Roger E. Bolton received his Ph.D. from Harvard in 1964. His dissertation adviser was Otto Eckstein and according to his c.v. (May 2019) Roger Bolton was an Instructor in Economics and nonresident Tutor in Adams House at Harvard at the time he taught the economics course “Introduction to Quantitative Methods” to students of the Graduate School of Public Administration.
___________________________
From GSPA report
…Dr. Roger E. Bolton, Instructor in Economics, was asked to continue his course, Introduction to Quantitative Methods, which was established particularly for the benefit of students in this School who, without previous mathematical training, needed an introduction to modern methods of economic measurement and projection.
Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College 1964-1965, p. 376.
___________________________
Course Announcement
Economics 168. Introduction to Quantitative Methods (Offered jointly with the Graduate School of Public Administration). Half course (fall term). Tu., Th., S., at 9. Dr. Bolton
An introduction to national income accounts, input-output tables, index numbers, capital coefficients, and other methods of economic measurement and projection. This course assumes no previous mathematical or statistical training.
Source: Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Courses of Instruction for Harvard and Radcliffe1964-1965, p. 111.
___________________________
Economics 168
Harvard University
Fall Term, 1964
Dr Roger E. Bolton
Littauer 322
There will be no hour examination. Each student will write a 15 page paper, due about midway in the reading period. The paper is to be some sort of “quantitative” analysis of an important policy problem facing the country of the student, if sufficient data are available for that country. The student will be given considerable latitude in selecting a topic but must confer with the instructor about it in advance. The paper must use extensively some body of statistical data, and include some commentary on the data and their reliability, suitability for the analysis. etc.
In addition to the paper and the final exam, there will be a number of problem sets to be worked during the term. The primary purpose of the problems is learning, not testing, but students’ performance on them will be weighed in determining the final grade. The final exam grade will be weighted 60 per cent, the paper grade 25 per cent, and the problems 15 per cent.
Outline and Readings
Students are expected to do at least some of the suggested readings during the term. There will be no special reading period assignment.
I. Introduction to Important Kinds of Economic Quantities (September 29-October 1)
Ackley, Macroeconomic Theory, pp. 78-88.
Freund and Williams, Modern Business Statistics, 1958, chs. 15-10.
II. Basic Statistical Inference (October 3-8)
Beach, Economic Models, pp. 113-171.
Dixon and Massey, Introduction to Statistical Analysis, ch. 3, pp. 11-23; ch. 5, pp.48-54; ch. 6, pp. 76-82, and all of chs. 8 and 9.
III. National Income and Product: Concept and Measurement (October 10-29)
A. Purposes and uses
Kuznets, Economic Change, Ch. 7.
Kuznets, Six Lectures on Economic Growth, pp. 13-18 and all of Lecture 4.
Suggested: Hitch and McKean, The Economics of Defense in the Nuclear Age, Ch. 3.
B. History
Rosen, National Income, ch. 1
Suggested: Studenski, The Income of Nations, Part 1.
C. Basic Concepts
Harvard Business School, Notes on National Accounting.
Rosen, National Income, chs, 4-5.
Suggested: Ackley, Macroeconomic Theory, chs. 2-3.
D. United States Practices
U. S. Dept. of Commerce, National Income, 1954 ed., pp. 27-60.
U. S. Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business July 1964 issue, tables giving data on the national accounts.
E. The United Nations System
United Nations Statistical Office, A System of National Accounts and Supporting Tables (Studies in Methods, series F, no. 2, Rev. 2 — second revision).
Suggested:
Organization for European Economic Co-operation, A Standardized System of National Accounts, 1958, pp. 31-49, and Systems of National Accounts in Africa, 1960, pp. 9-63.
Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Canada, National Accounts Income and Expenditure, 1926-1956, pp. 103-176.
Central Statistical Office, Great Britain, National Income Statistics: Sources and Methods, 1956, chs. 1-3.
F. Real Output, Deflation Principles, Various Price Indexes
Ackley, Macroeconomic Theory, pp. 88-99.
U. S. Dept. of Commerce, National Income 1954 ed., pp. 153-158.
U. S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 1168, Techniques of Preparing Major BLS Series, chs. 9-10.
Suggested: U. S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Hearings on Government Price Statistics, 87th Congress, 1961, especially pp. 9-78 of the report presented by the National Bureau of Economic Research
G. Other Common Indexes
No assigned readings
H. Intertemporal and International Comparisons
Bornstein, “A Comparison of Soviet and United States National Product,” in U. S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Comparisons of the United States and Soviet Economies, 1959.
Suggested: Gilbert and Kravis, An International Comparison of National Products and the Purchasing Power of Currencies.
I. Sources of Data
U. S. Dept. of Commerce, National Income 1954 ed., pp. 68-72, 76-86.
Ruggles and Ruggles, National Income Accounts and Income Analysis, ch. 8 and appendix to ch. 8.
United Nations Statistical Office, Methods of National Income Estimation (Series F, No. 8, of Studies in Methods).
J. Issues in National Income Accounting; Reliability of Data
Rosen, National Income, chs. 8-9.
Schelling, “National Income, 1954 edition,” in Review of Economics and Statistics, November 1955.
Schelling, essay in National Bureau of Economic Research, A Critique of the National Income and Product Accounts.
Jaszi, “The Statistical Foundations of the Gross National Product” in Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1956.
Suggested: Musgrave, The Theory of Public Finance, ch.8
IV. Other Summary Accounts and their Relation to the National Income Accounts (October 31-November 3)
A. The Balance of Payments
Kindleberger, International Economics, Ch. 2
U. S. Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business, July 1964 issue, tables.
Suggested:
“The Bookkeeping of the Balance of Payments,” Morgan Guaranty Survey, May 1962.
Badger, “The Balance of Payments: A Tool of Economics Analysis,” International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, September 1951.
B. The Government Budget
U. S. Bureau of the Budget, The Budget of the United States, Special Analysis A.
U. S. Dept. of Commerce, Survey of Current Business, July 1964 issue, tables.
Suggested: U. S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, The Budget as an Economic Document, a report by R. Moor (not the hearings of the same title).
V. Models of National Output Determination (November 5-19)
A. The Distinction between Potential and Actual Output
Schultze, National Income Analysis, ch. 6.
Suggested: Hamberg, Principles of a Growing Economy, ch. 7.
B. Potential Output Models
Kindleberger, Economic Development, ch. 4.
Higgins, Economic Development, 642-653.
Hamberg, Principles of a Growing Economy, ch. 8.
Suggested: Knowles,The Potential Economic Growth of the United States, Study Paper 20 of: U. S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Employment, Growth and Price Levels, 1960.
C. Actual Output Models
Hamberg, Principles of a Growing Economy, chs. 9-13.
Schelling, National Income Behavior, chs. 13-14.
Suggested:
Schelling, National Income Behavior, the remainder of book, but especially chs. 9-11.
Polak, “Monetary Analysis of Income Formation and Payments Problems, International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, November 1957.
VI. Input-Output Models (November 21-December 5)
A. Purposes and Uses
Chenery and Clark, Interindustry Economics, ch. 1.
B. Principles
Chenery and Clark, Interindustry Economics, chs. 2,3,5,6.
Suggested: Chenery and Clark, ch. 4.
Stone, Input-Output and National Accounts.
Bruno, Interdependence, Resource Use and Structural Change in Israel, chs. 1-3, Appendices A-1, B-2, and B-3.
C. Applications
Leontief, “The Structure of Development,” in Scientific American, September 1963.
Wonnacott, Canadian-American Interdependence, chs. 1-3, 5-7.
One of these three:
Meyer, “An Input-Output Approach to Evaluating the Influence of Exports on British Industrial Production in the Late 19th Century,” in Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, Volume 8, number 1.
Hirsch, “Interindustry Relations of a Metropolitan Area,” Review of Economics and Statistics, Nov. 1959.
Leontief and Hoffenberg, “The Economic Effects of Disarmament,” Scientific American, April 1961.
Suggested: Wonnacott, the remainder of the assigned book. The other two of the above articles by Meyer, Hirsch, and Leontief and Hoffenberg.
D. Evaluation
Dorfman, “The Nature and Significance of Input-Output,” Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1954.
Seers, “The Role of National Income Estimates in the Statistical Policy of an Underdeveloped Area,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 20, pp. 159-168, and his rejoinder in the same journal, Vol. 21, pp. 229-231.
Prest, “Comment” (on Seers), Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 21, pp. 223-228.
Peacock and Dosser, “Input-Output Analysis in an Underdeveloped Country,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 25, pp. 21-24.
Suggested: Arrow and Hoffenberg, A Time-Series Analysis of Inter-Industry Demands, especially chs. 1-2, appendix to ch. 2, ch. 3, ch. 7, pp. 117-126, 132-133.
VII. Aspects of Development Planning (December 8-19)
A. General
Chenery and Clark, Interindustry Economics, chs. 7, 9, 10.
Bruno, Interdependence, Resource Use, and Structural Change in Israel chs. 4-6.
Tinbergen, The Design of Development.
Rosenstein-Rodan, ed. Formation and Economic Development, pp. 11-32, 68-82.
Suggested:
Rosenstein-Rodan, ed. remainder of book.
Chenery and Clark, ch. 11.
B. Cases
India, Planning Commission, Third Five-Year Plan, 1961; skim enough to get the flavor.
Pakistan, Planning Commission, The Second Five-Year Plan; skim enough to get the flavor.
Mahalanobis, The Approach of Operational Research to Planning in India, 1955, ch. 1, 3, 4, appendix to ch. 4, chs. 5-7, and the three chapters in Appendix II.
C. Investment Criteria
Chenery, “Comparative Advantage and Development Policy, American Economic Review, March 1961.
Suggested:
Galenson and Leibenstein, “Investment Criteria, Productivity, and Economic Development” Quarterly Journal of Economics. August 1955.
Eckstein, “Investment Criteria for Economic Development and the Theory of Intertemporal Welfare Economics.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1957.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003. Box 8, Folder “Economics, 1964-1965 (1 of 2)”.
___________________________
Final Examination
ECONOMICS 168
FINAL EXAMINATION
Dr. Bolton
January 26, 1965
DO ALL 5 QUESTIONS.
Read each question carefully before beginning it. Please write legibly
- Briefly explain each of these terms: (30 minutes)
a. Net National Income at Factor Cost
b. Unbiased estimate (in statistical inference)
c. Commodity Flow Method
d. Statistical Discrepancy (in national income accounting)
e. “Accounting Prices”
f. Participation Rate
- Explain how you would use each of the following numbers in making economic policy decisions: (30 minutes)
- The number in row i and column j of an input-output “inverse”
- The “standard error of estimate” of a regression estimate of the marginal propensity to import
- The amount of planned saving which would occur when actual output is equal to potential output.
- The income-elasticity of consumption of a specific product
- Do three of the following four short problems: (30 minutes)
- Explain what amounts must be added to or subtracted from Gross Domestic Product to calculate Personal Disposable Income
- In regard to the change from 1963 to 1964 in a certain country, the income-elasticity of total consumption was 1.10, measuring both income and consumption in current prices. The rate of growth of income, in current prices, was 6 per cent. The consumer price index increased by 5 per cent. What was the rate of growth of real consumption between 1963 and 1964?
- Which of the following items are included in Gross National Product as calculated in the in the United States:
(1) State and local government interest
(2) Government purchase of land
(3) The level of inventories at the end of the year
(4) The net profit of a government enterprise
(5) Consumers’ repayment of debt
(6) Government sale of gold, from the monetary stock to foreigners
(7) Pensions paid to former government employees
(8) Purchase of repairs to old consumer durable goods
(9) Receipt by U.S. residents of dividends from foreign corporation
(10) Goods produced on government order but not yet paid for by the government
-
- The following values from the Gross National Product accounts of a certain country are available for a certain year. Calculate the government surplus or deficit for the year.
| Personal disposable income | 400 |
| Personal consumption | 360 |
| Residential construction | 60 |
| Inventory investment | 10 |
| Business Fixed Investment | 30 |
| Exports | 40 |
| Imports | 35 |
| Depreciation allowances | 30 |
| Corporate profits taxes | 30 |
| Retained corporate earnings | 30 |
| Dividends | 20 |
- Write an essay on input-output analysis, including a brief explanation of each of the following points: (45 minutes)
- The purposes and assumptions of the analysis
- The nature of the variables the analysis predicts
- The kinds of forecasts which must be made before the analysis can be used
- The differences between “open” and “closed” systems
- The way in which total Gross National Product is predicted
- The kinds of data needed to apply the analysis
- The relevance of input-output analysis to underdeveloped countries
You may use mathematical notation and examples if you choose, but it is not necessary to do so.
- (45 Minutes)
In 1964, actual and potential GNP in the country of Karicutta were both $1,000 million, and the capital stock was $3,000 million. Potential GNP in this country can be exactly predicted by this Cobb-Douglas function:
O = A L3/4 K1/4
It is known that in 1965 the rate of growth of A will be 1 per cent, and the rate of growth of L will be 2 percent. All capital in the country is created by investment by corporations, and information about their investment plans for 1965 is given later in the problem.
Actual GNP can be exactly predicted by this model: (all dollar amounts are in millions)
Consumption = C = 50 + .8(1-t)Y
Investment = I = an exogenous variable
Government Purchases = G = an exogenous variable
Exports = X = an exogenous variable
Imports = M = .03Y
GNP = Y = C + I + G + X – M
In 1964, the variables had the following values:
T= .40
I= 250
G = 200
X = 50
The variable t represents the sum of:
.10 = the share of total GNP which is retained corporate earnings (“undistributed profits”)
.30 = the share of total GNP which is taxes
In 1965 it is known that exports will rise to 60. On the last day of 1964, all corporations in the country made the the following joint announcement to their shareholders: “It is necessary to increase our annual investment to 300 million dollars, and we shall do this beginning in 1965. To finance this added expenditure we will retain more profits and reduce dividends. Assuming that GNP will be 1,000 million in 1965 as it was 1964, we can raise the extra 50 million by raising the share of GNP retained by us from .10 to .15. Therefore, during the year 1965 we shall retain 15 per cent of GNP instead of 10 per cent, and we shall invest 300 million dollars.
What will be potential output in 1965? What must government purchases be in order to make actual output equal to potential? The tax rate is not to be changed. Show your calculations clearly in order to receive partial credit if your final answer is not correct.
Source: Harvard University Archives. Social Sciences. Final Examinations. January 1965 (HUC 7000.28, vol. 157). Papers Printed for Mid-Year Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …,Naval Science, Air Science, January 1965.
Image Source: Roger E. Bolton in the Williams College Yearbook, Gulielmensian 1977, p. 18.