) variable and the costate (jumping) variable.
  3. Draw the phase diagram, including the steady-state conditions, the implied[?] dynamics, and the saddle-point stable path.
  4. Describe the effects of a sudden, permanent increase in g. Compare the results to the standard (static) Mundell-Fleming model.
  5. Describe the effects of a sudden, permanent increase in Compare the results to the standard (static) Mundell-Fleming model.

 

Problem 2

Suppose that the representative consumer maximizes the following intertemporal utility function:

{{E}_{t}}\sum\limits_{j=0}^{\infty }{{{\left( 1+\rho  \right)}^{j}}U\left( {{C}_{t+j}},{{G}_{t+j}} \right)}

where C is consumption,

G is (exogenous) government spending,

\rho is the subjective rate of discount,

The consumer has random earnings, and she can borrow and lend at the constant real interest rate r.

  1. What is the consumer’s intertemporal first-order condition? Explain.
  2. In this problem, what variable follows a random walk (that is a martingale)? What variable doesn’t? Explain.
  3. Suppose that government spending follows a predictable pattern: in particular, suppose that (for some political reason) G fluctuates as a sine wave. What is the implied pattern of consumption?
  4. Describe the equity-premium puzzle.
  5. Suppose now that government spending is countercyclical (that is, the government increases G when the economy goes into a recession). How might this model help resolve the equity-premium puzzle? What condition would you need for the utility function U(.)?

 

PART III

  1. What implications for the conduct of monetary policy follow from the fact that many of the familiar variables that economists have urged central banks to adopt as their operating targets—for example, prices, or real interest rates, or measures of money other than the monetary base—are inherently endogenous in the sense that a central bank typically cannot set any of these variables directly via its open market operations? Use a specific model of your choice to illustrate what role a variable like the price level or the real interest rate, or a measure of money other than the monetary base, can plausibly play in the monetary policymaking process even when it is clearly endogenous.
  2. “Whether or not debt-financed government spending ‘crowds out’ private capital formation depends on whether or not the economy’s private resources are already fully employed. At less than full employment, deficit spending will crowd out investment even if it raises output (which it may or may not do). By contrast, the mechanisms that cause this decline in investment at less than full employment are not operative when the economy is fully employed.” Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Explain your reasoning as explicitly as possible.

 

PART IV

  1. Suppose that the government wishes to minimize the present value of costs, zt, which are given for period t by {{z}_{t}}=a\cdot {{\left( {{\pi }_{t}} \right)}^{2}}-b\cdot \left( {{\pi }_{t}}-\pi _{t}^{e} \right)+\left( {c}/{2}\; \right){{\left( {{\pi }_{t}}-\pi _{t}^{e} \right)}^{2}}
    where a, b, c, > 0 are constants, {{\pi }_{t}} is the inflation rate for period t, and \pi _{t}^{e} is the inflation rate that people expected at the start of period t.

    1. If the government takes \pi _{t}^{e} as given, then what value of {{\pi }_{t}} minimizes the cost zt for period t?
    2. If the government acts as in part I., and everyone knows it, then what is the full equilibrium under conditions of rational expectations? Explain the costs that are borne in this equilibrium. How are they affected by an increase in the parameter a, which measures the cost of inflation? Explain the results.
    3. If the government can commit to an inflation rate for period t, then what rate should it commit to? Explain how the costs in this situation compare with those from the equilibrium in part 2.
    4. Can the equilibrium described under 2. still apply if the government takes account of costs in future periods as well as for period t?
  2. Consider the neoclassical growth model for a closed economy of Solow, Cass, Koopmans, et al.
    1. If we think of all countries as closed, does this model imply convergence in the sense that poor countries tend to grow faster per capita than rich countries? Discuss in your answer the distinction between absolute convergence—where the poor grow faster than the rich—and conditional convergence—where a poor country grows faster for given values of some exogenous variables.
    2. How do the rates of convergence in this model relate in a general way to the diminishing returns to capital and to the behavior of the saving rate? How would the rate of convergence be affected by allowing for some capital mobility across countries?
    3. If poor countries tend to grow faster per capita than rich countries does it follow that the dispersion of per capita incomes across countries will tend to narrow over time?

 

Source: Department of Economics, Harvard University. Past General Exams Spring 1991-Spring 1999, pp. 78-83. Copy provided to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror by Abigail Wozniak.

Image Source: Harvard Class Album 1946.

Categories
Economic History Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. European Economic History from the Industrial Revolution. Gay, 1934

 

 

A brief biography of Harvard economic historian and first Dean of the Harvard Business School, Edwin Francis Gay (1867-1946) is found in the earlier post for his course “Recent Economic History” that was also taught at Harvard in the 1934-35 academic year. Below we have the course announcement, enrollment figures, reading list, and final exam for the course on European Economic History from the Industrial Revolution.

______________________________

Course Announcement

Economics 2a 1hf. European Economic History from the Industrial Revolution

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat., at 9. Professor Gay.

Source: Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences During 1934-35, second edition. Published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXI, No. 38 (September 20, 1934), p. 125.

______________________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] 2a 1hf. Professor Gay.—European Economic History since the Industrial Revolution.

Total 50:  3 Graduates, 21 Seniors, 17 Juniors, 8 Sophomores, 1 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1934-35, p. 81.

______________________________

Assigned and Suggested Readings

ECONOMICS 2a
[pencil insert: 1934-5]

European Economic History from the Industrial Revolution

Hour Test on November 13 [Pencil insert: Extended to Nov. 15] will cover Groups I and II.

I. SOCIAL THOUGHT AND PROGRESS

A. V. Dicey—Law and Public Opinion in England (1908). Lectures 4-7 (Pages 62-258)

J. M. Keynes—The End of Laissez Faire. (1926)

G. Wallas—Life of Francis Place (1918). Chapters 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 (pages 1-92, 157-240)

II. TRANSPORTATION

E. A. Pratt—A History of Inland Transport and Communication in England (1912). Chapters 8-22 (pages 51-311)

J. H. Clapham—Economic Development of France and Germany (1921). Chapters 5, 7, 12 (Pages 104-120, 140-157, 339-375)

III. AGRICULTURE

Lord Ernle—English Farming, Past and Present (3d edition, 1922). Chapters 17, 18

J. H. Clapham—Economic Development of France and Germany (1921). Chapter 9 (pages 195-231)

C. L. Christensen—Agricultural Cooperation in Denmark. Pages 9-54, 81-87

IV. TARIFF POLICY

P. Ashley—Modern Tariff History (1920). Part 1, Part 3 (pages 3-128, 269-355)

J. Morley—Life of Richard Cobden (1881). Chapters 6, 7, 10, 11, 13, 16 (pages 140-172, 209-247, 290-307, 355-389)

V. BANKING

A. Andreades—History of the Bank of England (1909). Vol. 1, part 4; Vol. 2, Introductory chapter and Part 1 (pages 161-294)

H. Feis—Europe The World’s Banker, 1870-1914 (1930). Part I; Part II; Part III, Chapters 12, 13 (pages 3-190-258-313)

VI. READING PERIOD ASSIGNMENT

Choose ONE of the following groups:

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

P. Mantoux—The Industrial Revolution in the Eighteenth Century (English translation, 1928)

Part I, Chapter 2
Part II, Chapters 1, 2, 3
Part III, Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4
(pages 93-139-193-317, 349-489)

J. H. Clapham—Economic Development of France and German. Chapters 3, 4 (pages 53-103)

LABOR

S. & B. Webb—History of Trade Unionism (1920 edition). Chapters (in part) 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11 (pages 64-112, 153-179, 180-204, 249-298, 358-421, 472-546, 594-611, 634-676, 677-704)

Cambridge Modern History—Volume 12—Chapter 23—Social Movements (by Webb) (pages 730-765

BRITISH INDUSTRY AND CAPITAL

A. Siegfried—England’s Crisis (1933 edition)

L. H. Jenks—The Migration of British Capital to 1875 (1927). Chapters 1, 5, 7, 11. Pages 1-24, 126-157, 193-232, 326-336)

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING—NOT ASSIGNED

A. Birnie—Economic History of Europe 1760-1930 (1930)

C. Day—Economic Development in Modern Europe (1933)

J. H. Clapham—An Economic History of Modern Britain—2 vol. 1926-32 [3 vols. 1926-1938]

L. Domeratzsky—The International Cartel Movement (1928)

R. J. S. Hoffman—Great Britain and the German Trade Rivalry 1875-1914 (1933)

P Fitzgerald—Industrial Combination in England (1927)

L. C .A. Knowles—The Economic Development of the British Overseas Empire, 2 vols. (1924-1930)

F. L. Nussbaum—A History of the Economic Institutions of Modern Europe (1933)

H. M. Robertson—Aspects of the Rise of Economic Individualism (1933)

L. C .A. Knowles—Economic Development in the Nineteenth Century (1932)

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003. Box 2, Folder “Economics 1934-1935”

______________________________

1934-35
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 2a1
[Final. 1935.]

Comment briefly on THREE of the statements in part I, and discuss more fully TWO of the questions in Part II.

Part I

  1. “During the period 1785-1802 there was an increase rather than a decrease of the yeomen proper in England.”
    “The Industrial Revolution was responsible for a decrease in the number of yeomen.”
  2. “The solution for the problem of agricultural distress is to be found, as the example of Denmark clearly shows, not in protective tariffs but in coöperative organization.”
  3. “The Bank was right in 1811 in rejecting the main recommendations of the Bullion Committee and in thereby refusing to follow the counsels of doctrinaires.”
  4. “The Trade Union of today is a direct descendant of the old Gild.”
  5. “The fact that the landlords supported the Factory Acts and that the manufacturers agitated for the repeal of the Corn Laws indicates that both of these powerful antagonists desired the welfare of the working class and that this class, as yet unenfranchised, wielded great political power.”

Part II

  1. “It was the increase of population which rendered necessary the Industrial Revolution.” (Lewinski.)
    “The cotton industry by its demand for the labor of women and children was chiefly responsible for the great increase of population in the towns during the generation and a half preceding the Reform Bill.”
    Comment and give your own view concerning the movement of population in Great Britain and its relation to the Industrial Revolution.
  2. “The community as a whole benefits more by falling than by rising prices.” (Layton.)
    Is this statement supported by the experience of England in the nineteenth century?
  3. Show the chief difference (giving reasons therefor) between France and Germany in railroad development and control.
  4. “The manifold connections and activities of British commerce and finance achieved for Great Britain in their freedom a vigorous expansion.” (Feis) Explain and exemplify.
  5. Summarize concisely:
    1. Bullion Report.
    2. New Unionism.
    3. Cobden Chevalier Treaty.
    4. Méline Tariff.
    5. Bank Act of 1844.
    6. Taff Vale Case.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Mid-year examinations, 1852-1943. Box 12. Volume: Examination Papers. Mid-Years, 1934-35.

Image Source: Edwin Francis Gay in Harvard Class Album 1934.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Final examination for graduate mathematical economics. Goodwin, 1950-51

 

 

 

The reading list for the one-term course Economics 204b. Mathematical Economics, taught by Richard Goodwin during the first term of 1948-49 was posted earlier.

This same course number, Economics 204b, was later assigned to a Goodwin’s seminar in mathematical economics in 1950-51 (that covered “General interdependence systems: in particular, Leontief linear systems”), so we can assume that much of the reading list for his course Economics 204a in 1950-51  would have been very similar to the earlier list linked above. In any event, here are the exam questions for the 1950-51 course.

_____________________

Course Description

Economics 204a. Mathematical Economics

Half-course (fall term). Tu., Th., 2:30-4. Assistant Professor Goodwin.

Micro-and macro-dynamical economic systems.

Prerequisites: one course in economics and one in college mathematics. Properly qualified undergraduates will be admitted to the course.

Source: Final Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences During 1950-51. Published in Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLVII, No. 23 (September, 1950), p. 83.

_____________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 204a
Final. January, 1951

Please use right hand side of page only, leaving the left hand side for scratchwork.

I
Required hour question.

  1. Write an essay on the role of stability in economic science. Include some discussion of various definitions of it, how to measure it, and its use by Walras and by Marshall. Would you be inclined to accept as valid the following type of proposition: we may assume that all or most markets have stable equilibria, for “the plausibility of such a stability hypothesis is suggested by the consideration that positions of unstable equilibrium, even if they exist, are transient, nonpersistent states, and hence on the crudest probability calculation would be observed less frequently than stable states” (Samuelson)?

II
Take any TWO questions, allowing about 40 minutes for each.

  1. State concisely the economic assumptions and derivation of any one macrodynamic model of an inventory cycle. In terms of the model discuss the factors governing the period of its cycle.
  2. Develop briefly a simply macrodynamic model based on ‘fixed’ capital theory. Indicate the important non-linearities and give a graphical discussion of the nature of the solutions and their limit cycle. What are the principal characteristics of the system’s behavior?
  3. Two different economic situations are described by the somewhat similar equations:
    1. \ddot{x}+.12\dot{x}+2.3x=10;
    2. x\left( t+2 \right)+.12x\left( t+1 \right)+2.3x\left( t \right)=10.
      Compare and contrast the behavior implied in the two cases.

 

III
Take any TWO questions, allowing about 20 minutes for each.

  1. If the multiplier mechanism is represented by
    {1}/{v}\;\dot{y}+\left( 1-\alpha \right)y=i\left( t \right)+H ,
    and if
    i\left( t \right)=\kappa \dot{y}+I\cos \omega t,
    Obtain the complete solution for y.
  2. Given a Marshallian type market, specified by
    \begin{array}{l}{{p}_{d}}={{p}_{d}}\left( q \right),\\{{p}_{s}}={{p}_{s}}\left( q \right),\\\text{and}\\\dot{q}=f\left( {{p}_{d}}-{{p}_{x}} \right),\end{array}

    1. State the meaning and use of its phase line, \psi \left( q \right);
    2. Derive the relationship between the slope of \psi \left( q \right) and the slopes of the supply, the demand, and the reaction curves;
    3. Show what conditions on the slopes of the other curves are implied by a stable equilibrium point.
    4. If all curves are linear for small variations, show how the time constant, \tau , depends on the slopes of the supply, the demand, and the reaction curves.
    5. With the help of graphs, discuss the various possible behavior types of a ‘cob-web’ market with general, non-linear supply and demand curves. Explain briefly in words the meaning of your results.

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Final examinations, 1853-2001. Box 17, Bound volume: Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Military Science, Naval Science. January, 1951.

Image: Harvard Class Album 1951.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Economics of Mobilization and War. Syllabus, exam questions. Harris, 1952

 

Just as the Harvard economics department saw it fit to offer a course on the economic aspects of war at the start of the Second World War, there was a course on the economics of mobilization and war at the time of the Korean War taught by Seymour Harris, who had organized the earlier departmental course on war economics in 1940. Enrollment numbers for courses taught during the academic year 1951-52 were not included in the Harvard College Report of the President, so I am unable to include that information in this post. However, we have the course catalogue description, course reading list, and the final examination as transcribed below.

________________

Course Description

Economics 120. Economics of Mobilization and War

Half-course (spring term). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 12. Professor Harris.

This course deals with the following problems on both a historical and current basis: the allocation of resources; income policies; the financing problems; the avoidance of inflation; the incidence of inflation; the relevance of controls; international aspects.

Source: Final Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences During 1951-52. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLVIII, No. 21 (September 10, 1951) p. 77.

________________

Course Syllabus and Readings

Spring Term 1951-52
Economics 120
Economics of Mobilization and War

*Books to be bought

I. Introduction (1 week)

Nature of the problem: mobilizations of World War II and the 1950’s
Three models: peacetime economy, mobilization economy, war economy
Real costs and money costs
Prospects for the civilian standard of living

Reading

*1. Harris: Economics of Mobilization and Inflation, Ch. 1 (pp. 3-25)
2. Keynes: How to Pay for the War, Chs. 1, 2 (pp. 1-12)
3. Hart: Defense Without Inflation, Ch. 9 (pp. 165-185)
4. Pigou: The Political Economy of War, Ch. IV (pp. 47-55)

 

II. The Problem in Real Terms: Optimal Division of Resources (3 weeks)

Allocation of resources, manpower, and facilities; changing nature of output
International aspects
Production scheduling; “bottlenecks”
Administration of military procurement

Reading

1. Pigou: The Political Economy of War, Ch. III (pp. 29-47)
2. Harris: Economics of Mobilization and Inflation, Chs. 2-6 (pp. 25-85)
3. Office of Defense Mobilization: Three Keys to Strength (Third Quarterly Report to the President) or subsequent reports.
*4. Chandler and Wallace: Economic Mobilization and Stabilization, Chs. 4, 5 (pp. 91-136)

 

III. The Problem in Money Terms: Adequate Funds Without Runaway Inflation (3 weeks)

Financing the War; the “inflationary gap”
Why is inflation harmful? Uneven incidence of inflation
The Fiscal Policy attack on inflation
The Direct Controls attack on inflation
Interrelatedness of Fiscal Policy and Direct Controls

Reading

1. Keynes: How to Pay for the War, Ch. 2 (above)
2. Pigou: The political Economy of War, Chs. VII, VIII (pp. 72-94)
3. Harris: Economics of Mobilization and Inflation, Chs. 7-10, 18, 19, 22 (pp. 85-119; 197-214; 245-256)
4. Hart: Defense Without Inflation, Chs. 1, 4 (pp. 3-18, 59-77)
5. Galbraith: A Theory of Price Control, Chs. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (pp. 28-75)
6. Scitovsky, Shaw and Tarshis: Mobilizing Resources for War, Ch. 2 (pp. 101-144) and pp. 145-149 of Ch. 3
7. Chandler and Wallace: Economic Mobilization and Stabilization, pp. 34-59 and Ch. 26 (pp. 569-592)
8. Harris: Price and Related Controls in the United States, Ch. II (pp. 29-38)

 

IV. Fiscal Policy: Its Implementation and Effects (3 weeks)

Funds for financing mobilization: taxes or loans?
Reducing aggregate demand: taxes, savings, or deferred payment?
Burden of the public debt

Reading

1. Pigou: The Political Economy of War, Chs. VII VIII (above)
2. Harris: Economics of Mobilization and Inflation, Chs. 11-17, Chs. 22-24 (pp. 119-197, 245-286)
Chandler and Wallace: Economic Mobilization and Stabilization, Part III and Ch. 15 (pp. 180-272, 273-315)
4. Keynes: How to Pay for the War, Ch. V (pp. 27-34)

 

V. Direct Controls: Principles and Techniques (3 weeks)

Allocation of resources: priorities
Price control, rationing, wage control, rent control
Costs, prices, subsidies, supplies
International Aspects

Reading

1. Hart: Defense Without Inflation, Ch. 5 (pp. 78-97)
2. Harris: Price and related Controls in the United States, Chs. III-VIII, XI, XII, XVIII, XXI, XXII, XXV, XXVII
3. Galbraith: A Theory of Price Control, Ch. 8 (above)
4. Harris: Economics of Mobilization and Inflation: Ch. 20, 21 (pp. 214-245)

 

VI. Summary and Alternative Policies

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1951-1952 (1 of 2)”.

________________

Reading Period Assignment

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Reading Period Assignments
May 5 – May 24, 1952

Economics 120:

Bureau of the Budget: THE U.S. AT WAR. Chs. 5 through 7, 9 through 12, 15 and 16.

D. N. Chester (Ed.): LESSONS OF THE BRITISH WAR ECONOMY.

Baruch: AMERICAN INDUSTRY IN THE WAR, First Annual Report of the Activities of the Joint Committee on Defense Production. Read 250 pages dealing primarily with stabilization agencies. (Superintendent of Documents)

Joint Committee on the Economic Report: MONETARY POLICY AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PUBLIC DEBT, Part I. Read either pp. 1-194 or 207-492.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1951-1952 (1 of 2)”.

________________

Final Examination
May 1952

1951-52
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 120

Instructions: Answer both questions in Part I, and any two questions in Part II.

Please write legibly!

Part I

  1. (a) Summarize the “disequilibrium system” and the “pay-as-you-go” approaches to stabilization. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each as applied to the current mobilization period? (20 points)
    (b) Most practicable programs involve some combination of direct and indirect controls. Discuss the theoretical bases for monetary, fiscal, and direct controls, respectively, and explain clearly the theoretical interrelatedness of these measures. (20 points)
  2. Write a critical summary of some phases of your reading period assignment. (10 points)

 

Part II

  1. (a) Indicate briefly—by chart, if you prefer—the organizational hierarchy of the present mobilization and stabilization agencies and summarize briefly the function of each agency. (5 points)
    (b) Summarize the economic issues of the current Steel Case. Include in your answer such points as the WSB recommendations, the criteria for the recommendations, controversial issues, etc. (20 points)
  2. Define or identify and then discuss the significance of five (5) of the following: (5 points each)
    (a) Low end problem
    (b) Formula pricing
    (c) Controlled Materials Plan
    (d) Little Steel Formula
    (e) Differential pricing
    (f) Margin of tolerance and the Inflationary Gap
    (g) Simplification programs
    (h) Priority inflation
    (i) Export controls
  3. Outline the major economic institutions of the ideal “free enterprise” system and indicate what functions they perform. How are these functions carried out in a war economy such as the current one? (25 points)
  4. Discuss the problems which mobilization brings to the following areas:
    (a) Agriculture (5 points)
    (b) National Debt Management (10 points)
    (c) Welfare Expenditures (10 points)

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 27. Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Papers Printed for Final Examinations: History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Air Sciences, Naval Science. June, 1952.

Image Source:  Seymour Harris in Harvard College, Class Album 1957, p. 67.

Categories
Harvard History of Economics Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. History of Economics. First semester readings and exams. O. H. Taylor, 1955-56

 

Overton H. Taylor described his book, A History of Economic Thought: Social Ideals and Economic Theories from Quesnay to Keynes (McGraw-Hill, 1960), as “an outgrowth from, or reduction to book form of, a part of the course of lectures, covering the same ground, which I have given annually for many years at Harvard University.”  This post provides the graduate course outline for the first semester and final examinations for both semesters of his course for the 1955-56 academic year. It is something of a mystery that no syllabus with reading assignments for the second semester of the course  can be found in the Harvard archive’s collection of course syllabi (also not for the previous year either). Perhaps the second semester was structured according to the interests of the students in the course and Taylor simply announced reading assignments as they went along. At least the final examination questions from June 1956 give some indication of the material covered (Marx, Austrian value theory, neo-classical economics in general and Marshall in particular, Veblen…but not Keynes).

*  *  *  *  *  *

Earlier syllabi and exams by Taylor in the history of economics have been posted earlier:

Syllabus. Economics 115 (Fall Term, 1948-49). Economics and Political Ideas in Modern Times.

Final Exam. Economics 115 (Fall Term, 1948-49). Economics and Political Ideas in Modern Times.

Syllabus and Final Exam. Economics 115 (Spring Term, 1947-48). Economics and Political Ideas in Modern Times.

A much earlier version of the material for a one semester course:

Syllabus. Economics 1b (Spring Term, 1940-41). The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought.

Final Exam. Economics 1b (Spring Term, 1940-41). The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought.

Greater emphasis on economic theory was given in his graduate course:

Syllabus. Economics 205a (Fall Term, 1948-49). Main Currents of Thought in Economics and Related Studies over Recent Centuries.

In the Preface to his 1960 book Taylor described his purpose in writing as follows:

Perhaps I have a desire to be a ‘missionary’ in both directions–to convert as many noneconomist or lay readers as I can into interested students of economic theory and its history, and to convert more fellow-economists into interested students, also, of the diverse, general views or perspectives on all human affairs which formerly concerned all philosophical political economists.

______________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Fall Term, 1955-56

Economics 205
History of Economic Theory
[O. H. Taylor]

I. Sept. 26-30. Introduction.

Reading due Sept. 30. (1) J. A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, Part I, (45 pp.). (2) Review of the Schumpeter History, by O. H. Taylor, in (Harvard) Review of Economics and Statistics, Feb. 1955. (3) Essay, “Philosophies and Economic Theories in Modern Occidental Culture,” by O. H. Taylor in volume, Ideological Differences and World Order, ed. by F. C. S. Northrup. (Also available in O. H. Taylor essays, Economics and Liberalism).

Mon., Sept. 26. Introductory lecture: Aims, scope, and plan of course. Reasons for studying history of economic thought. Interrelations of the history of our “science”, history of popular politico-economic thought, and general backgrounds of economic, social, political, and intellectual history.

Wed., Sept. 28. Second Lecture: A preliminary survey of our subject matter and its-over-all pattern; characters of main developments in antiquity, the middle ages, early-modern times (“mercantilism”), the eighteenth century, classical political economy and its critics, socialism and Marxism, the historical schools, neo-classical systems, and 20th century economics.

Fri., Sept. 30. Class Discussion (no lecture), chiefly on Schumpeter History, Part I.

 

II. Oct. 3-7. Antiquity—Plato and Aristotle and Stoicism, Roman Law, and Early Christianity.

Reading due Oct. 7. (1) G. H. Sabine, History of Political Theory, first 6 chapters. (2) Schumpeter, History, Part II, Ch. 1.

Mon., Oct. 3. Lecture: Ancient Athenian life and thought, and Plato’s philosophy, politics, and economics.

Wed., Oct. 5. Lecture: Aristotle’s philosophy, politics, and economics; and effects on later economics, that of Stoicism, Roman Law, and early Christianity.

Fri., Oct. 7. Class discussion.

III. Oct. 10-14. The Middle Ages—Scholastic Thought—Aquinas.

Reading due Oct. 14. (1) Sabine, History of Political Theory, Ch. 13 (“Universitas Hominum”: St. Thomas and Dante). (2) Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, Part II, Ch. 2, 1st 5 sections.

Mon., Oct. 10. Lecture: Mediaeval Europe, its life and thought; scholastic philosophy and economics; St. Thomas Aquinas.

Wed., Oct. 12. Holiday.

Fri., Oct. 14. Discussion.

IV. Oct. 17-21. Early Modern Europe—Growth of capitalism, national states, the modern (as opposed to mediaeval) intellectual climate, and the ideas and practices of political absolutism and “mercantilism”. (2) The general and political philosophy of Hobbes.

Reading due Oct. 21: (1) Schumpeter, History, Part II, Ch. 2, Secs. 6, 7; and Chs. 3, 4. (2) Hobbes, Leviathan, Chs. 1-6 incl., and 13, 14, 15, 17, 21, 24.

Mon., Oct. 17. Lecture: From Mediaevalism to modernity; Evolution of the main elements of modern-western civilization, in the England and Western Europe of the 16th and 17th centuries.

Wed., Oct. 19. Lecture: The general and political philosophy of Hobbes, and its relation to “mercantilist” economic thought and policy.

Fri., Oct. 21. Discussion.

V. Oct. 24-28. Economic Analysis in the Age of “Mercantilism.”

Reading due Oct. 28: (1) Schumpeter, History, Part II, chs. 5, 6, and 7. (2) Look at, read in, “sample,” some of following: Sir T. Mun, England’s Treasure by Foreign Trade; Sir J. Child, A New Discourse on Trade; J. Locke, Considerations on Lowering Interest by Law and Raising the Value of Money; Sir D. North, Discourses on Trade; Sir W. Petty, Economic Writings (Hull, Editor, vol. 1, especially Editor Hull’s introduction and pp. 43-49, 74-77, 89-91, 105-114).

Mon., Oct. 24. Lecture: “Mercantilism” and the 17th century beginnings of modern economic science.

Wed., Oct. 26. Lecture: The transition from “mercantilist” to 18th century “liberal” thought in economics.

Fri., Oct. 28. Discussion.

VI. Oct. 31-Nov. 4. Liberalism, Locke, and the 18th Century Enlightenment.

Reading due Nov. 4: (1) O. H. Taylor essays, “Economics and Ideas of Natural Law,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 44, pp. 1 ff, and 205 ff. (also available in O. H. Taylor, Economics and Liberalism). (2) Review Schumpeter, History, Part II, Ch. II, Secs. 5, 6, 7. (3) J. Locke, Second Treatise on Civil Government, Chs. 2-9 incl.

Mon., Oct. 31. Lecture: History of ethical-juristic and natural-scientific “natural law” ideas, and early-modern liberalism; Grotius and others.

Wed., Nov. 2. Lecture: Newton, Locke, and the 18th century’s philosophic vision of the “natural order.”

Fri., Nov. 4. Discussion.

VII. Nov. 7-11. The Philosophy and Economics of the Physiocrats.

Reading due Nov. 11: (1) G. H. Sabine, History of Political Theory, Ch. 27 (“France: the Decadence of Natural Law.”) (2) Review, O. H. Taylor Essays, “Economics and Ideas of Natural Law,” and Schumpeter, History, Part II, Ch. IV.

Mon., Nov. 7. Lecture: The Physiocrats.

Wed., Nov. 9. Lecture: The Physiocrats (continued).

Fri., Nov. 11. Discussion.

VIII. Nov. 14-18. Adam Smith I. His forerunners in moral philosophy (Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, Hume), and his Theory of Moral Sentiments; and the relation of this material to the Wealth of Nations.

Reading due Nov. 17: Selby-Bigge, British Moralists, Selection from Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments.

Mon., Nov. 14. Lecture: The psychology and ethics, and philosophy of “the natural order,” of the 18th century Scottish “sentimental” moralists.

Wed., Nov. 16. Lecture: Adam Smith’s philosophy, psychology and ethics, and economics.

IX. Nov. 21-25. Adam Smith II. Economics.

Reading due Nov. 25: Wealth of Nations, Book I, first 7 chapters.

Mon., Nov. 21. Lecture: Adam Smith’s Inquiry into The Wealth of Nations (scope and nature of the book, etc.); and his theory of production, economic progress, “the system of natural liberty,” and “natural” prices, wages, profits, and rents.

Wed., Nov. 23, Lecture: Smith on capital, money, international trade, and other topics.

Fri., Nov. 25. Discussion.

X. Nov. 28-Dec. 2. Utilitarian Liberalism, Benthamism, and Classical (Ricardian) Political Economy.

Reading due Dec. 2: (1) G. H. Sabine, History of Political Theory, Chapter “Liberalism.” (2) Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, Part III, first 3 chapters. (3) Selby-Bigge, British Moralists, Selection from Bentham’s Introduction to Principles of Morals and Legislation. (4) J. Bentham, Rationale of Reward, Part II.

Mon., Nov. 28. Lecture: Liberal thought in the “natural law” and “utilitarian” versions; Benthamism; and the relation of this wider system of thought to “classical” economics.

Wed., Nov. 30. Lecture: Benthamism and classical economics, concluded.

Fri., Dec. 2. Discussion.

XI. Dec. 5-9. Malthus and Ricardo.

Reading due Dec. 9: (1) Schumpeter, History, Part III, Chs. 4, 5. (2) Ricardo, Principles, Chs. 1-6.

Mon., Dec. 5. Lecture: The Malthusian population principle, its ideological and scientific backgrounds and bearings, and its place in “classical” economics. (2) Malthus vs. Ricardo on other questions in economics.

Wed., Dec. 7. Lecture: Ricardo and his fundamental doctrines.

Fri., Dec. 9. Discussion.

XII. Dec. 12-16. Contemporary Criticisms of Classical Economics, and Rival Currents of Thought in the Same Epoch.

Reading due Dec. 16: (1) T. Carlyle, Past and Present, parts I and III. (2) J. Ruskin, Unto This Last. (3) A. Comte, Positive Philosophy, tr., Harriet Martineau, Introduction and Ch. 1 and Book VI, ch. 1.

Mon. Dec. 12. Lecture: Old and new currents and cross-currents of thought in this period. Advances in economic analysis in other quarters apart from the “classical” one. Contemporary Ideologies and “Lay” criticisms—Romantic, Positivistic, and “Reactionary” and “Radical.”

Wed., Dec. 14. Lecture: (1) Romantic-Conservative Thought in the Period vs. the Utilitarian-Liberal and Classical-Economic viewpoints. (2) Positivism and Comtism vs. liberalism and economics.

Fri., Dec. 16. Discussion.

Reading Period:

J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy

Book I—Chs. 3, 4, 5, 10, 11, 12
Book III—Chs. 1-4 incl., and 11, 15, 16
Book III [sic]

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in economics, 1895-2003. Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1955-1956 (1 of 2) and (2 of 2)”.

______________________

1955-56
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 205
[Mid-year exam, January 1956]

Write half-hour essays on six (6) of the following:

  1. (a) Summarize, and discuss, the main ideas on “economic” (?) subjects that appear in Plato’s Republic. (b) With what tenets of Plato’s philosophy were those ideas connected? Explain these connections. (c) Do you think that modern economics presupposes other, very un-Platonic views in philosophy? Explain and defend your answer to (c).
  2. (a) What principal achievements in economic analysis does Schumpeter credit to the mediaeval scholastic doctors? (b) How, if at all, were their contributions affected (1) in Schumpeter’s view and (2) in your own view, by Scholastic doctrines in philosophy and ethics?
  3. Try to say as concisely and fully as you can, what seem to you the most important things to be said about “mercantilism” as a cluster of economic ideas and policies.
  4. (a) Who were the “econometricians” who are referred to as such in the title of Schumpeter’s chapter “The Econometricians and Turgot”? Identify as many of them as you can, giving names, approximate dates, and when possible, titles of their best-known writings. Then (b) characterize, a little more fully, the work, ideas, and contributions of one important member of that group.
  5. Explain and discuss either (a) the nature and significance of Quesnay’s tableau economique, (b) the Physiocratic philosophy of “the natural order”; or (c) the assumptions and reasoning behind the Physiocratic doctrines leading to identification of the land-rent-income of the proprietary class, with the entire national produit net, and to the views about taxation and other matters based upon that.
  6. “Adam Smith’s economic liberalism resulted logically, not from his ideas in economic theory only, but jointly from those and his fundamental views in philosophy, ethics, psychology, and sociology.” What main Smithian ideas, in each of those fields, in your view, played what parts in the full Smithian argument for economic liberalism?
  7. How do you explain both (1) the very high estimate, by Ricardo’s admirers in England, of the value of his contributions to economic science, and (2) Schumpeter’s rather low estimate of the same? Finally, what kind of an estimate would you offer as your own, and how would you defend it?
  8. Explain, and discuss critically, what you think J. S. Mill meant to assert, in his dictum about the laws of economic production vs. those of distribution—the dependence of the latter but not of the former on human institutions.

Source:  Harvard University Archives.  Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 23. Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science  (January, 1956).

______________________

1955-56
HARVARD UNIVERSITY

ECONOMICS 205
[Final exam, June 1956]

Write one-hour essays on three (3) of the following subjects:

  1. A comparative discussion of the theories of economic development of Ricardo, Marx and Schumpeter.
  2. A comparative discussion of the Ricardian, Austrian, and Marshallian theories of the foundations and adjustment (into equilibrium) of the values and prices of different goods in a competitive economy.
  3. Your own views and arguments as to whether and how far the body of “marginal analysis” worked out in “neo-classical” economics was (1) a great advance in giving economics the precision and rigor of aa real science; or (2) a sad decline into a deadly-dull, unrealistic, and unimportant kind of theorizing, preoccupied with trivialities.
  4. Your own “sorting out,” in Veblen’s thought, of what you regard as his valid insights, and his to-be-rejected notions, (a) as a critic of traditional economic theory, and (b) as a critic of capitalism or the business culture.

Source:  Harvard University Archives.  Harvard University. Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 24. Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science (June, 1956).

Image Source: Harvard Class Album 1952.

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Lecture Notes

Harvard. Tobin’s notes to lecture by Alvin Hansen on Keynes’ General Theory, May 1938

 

The following notes were taken by James Tobin at the end of his junior year at Harvard. The notes for this lecture by Alvin H. Hansen on Keynes’ General Theory were “filed” as loose-leaf pages inserted into a bound volume of Tobin’s handwritten course notes for Economics 41 (Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises, taught by John H. Williams and Seymour Harris). Hansen’s lecture might have been a guest lecture for that course since only a recitation section taught by Kenyon Edward Poole was included in the notes for that date.  

Also on that date in history at Harvard: Gunnar Myrdal held the second lecture in his four-lecture Godkin public lecture series “The Population Problem and Social Security”.

__________________

Lecture
5/4/38
Prof. Alvin H. Hansen of Garver & Hansen
Littauer Professor of Political Economy

Keynes’ General Theory.

Not mainly concerned with trade cycle. Ch[apter] on trade cycle not very original. Cycle consists in fluctuation of rate of investment-purchase of capital-goods. Keynes holds that fluctuations in rate of invest[ment] due to fluctuations in the rate of prospective profits, in the marg[inal] efficiency of capital. Keynes emphasizes the rôle of expectations—psychology. Quick shift from prosperity to depression due to violent shifts in expectation from optimism to pessimism.

Mainly concerned with larger problem of full empl[oyment] of labor and the other factors of production. Could still have trade cycle but its booms would hit full employment. But also conceivable is a society in which ceiling of fluctuations is below full empl[oyment]—permanent under-employment. This long-run under-empl[oyment] Keynes mainly concerned with. Modern societies tend to be in a situation of chronic under-employment. He accuses classicals of working on assumption that society has long-run tendency to full empl[oyment]. Classical writers were concerned with pricing system and returns to different factors, and how much labor, etc., was used. R[ate] of int[erest] for example determined amount of saving cped [compared?] to consumption out of given income. This according to K[eynes] only goes with full empl[oyment] assumption. Rise in consumption in condition of under-empl[oyment] will lead to rise in investment as well. These are not alternatives until there is full empl[oyment]. This well realized by bus[isness] cycle theorists. Keynes applies it to long-run analysis.

What determines the volume of employment?

1) Rate of interest
2) Marg[inal] efficiency of capital. (Prospective rate of profit anticipated by bus[iness] man.)
3) Propensity to consume.

Nothing new about introducing rate of int[erest] as a determinant. Wicksell 1898 set forth determinants of expansion as prospective rate of profit on one side and r[ate] of int[erest] on the other side. Keynes adds the propensity to consume. dC/dY >0, <1, decreases. Rich societies have tendency to fail to maintain level of income once achieved. A society which consumes all of its income would have no difficulty in maintaining its level, because no deficiency in income-spending from incomes pd [paid] out to factors. If some part is not spent on consumers’ goods—just saved without a purchase of capital-goods – those who save are not actual investors-entrepreneurs—and there is not an equal amount of new investment, there is a tendency for incomes to fall. If propensity to consume is low, other determinants of employment must be very strong—high prospective rate of profit, low r[ate] of int[erest]—in order to balance saving.

“Classical” relation of r[ate] of int[erest] to saving. Later classical writers qualified argument: if r[ate] of int[erest] is very high, more saving; if low, less. But in between, there are the fixed-income savers. Keynes: determinant is level of incomes. Wouldn’t say no relation of saving to r[ate] of int[erest]. Given r[ate] of int[erest], determinant is level of incomes. There is for K[eynes] then no minimum r[ate] of int[erest], such as Cassel found: if int[erest] falls there because of shortness of human life people will say int[erest] is so low that not much income from it. Hence they will consume capital. At this p[oin]t tendency for saving to decrease, & consumption [to] increase. For K[eynes] there is another minimum point, below which there is not decrease of saving but an increase of hoarding. K[eynes] distinguishes mkt [market] & pure rates of int[erest]. Special risk in buying long-term commitment—risk is that r[ate] of int[erest] will rise a little bit in future, price of bond will drop so as to wipe out all int[erest] gain on it. Hence there is pt[point] where we won’t bother to buy securities but will hold cash. R[ate] of int[erest]not driven down below point of consump[tion] ncrease. What people will do is hold savings in liquid forms.

In rich community, marg[inal] efficiency of capital low; propensity to consume low; but rate of int[erest] can’t keep falling because of liquidity-preference. Hence there is not adequate volume of new invest[ment] to maintain full employment. R[ate] of int[erest] doesn’t drop to point where people stop saving & consume more, & rectify the difficulty; but is held up by liquidity preference.

Emphasizes largely r[ate] of int[erest]; Spiethoff thinks important thing in expansion is marg[ignal] efficiency of capital, which K[eynes] largely takes for granted. Spiethoff’s factors influencing prospective rate of profit on new invest[ment]: expanding market, increasing population, inventions & giant industries. All these associated with a young & growing capitalism, as in 19th.—unique century, conquering the world and revolutionizing the industrial technique and expanding population. Now decline in population, and no new mkts [markets]. K[eynes] assumes this exploitation of opportunities & emphasizes the monetary rate of int[erest], not as Spiethoff on non-monetary influences on marg[inal] efficiency. Risk & uncertainty of modern world decrease the will to invest—and perhaps also the tendency to save w[oul]d be greater. Failure of invest[ment] outlet.

K[eynes]’s solutions:

1) Artificially create a low rate of interest.
2) Stimulate consump[tion] by redistribution of income.
3) Enlarge volume of public investment.

[Qualifications]

1) How far will stimulate invest[ment] doubtful.
2) Effects of taxation for this purpose may hurt private invest[ment]
3) Public invest[ment] may be offset by private invest[ment] decline.

            Economic policies are choice among evils.

 

Source: Yale University Archives. Papers of James Tobin.  Box 6, Loose pages in bound lecture notes for Economics 41 taken by James Tobin during the 1937-38 academic year at Harvard University.

Image Source: James Tobin senior year portrait in Harvard Class Album, 1939.

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Faculty Regulations Harvard Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Rochester Stanford Uncategorized Yale

Harvard. Report on the General Examination for an Economics PhD, 1970

 

 

What makes this report on the general examination in the economics PhD program at Harvard particularly valuable is its brief survey of the practice at eight other universities: Yale, MIT, Johns Hopkins, Rochester, Stanford, Berkeley, Michigan, and Chicago. 

_____________________

DRAFT

This draft is distributed in Professor Chenery’s absence to permit discussion at the next Department meeting, January 27, 1970.
Professor Chenery or other members of The Committee might wish to record further comments in preparation [of] a final report.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02135
January 16, 1970

To: The Department of Economics
From: Committee on Graduate Instruction

REPORT ON THE GENERAL EXAMINATION FOR THE PH.D.

In response to a number of requests from students and faculty, the Committee has reexamined at considerable length the requirements for the General Examination. This report summarizes our general assessment in section I and makes specific recommendations for changes in section II. Some related issues needing further consideration are listed in section III.

Although for the past several years graduate students have criticized various aspects of the generals, the main source of dissatisfaction seems to be with the rigidity of “the system” rather than with any particular aspect of it. We have taken advantage of the fact that the Committee now has three student members to try to understand some of the effects of our present procedures on students’ choices and incentives. We have also tried to strike a better balance between preparation for the general examination and other aspects of a student’s training in his first two years.

As a background for our discussion, the secretary of the Committee compiled a useful summary of the regulations in effect at other leading universities, which is attached.

 

ROLE OF THE GENERAL EXAMINATION

The primary functions [sic] of the General Examination is to evaluate the student’s formal preparation in economics before he proceeds to more advanced phases of teaching and thesis preparation. It also serves as a screening device to weed out weak candidates, as a basis for subsequent recommendations for employers, and as an indirect way of organizing the student’s course work in his first two years. These multiple functions produce much of the debate over requirements at Harvard and elsewhere, since a system that is ideal for one purpose has weaknesses for another.

One of the main criticisms of the existing Harvard system is its psychological impact on the student. The need to satisfy the requirements in all fields within a period of several months inhibits most students from exploring non-required topics until after they have passed the generals. On balance, we are impressed with the desirability of adopting a more flexible timing that will encourage the student to get most of his tool requirements out of the way in the first year and use the second year to explore the fields of his special interest and get some taste of actual research. We have tried to maintain the undoubted benefits of an overall examination, however, as compared to a set of course requirements.

Our survey of other departments shows a significant trend toward breaking down the requirements into separate parts and focusing less on the culminating oral examination. Most departments use the qualifying examination in theory as a device for screening first year students, which also reduces the burden of preparing all fields in the second year. In most departments the minimum proficiency in quantitative techniques and economic history is demonstrated by a satisfactory course grade rather than by inclusions in the general examination. Although we have made our own judgements on these questions, we recommend movement in these directions.

Another consideration which makes greater flexibility desirable is the growing proportion of students who are already well prepared in one or more required fields. For many students, the present system therefore encourages too much review of material they have already covered. We feel that those who are adequately prepared on one of the required fields (theory, quantitative method, history) should have an opportunity to satisfy this requirement in their first year in order to make better use of their time thereafter.

Our recommendations are directed toward achieving greater flexibility in the timing of courses and examinations to allow the student to make more effective use of his time. This should enable many students to get started earlier on their optional fields and to make a better choice of their field of specialization. We do not envision any reduction in the total work done in the first two years or any lowering of standards of performance.

 

SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

General Principles

  1. The general examination should be separated into four component parts—theory, quantitative method, economic history, and special fields—each of which would be graded separately.
  2. The minimum requirement in quantitative method and economic history should be regarded as a “tool requirement” or “literacy test” as has become the practice in the quantitative field. Students wishing to specialize in these fields may offer them at a higher level as one of their special fields.
  3. The term “general examination” would apply to the oral examination on the special fields. (The question of a general grade on all parts as at present was left open.)
  4. There should be no prescribed timing of the four components, other than the stipulation that the required fields be either completed (or write-off courses in progress) at the time of the oral examination on the special fields. Qualified students would be encouraged to complete one or more requirements in the first year.
  5. Two write-offs should be allowed rather than one.
  6. A subcommittee would be set up for economic history (and retained in theory and quantitative method). The standards and ways of satisfying them in the three required fields should be proposed by the three subcommittees and ratified by the GIC and the Department.

The Theory Requirement

  1. The present coverage (roughly 201a, 201b, 202a) should be retained. The examination would continue to be written.
  2. The examination should be offered two or three times a year. (A straw vote by students showed a preference for June, September and January and a margin for September over January.) Most students would take the examination at the end of their first year—in June or September.

The Quantitative Requirement

  1. The present de facto standard of the written examination should be accepted as the “literacy test”.
  2. The requirement can be met either by the present type of written examination (given twice a year) or by a grade of B+ in 221b or 224a. (It is estimated that roughly 75% would be able to qualify by course examination.)

The Economic History Requirement

  1. The history requirement be made parallel to the quantitative requirement in that:
    1. It can be satisfied by course or special departmental examination.
    2. It can either be offered at a minimum level or at a higher level as a special field.
  2. The minimum requirement would be satisfied by a course grade that would allow a similar proportion to qualify in this way (B+ or A- pending further information).
  3. Alternatives to the present 233 sequence (if any) to be established by the history subcommittee.
  4. Minimum standards in both history and quantitative method could be demonstrated by course examination.

The Requirement in Special Fields

  1. Two special fields would be required as the basis for the oral examination, which would also cover general analytical ability.
  2. Advanced theory, econometrics and economic history would be eligible as special fields, but the first two could not both be included. (In the majority view, one applied field apart from history would be required in order to eliminate the possibility of a candidate offering only the three required fields.)
  3. The candidate would be encouraged (or required?) to submit a research paper to be made part of the subject matter and record of the general examination (He is now “expected” to have presented a paper to a working seminar by the end of his second year.)
  4. The general oral examination would normally be taken at the end of the second year, but could not be taken before the qualifying exams in theory, quantitative and history have been passed (or prospective write-offs are in progress.)

QUESTIONS OF GRADING

  1. Should all examinations be either pass-fail or on a more limited grading scale than at present?
  2. Should the passing standard for the course option in both quantitative methods and history be B+?
  3. Should the four requirements be graded separately or combined (as at present) into an overall grade on the General Examination? (The committee favors first the alternative, but would also require “distinguished” performance in at least one area.)

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Examination Requirements at Other Places

Below I summarize examination requirements at eight other places, including Yale, MIT, Hopkins, Rochester, Stanford, Berkeley, Michigan and Chicago. The main findings of the survey are:

  1. It appears that the massive type of “generals” (where all fields and theory are combined in one session) has almost disappeared. With the exception of Hopkins, all of the above schools seem to settle the theory examination at the end of the first year, with special fields examined at the end of the second year.
  2. Among the schools surveyed, only Yale has a written examination in history. Hopkins, Stanford, Chicago and Berkeley require a course, with “satisfactory” grade. MIT and Rochester have no requirement.
  3. Only Yale gives a written in quantitative aspect of the generals. All the other schools have course requirements (satisfactory grade) only.
  4. Practices vary with regard to number of special fields and type of examination. MIT and Hopkins require three, the others two special fields. Examinations at Yale are oral, at the other places written, in some cases both written and oral. In most places the special field examinations must be taken together, but in some (Rochester, Chicago) they can be separated. Throughout, these special examinations seem to be given by the department, and not merely as course examination.
  5. Some provisions of special interest:
    1. Chicago and Rochester’s second year research paper as part of general examination
    2. Stanford’s requirement for distinction in at least one field.

 

I. Yale

Comprehensive Examination

  1. Written examination in theory and econometrics, usually August or September after first year.
  2. Written examination on economic history; usually late spring of second year.
  3. Oral examination in two applied fields, chosen from six and in general analytical ability; late spring of second year. Given by four examiners. Student excused from general examination in special field courses at end of second year. Oral examination in theory, history, quantitative or field outside economics may be substituted for one of the applied fields if candidate has done year’s course work in applied field “with sufficient distinction”.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—written, end of second year, and option to substitute for one special field.
  2. Quantitative—written, end of first year, and option to substitute for one special field.

Other requirements

  1. Has apparently been dropped.
  2. One course credit of explicit research training, second year.
  3. Dissertation to be completed in fourth year.

 

II. MIT

General examination

  1. General examination in theory consists of two written papers—micro and macro, given in final exam period of first year. May be substituted for final examinations in theory courses.
  2. General examination normally at end of second year. Consists of:
    1. written examinations on three of 12 special fields. These may include advanced theory, econometrics or economic history.
    2. oral examination in the three fields after written.
    3. a fourth field is required but may be written off by B grade in full year course.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—no requirement. May be a special field.
  2. Quantitative—no generals examination. May be a special field.

Other requirements

  1. Two languages

 

III. Johns Hopkins

First Year Oral Examination

A first year oral examination is given in the spring of the first year, covering the fields in which the student has worked during that year.

Comprehensive Examination

Normally taken in spring of second year. Consists of:

  1. Two written examinations in theory, micro and macro.
  2. Three written examinations in special fields, one of which may be outside economics.
  3. Oral examination: Covers theory, special fields, statistics.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—satisfactory work in course.
  2. Statistics—satisfactory work in course.

Other Requirements

  1. One language.
  2. In addition to the departmental special examination, an examination is given by the graduate board, which includes members of other departments.

 

IV. Rochester

Qualifying Examination

  1. Theory and econometrics courses are required but are not part of Qualifying Examination.
  2. Qualifying Examination taken in May of second year. Consists of
    1. Written examination in two fields. These may include mathematical economics and econometrics. Need not be taken simultaneously.
    2. A second year research paper which is to be presented to a departmental seminar at the end of second year.
    3. After (a) and (b) are met, an oral examination in the special fields.

History and Quantitative

  1. Econometrics and mathematical economics requirements (courses), extent depending on fields.
  2. No history requirement.

Other Requirements

  1. Certain distribution requirement.
  2. Language and mathematics.

 

V. Stanford

Comprehensive Examination

  1. Written in micro and macro theory at end of first year. Cover course materials.
  2. Selection of special fields under two plans:
    1. If no minor subject is taken, student chooses four out of ten fields. These may include history, econometrics, mathematical economics. One field may be outside economics.
    2. Student may choose a minor subject (in another department) and choose only one out of the ten special economics fields.

Comprehensive written examinations for each field scheduled annually, usually at close of course sequence. Must show distinction in at least one field.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—Include at least two courses from offerings in economic history, history of thought, comparative economics, development.
  2. Quantitative—Econometrics course required.

Other Requirements

  1. Language or particular quantitative skills.
  2. Two seminars and research papers.

 

VI. Berkeley

Departmental Examination in Theory

  1. Must be passed by end of first year. Students with strong background take it in November of first term, others in June (end of first year).
  2. Written qualifying examinations given in two out of thirteen special fields at end of second year. Examinations given twice a year, must be taken together.
  3. Within one year after written qualifying examinations are completed, student presents himself for oral, based on prospectus (and interim results) of his thesis. General assessment of competence.

History and Quantitative

  1. Course in economic history at 210 level.
  2. Course in statistics at 240 level.

Other Requirements

  1. No language.

 

VII. Michigan

Preliminary Examination

  1. At end of theory courses in micro and macro, an “augmented examination” is given which serves as preliminary examination in theory.
  2. Two fields of specialization are required. One field is satisfied by satisfactory grades in two courses. For the other field a written preliminary examination is required.
  3. After this, oral examination on research topic and surrounding area.

Economic History and Quantitative

  1. No history requirement.
  2. Course requirement in statistics and econometrics.

Other Requirements

  1. No general language requirement.

 

VIII. Chicago

Preliminary Examination

  1. A “course [sic, “core” probably intended] examination” covering micro and macro theory is given twice a year (separate from course examinations) and is usually taken at end of first or middle of second year.
  2. Two special fields are chosen. Written examinations in these fields, separate from course examinations. Need not be taken together.
  3. Student presents a thesis prospectus before thesis seminar, usually in third year. Must pass on this for candidacy.

History and Quantitative

  1. History course required as part of distribution requirements.
  2. Course work in statistics required.

Other Requirements

  1. Math, no languages.

 

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Papers. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526. Folder “Harvard University Department of Economics: General Correspondence, 1967-1974 (2 of 3)”.

Image Source: Harvard Class Album, 1946.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Locational Economics. Readings and Exams. Isard, 1952-53

Image Source:  Walter Isard, ca. 1960. From David Boyce presentation: Leon Moses and Walter Isard: Collaborators, Rivals or Antagonists.

___________________

Harvard Ph.D. (1943)

WALTER ISARD, A.B. (Temple Univ.) 1939, A.M. (Harvard Univ.) 1941.
Subject, Economics. Special Field, Economic Fluctuations and Forecasting.
Thesis, “The Economic Dynamics of Transport Technology.”

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1942-43, p. 105.

___________________

Tentative Schedule of Topics

Economics 235—Problems of Location of Economic Activities
Fall Term—M.W.F. at 9 A.M.

  1. Realistic Theory
    1. Introduction
    2. Transport Orientation
    3. Labor Orientation
    4. Other Orientation
    5. Agglomeration
    6. Competing Market and Supply Areas, Theory of Space Pricing (Basing Point included)
    7. Agricultural Location Theory (with reference to an aggregate)
    8. The General Equilibrium Framework (The Total Picture of a Space-Economy—The Interaction of the Industrial and Agricultural Sectors)
  2. Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Regional Development
    1. Case Studies
      1. Iron and Steel Industry
      2. Glass Industry
      3. Aluminum Industry
    2. Trends—Past and Near Future
      1. General Historical Background
      2. Changes in Resource Utilization and in the Pull of Materials, Markets, and Labor Locations
      3. Industrial Concentration and Dispersion
      4. Urban-Metropolitan Development Processes
      5. Regional Industrialization Processes
  3. The Far Future: Technique in Predictive Analysis
    1. Implications of Atomic Energy
    2. Implications of Aircraft and other Innovations

Summary

[Note:  A.1 through A.5 above—“With reference to the individual firm and the industry as well as to groups of industries]

*  * *  *  * *  *  * *  *  *

Economics 235a—Economics of Location and Regional Development: Principles

Fall Term—M.W.F. at 9 A.M.

Readings

  1. Introduction
    Required reading

    1. Alfred Weber’s Theory of Location of Industries (ed. by C. J. Friedrich), Introduction and Chap. I
    2. A.P. Usher, A Dynamic Analysis of the Location of Economic Activity, section 1

Supplementary reading

    1. T. Palander, Beiträge zur Standortstheorie, Chaps. I, II, V
    2. H. Schumacher, “Location of Industry,” Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, Vol. V, pp. 585-92
    3. S.R. Dennison, Location of Industry and Depressed Areas, Chaps. I, II
    4. F. M. Hoover, The Location of Economic Activity, Chap. I

 

  1. Transport Orientation
    Required reading

    1. Alfred Weber’s Theory of Location of Industries, Chaps. II, III
    2. E.M. Hoover, Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, Chaps. I, II, and pp. 34-42
    3. William H. Dean, Jr., The Theory of the Geographic Location of Economic Activities (Selections), Chap. II
    4. A.P. Usher, A Dynamic Analysis of the Location of Economic Activity, section 4

Supplementary reading

    1. National Resources Planning Board, Industrial Location and National Resources, Chaps. 6, 9, 10
    2. T. Palander, Beiträge zur Standortstheorie, Chaps. VI-IX, XII
    3. E.M. Hoover, The Location of Economic Activity, Chaps. 2, 3, 4 (for an elementary presentation)
    4. A. Lösch, Die räumliche Ordnung der Wirtschaft, Part I (for general theoretical reading)
    5. E. Niederhauser, Die Standortstheorie Alfred Webers (for general theoretical reading)
    6. O. Englander, “Kritisches und Positives zu einer allgemeinen reinen Lehre vom Standort,” Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Sozialpolitik, Vol. V (New Series), 1926, secs. I and II
    7. S.R. Dennison, Location of Industry and Depressed Areas, Chap. III

 

  1. Labor and Other Orientation
    Required reading

    1. Alfred Weber’s Theory of Location of Industries, Chap. IV
    2. E.M. Hoover, Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, Chaps. IV, V
    3. A.P. Usher, A Dynamic Analysis of the Location of Economic Activity, section 10

Supplementary reading

    1. E.M. Hoover, The Location of Economic Activity, Chaps. V and VII (elementary presentation)
    2. National Resources Planning Board, Industrial Location and National Resources, Chaps. 7, 8, 11, 12, 13
    3. O. Englander, “Kritisches und Positives zu einer allgemeinen reinen Lehre vom Standort,” Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Sozialpolitik, Vol. V (New Series), 1926, sec. III
    4. H. Ritschl, “Reine und historische Dynamik des Standortes der Erzeugungszweige,” Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 51, 1927, secs. I-III
    5. S.R. Dennison, Location of Industry and Depressed Areas, Chaps. IV, V
  1. Agglomeration
    Required reading

    1. Alfred Weber’s Theory of Location of Industries, Chaps. V, VI
    2. E.M. Hoover, Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, Chap VI
    3. William H. Dean, Jr., The Theory of the Geographic Location of Economic Activities (Selections), Chap. V

Supplementary reading

    1. National Resources Planning Board, Industrial Location and National Resources, Chaps. 14, 15, 16, 17
    2. O. Englander, “Kritisches und Positives zu einer allgemeinen reinen Lehre vom Standort,” Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Sozialpolitik, Vol. V (New Series), 1926, sec. IV.
    3. E.A.G. Robinson, The Structure of Competitive Industry

 

  1. Market and Supply Areas
    Required reading

    1. A. Lösch, “The Nature of Economic Regions,” Southern Economic Journal, Vol. V, 1938, pp. 71-78
    2. E.M. Hoover, Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, pp. 42-59
    3. C.D. and W.P. Hyson, “the Economic Law of Market Areas,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1950

Supplementary reading

    1. A. Lösch, Die räumliche Ordnung der Wirtschaft, Part II
    2. T. Palander, Beiträge zur Standortstheorie, Chap. XIV
    3. H. Hotelling, “Stability in Competition,” Economic Journal, Vol. 39, March 1929, pp. 41-57
    4. E. Chamberlin, The Theory of Monopolistic Competition, 3rded., especially Appendix C, “Pure Spatial Competition”
    5. A.P. Lerner and H.W. Singer, “Some Notes on Duopoly and Spatial Competition,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 45, 1937, pp. 145-86
    6. A. Robinson, “A Problem in the Theory of Industrial Location,” Economic Journal, Vol. 51, June-Sept. 1941, pp. 270-75
    7. E.M. Hoover, “Spatial Price Discrimination,” The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. IV, No. 3, pp. 182-91
    8. A. Smithies, “Monopolistic Price Policy in a Spatial Market,” Econometrica, Vol. 9, 1941, pp. 63-73
    9. _____, “Optimum Location in Spatial Competition,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 44, June 1941, pp. 423-39
    10. H. Moller, “Grundlagen einer Theorie der regionalen Preisdifferenzierung,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Bd. 58, 1943, pp. 335-90
    11. G. Ackley, “Spatial Competition in a Discontinuous Market,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 56, Feb. 1942, pp. 212-30
    12. S. Enke, “Space and Value,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LVI, Aug. 1942, pp. 627-37
    13. T.N.E.C. Monograph No. 42
    14. F. Machlup, The Basing Point System, Chaps. 4, 5, 6, 7
    15. S. Enke, Equilibrium among Spatially Separated Markets: Solution by Electric Analogue,” Econometrica, January 1951

 

  1. Agricultural Location Theory
    Required reading

    1. Theodor Brinckmann’s Economics of the Farm Business, pp. 1-27, 61-63, 66, 73, 78-111, 142-63

Supplementary reading

    1. J.D. Black et al., Farm Management, Chap. XVI
    2. Theodor Brinckmann’s Economics of the Farm Business, pp. 27-61, 111-163
    3. T. Palander, Beiträge zur Standortstheorie, Chaps. III, IV
    4. A. Lösch, Die räumliche Ordnung der Wirtschaft, Chap. 5
    5. F. Aereboe, Allgemeine landwirtschaftliche Betriebslehre, Parts III, V
    6. J.H. von Thünen, Der isolierte Staat in Beziehung auf Landwirtschaft und Nationalökonomie

 

  1. The General Equilibrium Framework
    Required reading

    1. A. Predöhl, “The Theory of Location in Relation to General Economics,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 36, June 1928
    2. B. Ohlin, Interregional and International Trade, Preface
    3. Alfred Weber’s Theory of Location of Industries, Chap. VII
    4. Isard, “The General Theory of Location and Space Economy,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1949
    5. _____, “Distance Inputs and the Space-Economy: Part I, The Conceptual Framework; Part II, The Locational Equilibrium of the Firm,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May and August, 1951

Supplementary reading

    1. H. Weigmann, “Ideen zu einer Theorie der Raumwirtschaft,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Vol. 34, 1931, pp. 1-40
    2. ______, “Standortstheorie und Raumwirtschaft,” in Johann Heinrich von Thünen zum 150. Geburtstag (ed. By W. Seedorf and H. G. Seraphim)
    3. A. Predöhl, “Das Standortsproblem in der Wirtschaftstheorie,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Bd. XXI, 1925
    4. B. Ohlin, Interregional and International Trade, Chaps. VIII-XII
    5. T. Palander, Beiträge zur Standortstheorie, Chaps. X and XI
    6. O. Englander, “Kritisches und Positives zu einer allgemeinen reinen Lehre vom Standort,” Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft und Sozialpolitik, Vol. V (New Series), 1926, sec. V-VIII
    7. L. Miksch, “Zur Theorie des räumlichen Gleichgewichts,” Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Bd. 66, 1951
    8. A. Predöhl, Aussenwirtschaft, 1949

 

  1. Regional and Interregional Input-Output Analysis
    Required reading

    1. W.W. Leontief, “Interregional Theory,” Littauer reading room
    2. Isard, “Some Empirical Results and Problems of Regional Input-Output Analysis,” Littauer reading room
    3. ________, “Interregional and Regional Input-Output Analysis: A Model of a Space-Economy,” Review of Economics and Statistics, November 1951

Suggested reading

    1. W. Leontief, Structure of American Economy 1919-1929
    2. W. Leontief, “Output, Employment, Consumption and Investment,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LVIII, February 1944
    3. W. Leontief, “Exports, Imports, Domestic Output, and Employment,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LX, February 1946
    4. W. Leontief, “Wages, Profit and Prices,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LXI, November 1946
    5. Cornfield, Evans, and Hoffenberg, “Full Employment Patterns 1950,” Monthly Labor Review, February 1947
    6. Cornfield, Evans, and Hoffenberg, “Structure of the American Economy Under Full Employment Conditions,” Monthly Labor Review, March 1947
    7. M. Hoffenberg, “Employment Resulting from U.S. Exports,” Monthly Labor Review, December 1947
    8. W. Leontief et al., “Input-Output Analysis and its Use in Peace and War Economies,” Papers and Proceedings of the American Economic Association, May 1949

 

  1. Empirical Regularities and Distance
    Required reading

    1. John Q. Stewart, “Empirical Mathematical Rules Concerning the Distribution and Equilibrium of Population,” Geographical Review, July 1947
    2. John Q. Stewart, “Demographic Gravitation: Evidence and Applications,” Sociometry, February—May 1948
    3. G.K. Zipf, Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort, Chap. 9

Supplementary reading

    1. G.K. Zipf, National Unity and Disunity
    2. J.Q. Stewart, “Potential of Population and its Relationship to Marketing,” in Theory in Marketing, ed. by R. Cox and W. Alderson
    3. H.W. Singer, “The ‘Courbe des Populations’. A Parallel to Pareto’s Law,” Economic Journal, June 1936
    4. S.A. Stouffer, “Intervening Opportunities: A Theory Relating Mobility and Distance,” American Sociological Review, December 1940
    5. M.L. Bright and D.S. Thomas, “Interstate Migration and Intervening Opportunities,” American Sociological Review, December, 1941
    6. E.C. Isbell, “Internal Migration in Sweden and Intervening Opportunities,” American Sociological Review, December 1944

 

  1. Reading Period Assignment
    1. G.E. McLaughlin and S. Robock, Why Industry Moves South, pp. 1-102

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1952-1953 (2 of 2).

___________________

Final Examination January, 1953

1952-53
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 235a

Answer questions 1 and 2, and any two others.

  1. Define and briefly discuss the following concepts:

(a) locational weight
(b) rent surface
(c) demographic gravitation
(d) market orientation

  1. Design a regional input-output model. Discuss in full the limitations of such a model for projection purposes.
  2. Present Hoover’s analysis for determining the location of marketing and other intermediary establishments.
  3. Outline and evaluate Brinkmann’s theory of agricultural location.
  4. Discuss some ways in which linear programming (activity analysis) techniques may be useful in regional analysis.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Final Exams—Social Sciences—January 1953 (HUC 7000.28), Vol. 96. Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Military Sciences, Naval Science. January, 1953.

___________________

Harvard University
Department of Economics
Spring Term 1952-53

Economics 235b—Economics of Location and Regional Development: Problems

  1. Case Studies of Industries
    Required Reading

    1. Isard, “Some Locational Factors in the Iron and Steel Industry Since the Early Nineteenth Century,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 56, June 1948
    2. Isard and Cumberland, “New England as a Possible Location for an Integrated Iron and Steel Works,” Economic Geography, vol. 26, October 1950
    3. F. Machlup, The Basing-Point System, pp. 3-17, 25-30
    4. T.R. Smith, The Cotton Textile Industry of Fall River, Mass., Chs. II, III, IV.
    5. E.M. Hoover, Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, Chs. VII, VIII, IX and XVI

Supplementary Reading

    1. E.M. Hoover, Location Theory and the Shoe and Leather Industries, Chs. X-XIV
    2. Isard and Capron, “The Future Locational Pattern of the Iron and Steel Industry in the United States,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 57, March 1949
    3. U.S. Department of Commerce, Transportation Factors in the Location of the Cast Iron Pipe Industry, Economic Series, No. 63 (by J.C. Nelson and R.C. Smith)
    4. L. Dechesne, La Localisation des Diverses Productions
    5. E.W. Zimmerman, World Resources and Industries, Parts II, III
    6. C.S. Goodman, The Location of Fashion Industries, Michigan Business Studies, Vol. X, No. 2
    7. F. Machlup, The Basing-Point System, Chs. 4, 5, 6, 7
    8. T.N.E.C. Monograph No. 42
    9. A.Smithies, “Aspects of the Basing-Point System,” American Economic Review, December 1942
    10. United Nations, Department of Economic Affairs, World Iron Ore Resources and Their Utilization
    11. W.G. Cunningham, The Aircraft Industry: A Study in Industrial Location, Los Angeles, 1951
    12. J.V. Krutilla, The Structure of Costs and Regional Advantage in Primary Aluminum Production, Doctoral Dissertation, 1952, Harvard University Archives.
    13. J.H. Cumberland, The Locational Structure of the East Coast Steel Industry, Doctoral Dissertation, 1951, Harvard University Archives.

 

  1. Trends—Past and Near Future
    a. General Historical Background
    Required Reading

    1. W.H. Dean, The Theory of the Geographic Location of Economic Activities(Selections), Introduction and Ch. III
    2. Isard, “Transport Development and Building Cycles,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 52, November 1942

Supplementary Reading

    1. G. McLaughlin, Growth of American Manufacturing Areas, Part I
    2. A.P. Usher, A Dynamic Analysis of the Location of Economic Activity, Ch. II to end
    3. A. Weber, “Industrielle Standortstheorie,” Grundriss der Sozialökonomik, Abt. VI, pp. 55-82.
    4. H. Ritschl, “Reine und historische Dynamik des Standortes der Erzeugungszweige,” Schmollers Jahrbuch, Vol. 51, 1927, secs. IV and V
    5. E.M. Hoover, The Location of Economic Activity, Chs. 9 and 10
    6. R.G. Hawtrey, The Economic Problem, Chs. IX and X
    7. C. Goodrich, Migration and Economic Opportunity, Chs. VI, VIII
    8. A.P. Usher, “The Steam and Steel Complex and International Relations,” in Technology and International Relations (ed. by W.F. Ogburn)
    9. P.E.P., Report on the Location of Industry in Great Britain, Chs. II and IV
    10. W.H. Dean, The Theory of the Geographic Location of Economic Activities, Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University 1938, Chs. IV-VIII
    11. M.P. Fogarty, Prospects of the Industrial Areas of Great Britain, Ch. II
    12. R. Lester, “Trends in southern Wage Differentials Since 1890,” Southern Economic Journal, April 1945
    13. G. Ellis, “Why New Manufacturing Establishments Located in New England,” Monthly Review of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Volume 31, April 1949

 

  1. Industrial Concentration and Dispersion
    Required Reading

    1. S.P. Florence, Investment, Location and Size of Plant, Chs. III, IV, VI
    2. Shenfield and Florence, “The Economies and Diseconomies of Industrial Concentration: The Wartime Experience of Coventry,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XII, No. 32, 1944-45
    3. C. Goodrich, Migration and Economic Opportunity, pp. 314-92

Supplementary Reading

    1. S.P. Florence, Investment, Location and Size of Plant, Chs. I, II, V
    2. National Industrial Conference Board, Decentralization in Industry, Studies in Business Policy, No. 30
    3. J. Steindl, Small and Big Business, Oxford Institute of Statistics, Monograph No. 1
    4. D. Creamer, Is Industry Decentralizing
    5. National Resources Planning Board, Industrial Location and National Resources, Chaps. 4 and 5
    6. A.J. Wright, “Recent Changes in Concentration of Manufacturing,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 35, December 1945
    7. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Location of Manufactures, 1889-1929: A Study of the Tendencies Toward Concentration and Toward Dispersion.
    8. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Business Information Service, Concentration of Industry Report, December 1949
    9. Survey of Current Business, December 1949, “State Estimates of the Business Population.”

 

  1. Urban-Metropolitan Development Processes
    Required Reading

    1. A.E. Hawley, Human Ecology, pp. 80-91, 234-87, 348-432
    2. D.E. Bogue, The Structure of the Metropolitan Community, Part I
    3. R.E. Dickinson, City Region and Regionalism (Page through and observe figures carefully. Read text only when necessary to understand the implications of these figures).

Supplementary Reading

    1. W. Christaller, Die zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland
    2. E. Ullman “A Theory of Location for Cities” American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 46, May 1941, pp. 853-64
    3. U.S. Federal Housing Administration, The Structure and Growth of Residential Neighborhoods in American Cities
    4. Isard and Whitney, “Metropolitan Site Selection,”Social Forces, Vol. 27, March 1949
    5. P.E.P., Report on the Location of Industry in Great Britain, Chap. VI
    6. R.D. McKenzie, The Metropolitan Community, Parts II, III,, IV
    7. N.S.B. Gras, “The Rise of the Metropolitan Community” in the Urban Community (ed. by E.W. Burgess)
    8. R. Park et al., The City, Chaps. I, II, III
    9. E. de S. Brunner and J.H. Kolb, Rural Social Trends, Chaps. IV, V, VI
    10. R.E. Dickinson, “The Scope and Status of Urban Geography: An Assessment,” Land Economics, Vol. XXIV, August 1948, pp. 221-38
    11. Griffith Taylor, Urban Geography
    12. D.E. Bogue, The Structure of the Metropolitan Community, Parts II and III
    13. P.K. Hatt and A.J. Reiss, Reader in Urban Sociology, Parts 1-4

 

  1. Regional Industrialization Processes
    Required Reading

    1. Pei-kang Chang, Agriculture and Industrialization, pp. 23-36, 46-55, 66-112
    2. A.W. Lewis, “The Industrialization of the British West Indies,” Caribbean Economic Review, Vol. II, No. 1, May 1950
    3. A.P. Usher, A Dynamic Analysis of the Location of Economic Activity, Sections 7, 8, and 9

Supplementary Reading

    1. Pei-kang Chang, Agriculture and Industrialization, Chaps. IV, V, VI
    2. K. Mandelbaum, The Industrialization of Backward Areas
    3. Colin Clark, The Conditions of Economic Progress, Chaps. V-XV
    4. Colin Clark, The Economics of 1960
    5. League of Nations, Industrialization and Foreign Trade, Chaps. III and IV
    6. A.J. Brown, Industrialization and Trade
    7. S.R. Dennison, The Location of Industry and Depressed Areas, Part II
    8. G. McLaughlin, Growth of American Manufacturing Areas, Part II
    9. D.M. Phelps, Migration of Industry to South America
    10. P.E.P, Report on the Location of Industry in Great Britain, Chaps. I, V, VIII, IX, X
    11. B. Barfod, Local Economic Effects of a Large-Scale Industrial Undertaking
    12. Harold H. Hutcheson, “Problems of the Underdeveloped Countries,” (Parts I and II), Foreign Policy Reports, September 15 and October 1, 1948, Vol. XXIV, Nos. 9 and 10
    13. L.H. Bean, “International Industrialization and Per Capita Income,” Studies in Income and Wealth (National Bureau of Economic Research 1946), Vol. 8, pp. 119-44
    14. Ernst Pelzer, “Industrialization of Young Countries and the Change in the International Division of Labor,” Social Research, September 1940, pp. 299-325
    15. N.S. Buchanan, “Deliberate Industrialization for Higher Incomes,” Economic Journal Volume 56, December 1946
    16. E. Staley, World Economic Development (I.L.O.)
    17. Great Britain Ministry of Works and Planning, Report of the Committee on Land Utilisation in Rural Areas (Scott Report), Parts I, II
    18. Great Britain, Royal Commission on the Distribution of the Industrial Population, Report (Barlow Report)
    19. T.R. Sharma, Location of Industries in India (2nd Edition), Chaps. XI-XV
    20. H. Perloff, Puerto Rico’s Economic Future
    21. W.A. Lewis, “Industrial Development in Puerto Rico,” Caribbean Economic Review, Vol. I, No. 1, December 1949
    22. S.S. Balzak et al., Economic Geography of the U.S.S.R.
    23. E.M. Hoover & J.L. Fisher, “Research in Regional Economic Growth,” in Problems in the Study of Economic Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research
    24. P. Neff et al., Production Cost Trends in Selected Industrial Areas
    25. R. Vining, articles on regional cyclical behavior, Econometrica, July 1945, January 1946, and July 1946; and Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Review, May 1949
    26. Interstate Commerce Commission, Dockets Nos. 29885 and 29886, pp. 55-165, Testimony of R. Vining
    27. Survey Research Center, Industrial Mobility in Michigan
    28. Hildebrand and Mace, “The Employment Multiplier in an Expanding Industrial Market: Los Angeles County, 1940-47,” Review of Economics and Statistics, August, 1950
    29. C. Clark, “The Distribution of Labour Between Industries and Between Locations,” Land Economics, May 1950

 

  1. Regional Implications of Aircraft and Atomic Power
    Required Reading and Reading Period Assignment

    1. Isard and Whitney, Atomic Power: An Economic and Social Analysis, entire book
    2. C. and W. Isard, “Some Economic Implications of Aircraft,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 59, February 1945

Supplementary Reading

    1. National Resources Planning Board, Technological Trends and National Policy, Parts I, II
    2. W. F. Ogburn, “The Process of Adjustment to New Inventions,” in Technology and International Relations (ed. by W.F. Ogburn)
    3. H. Hart, “Technology and Growth of Political Areas,” in Technology and International Relations(ed. by W.F. Ogburn)
    4. A. J. Brown, Applied Economics, Chapter VII
    5. Isard and Lansing, “Comparisons of Power Cost for Atomic and Conventional Steam Stations,” Review of Economic Statistics, Vol. XXXI, August 1949
    6. Isard, “Some Economic Implications of Atomic Energy,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LXII, February 1948
    7. W.F. Ogburn, Social Effects of Aviation, Parts I, II, III
    8. National Resources Planning Board, Transportation and National Policy, Part II, Section I, “Air Transport.”
    9. S. Schurr and J. Marschak, Economic Aspects of Atomic Power
    10. Isard and Whitney, “Atomic Power and Regional Development,” Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, Vol. VIII, April 1952

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 5, Folder “Economics, 1952-1953 (2 of 2).

___________________

Final Examination May, 1953

1952-53
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 235b

Answer question 1 and three others.

  1. Define and discuss briefly the following concepts:

(a) location quotient
(b) freight absorption
(c) income potential

  1. Evaluate the economic feasibility of a plan based on the concepts of “small man, small plant, and small town with diversified industry.”
  2. Discuss the thesis that the concept of a nodal or metropolitan region is increasing in significance for regional analysis.
  3. What are the various forces determining the location pattern of the iron and steel industry? How do they interact under several different sets of circumstances? Illustrate with diagrams.
  4. “If private enterprise is to engage in the production of both fissionable material and power for commercial use, the location in New England of a nuclear energy installation operated by private enterprise would tend to minimize the subsidy required of the federal government.” Evaluate this statement.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Final Exams—Social Sciences—June 1953 (HUC 7000.28), Vol. 99. Papers Printed for Final Examinations. History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Air Sciences, Naval Science. June, 1953.

Image Source:  Walter Isard, ca. 1960. From David Boyce presentation: Leon Moses and Walter Isard: Collaborators, Rivals or Antagonists.