The outline below for an ambitious Harvard course organized jointly by Richard Musgrave and Martin C. Spechler in 1973 comes from John Kenneth Galbraith’s papers. Galbraith was invited to give a lecture on institutional economics and a couple of pages of keywords in the folder would appear to confirm that Galbraith indeed lectured on the topic.
Biographical information for Richard Musgrave was provided a few blog postings ago. Martin Spechler too was a Harvard alumnus (indeed all three of his academic degrees come from that institution) and so I’ll first insert the chronology of his academic jobs so one can meet another economic Ph.D. alumnus. Spechler’s main research field was comparative economic systems complemented by a strong interest in the history of economics (see the link to his 2007 c.v. below).
______________________
Martin C. Spechler (b. January 25, 1943, New York City)
A.B. in Social Studies (1964), A.M. in Economics (1967), Ph.D. in Economics (1971). Harvard
1965-1971. Harvard. Teaching fellow in economics and social studies.
1971-1973. Harvard. Lecturer on economics and on social studies.
1971-1974. Harvard. Head tutor in economics.
1973-1975. Harvard. Assistant professor of economics.
1974-1980. Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Department of Economics, lecturer.
1980-1982. Tel Aviv University. Department of Economics and School of General History. Senior lecturer (acting).
1982-1983. University of Washington, Seattle. School of International Studies. Visiting associate professor.
1983-1984. University Iowa, Iowa City. Visiting associate professor.
1984-1986. Indiana University, Bloomington. Visiting associate professor of economics and research associate, West European Studies.
1986-1990. Indiana University, Indianapolis. Associate professor of economics
1990-. Indiana University, Purdue University, Indianapolis. Professor of economics.
Source: Martin C. Spechler c.v. (December 2007).
______________________
ECONOMICS 2080
Tentative Lecture Schedule
[1973]
| 1. | September 27 | Spechler on Marxism |
| 2. | October 4 | Unger on Weber |
| 3. | October 9 (Tues.) | Galbraith on institutionalism |
| 4. | October 18 | Duesenberry on consumer behavior |
| 5. | October 25 | (?) on entrepreneurs |
| 6. | November 1 | M. Roberts on government bureaucracy |
| 7. | November 8 | J. Bower on corporate organization |
| 8. | November 15 | Doeringer on workers and unions |
| 9. | November 20 (Tuesday) | Bowles (?) on Marxian theory of the state |
| 10. | November 29 | D. Bell (?) on elite theory |
| 11. | December 6 | J. Q. Wilson on pluralism |
| 12. | December 13 | Hirschman on trade policy |
| 13. | December 20 | Musgrave on objectivity in economics and social science |
Harvard University
Economics 2080
Social Influences on Economic Action
Fall Term, Thursday 4-6
Martin C. Spechler
Holyoke 833, Office; 10-12 (daily)
Richard Musgrave
Littauer 326
Designed to be taken in one semester to be followed by a seminar, this course examines the social context of economic activity. It covers theoretic and applied writings in several significant traditions: Marxist, Weberian, institutionalist, and liberal. The list includes a more thorough reading of Marx and Weber than is usually available elsewhere and articles reporting contemporary research of a scale suitable for dissertations. Since certain topics of interest, such as stratification, are treated elsewhere in the Economics or allied departments, the range of topics is intentionally incomplete. But each topic includes competing paradigms and case studies making use of them. Each topic takes off from the limits of conventional economics to show that different assumptions and procedures show promise of answering important questions about economic life.
It is envisioned that the course will be taught during the first year in a conference format, with guest lecturers but with one or two Department members responsible for the entire course and always present in class. The course will culminate in the writing of a long (30-40 pages) case study, employing some or all of the theoretical perspectives which have been presented. There will also be a shorter paper early on to fix the theoretical perspectives in mind.
The course is intended for graduate students with some preparation in economics. To facilitate discussion, one might have to limit enrollment, though a diverse group would be highly desirable.
Works marked (*) are assumed as background; those marked (**) are supplementary.
A. The Content and Limits of Modern Economics: A Point of Departure
*Lord Robbins, An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science (2nd ed. 1935).
Emile Gruenberg, “The Meaning of Scope and External Boundaries of Economics.”
Kenneth E. Boulding, “The Verifiability of Economic Images.” Both in Sherman Roy Krupp, The Structure of Economic Science. (Prentice Hall, 1966), pp. 129-165.
Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, Analytical Economics (Harvard University Press, 1966), Part I (especially pp. 92-129).
B. Three Social Perspectives on Economic Action
What are the hallmarks of “modern” — now misleadingly termed “Western” — society? What changes in productive relations, in ethos, and in political arrangements favored its development? This section examines in depth three major interdisciplinary systems which undertake to define, explain, and analyze the working of modern society, particularly the limits placed on the market by social forces.
Week 1 (September 27) Marxism
Karl Marx, “Preface to a Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy”
________, “Estranged Labor”
________, “Private Property and Communism”
________, “The Power of Money in Bourgeois Society”
________, “The German Ideology”, Part I
________, “Wage Labor and Capital”
________, “Capital”, Vol. 1 (selections) all in The Marx-Engels Reader (ed. By Robert C. Tucker), Norton Publ., pp. 306 [30-36 intended?], 56-83, 110-164, 167-317, 577-588.
Friedrich Engels, “Letters on Historical Materialism” in Tucker, ed., pp. 640-651 and 661-664. OR
Ernest Mandel, Marxist Economic Theory, Vol. I, chapters 5, 11; Vol. II, 12-14.
Week 2 (October 4) Weber
Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, entire.
________, The Religion of China, IV, V, and VIII.
________, *General Economic History, Part IV
“Power, Capitalism and Rural Society in Germany,” and “National Character and the Junkers,” all in Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, pp. 159-195, 363-395.
Week 3 (October 11) Institutionalism
Thorstein Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class, in Max Lerner, The Portable Veblen (Viking pb) chapters IV, VI.
________, “On the Merits of Borrowing,” from Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution, pp. 349-363 in M. Lerner, The Portable Veblen, op. cit.
________, The Theory of Business Enterprise, chapters III, IV, VII.
John Kenneth Galbraith, Economics and the Public Purpose (Houghton-Mifflin, 1973), chapters V, IX-XIV, and XIX.
Possible paper topics (illustrative only) for section B. Due October 18:
Paper: What do Marxist, Weberian, and Historical-institutional theories have to say about kinds of modern economies which have developed in the world?
**England, 1642-1851
David Landes, The Unbound Prometheus, introduction and chapter 1.
Barrington, Moore, Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy, chapters I and VI.
E.J. Hobsbawm, Industry and Empire, chapters 1-7.
**Japan and China Compared
M. J. Levy, “Contrasting Factors in the Modernization of China and Japan,” in Simon Kuznets, Economic Growth: Brazil, India, Japan (Duke, 1955), pp. 496-536.
Henry Rosovsky, “Japan’s Transition to Modern Economic Growth, 1868-1885,” in Henry Rosovsky (ed.) Industrialization in Two Systems: Essays in Honor of Alexander Gerschenkron (Wiley, 1966). Bobbs-Merrill Reprint No. Econom-264.
Thomas C. Smith, “Japan’s Aristocratic Revolution,” Yale Review V (50), 1960-61, pp. 370-83, reprinted in R. Bendix and S.M. Lipset, Class, Status and Power (2nd ed.), pp. 135-40. The samurai class as modernizers.
Barrington Moore, Jr., Social Origins, op. cit., IV, V, VIII, IX. Particular attention to feudal land patterns as an obstacle to economic and political modernization.
or R.H. Tawney, Land and Labour in China (Octagon, 1964)
or Johannes Hirschmeier, The Origins of Entrepreneurship in Meiji Japan (Harvard, 1964).
**Indonesia, 1945-
Clifford Geertz, Peddlers and Princes (Chicago, 1963). An excellent example of economic anthropology in the Weberian tradition.
[Other suggestions and bibliography available from the instructors.]
C. How do Consumers, Workers, and Entrepreneurs form their Preferences for Market Activities?
This section examines the empirical evidence to date on the relative role of material incentives and job characteristics on productivity, on the effects of advertising on consumer attitudes, and on the relationship between historical experience and decisions about the future.
Week 4 (October 18) Consumer Behavior
*Robert Ferber, “Research on Household Behavior,” American Economic Review, Vol. 52 (1962), pp. 19-63. Reprinted in A.S.C. Ehrenburg and F.G. Pyatt, Consumer Behavior (Penguin, 1971).
*Karl Marx, “Alienated Labor,” and “Needs, Production, and the Division of Labor,” from Early Writings, ed. J. B. Bottomore, pp. 120-134.
*James S. Duesenberry, Income, Saving, and the Theory of Consumer Behavior, chapters I-IV.
J.K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society, (Revised edition), chapter 11.
Lester Telser, “Advertising and Cigarettes,” Journal of Political Economy (October, 1962), pp. 471-99).
Tony McGuiness and Keith Cowling, “Advertising and the Aggregate Demand for Cigarettes: An Empirical Analysis of a U.K. Market,” paper no. 31, Centre for Industrial Economic and Business Research, University of Warwick, England. On reserve in Littauer.
Lester D. Taylor and Daniel Weiserbs, “Advertising and the Aggregate Production Function,” American Economic Review, (September 1972), pp. 642-55.
George Katona, Burkhard Strumpel and Ernest Zahn, Aspirations and Affluence (McGraw-Hill, 1971), chapters 6-12. The effects and causes of consumer attitudes in the United States and Western Europe.
Week 5 (October 25) Entrepreneurs
Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, (Harper Torchbook, 1962), chapter XI-XIV.
Thomas C. Cochran, “Cultural Factors in Economic Growth,” and David Landes, “French Business and the Business Man: a Social and Cultural Analysis,” in Hugh G.J. Aitken, Explorations in Enterprise (Harvard University Press, 1965), pp, 122-38, 184-209.
Alexander Gerschenkron, “Social Attitudes, Entrepreneurship, and Economic Development,” in Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective (Harvard, 1962), pp. 52-71. [note: workers’ attitudes will be discussed in week 8.]
D. How Do Large Organizations Behave?
The opportunities created by market power and the size of the hierarchy in modern economic bureaucracies probably allowed behavior far from the competitive norm. What are the elements of structure, control, and attitudes which influence corporate behavior? The readings include the Weberian, and the “bureaucratic politics” points of view; and the case comparisons include the U.S. Navy, French enterprise, the Society of Jesus, the Soviet industrial planning system, and the most important American public enterprise.
Week 6 (November 1) Government Bureaucracy
Max Weber, “Bureaucracy,” in Hans Gerth and C. Wright Mills, From Max Weber, pp. 196-244.
Charles Lindblom, “The Politics of Muddling Through,” Bobbs-Merrill Reprint, Public Administration Review XIX (Spring, 1959), pp.79-88: why strict means-end rationality is impossible in government bureaucracies.
A. Wildavsky, The Politics of the Budgetary Process, (Little, Brown, 1964) chapter 2.
Stanley Surrey, “Congress and the Tax Lobbyist: How Tax Provisions Get Enacted,” Harvard Law Review (1957), pp. 1145-70.
Sandford F. Borins, “The Political Economy of ‘The Fed,’” Public Policy (Spring, 1972), pp. 175-98.
Sanford Weiner, “Resource Allocation in Basic Research and Organizational Design,” Public Policy (Spring, 1972), pp. 227-55.
Benjamin Ward, The Socialist Economy: A Study of Organizational Alternatives, chapters 5 and 6.
The latter considers whether socialization, such as occurs in the Jesuits and the Navy, would overcome some of the control anomalies which have frustrated Soviet planning.
**Joseph Berliner, Factory and Manager in the U.S.S.R. (Harvard, 1957); a classic on informal organizations versus system goals.
Week 7 (November 8) Corporate Organization
A Harvard Business School case will be distributed for discussion.
*R.H. Coase, “The Nature of the Firm,” Economica, (1937) reprinted in G. J. Stigler and Kenneth Boulding,Readings in Price Theory (AEA, 1952), pp. 331-351.
Armen A. Alchian and Harold Demsetz, “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization,” American Economic Review (December, 1972), pp. 777-95.
Philip Selznick, Leadership in Administration (Row Peterson, 1957), chapter 4.
David Granick, Managerial Comparisons of Four Developed Countries (MIT, 1972), chapters 1-5, 9-13.
**Alfred Chandler, Jr. Strategy and Structure, chapters 1-3, 5-7, conclusion.
**Philip Selznick, TVA and the Grass Roots (Harper pb, 1966).
**Michelle Crozier, The Bureaucratic Phenomenon (Phoenix pb, 1964).
**Alfred Chandler. Pierre Dupont and the Modern Corporation.
Joseph L. Bower, “The Amoral Organization,” in R. Marris and E. G. Mesthene, Technology, the Corporation, and the State (forthcoming) or Harvard Business School 4-372-285.
Week 8 (November 15) Workers and Unions
Victor Vroom,”Industrial Social Psychology,” in Gardner B. Lindzey and Elliott Aronson, eds., The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. V. (2nd ed.), 1969, pp. 196-248.
Work in America, report of a Special Task Force to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (MIT Press, 1973), chapters 1, 2, 4, 5.
Mancur Olsen, Logic of Collective Goods (paperback, rev. ed., 1971), chapter III, pp. 66-97.
Suggested:
**John Goldthorpe et al., The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure, Cambridge University Press, 1969, pb).
**Andre Gorz, A Strategy for Labor (Beacon pb., 1968), chapter 4.
Leonard Goodwin, Do the Poor Want to Work? (Brookings, 1972).
E. Does Economic Power Give Rise to Political Power?
Marxist, elite and pluralist theorists all answer differently as to under what circumstances market power and material privilege are translated into political power and what sorts of groups (classes, corporations, trade associations, ideological coalitions, parties) contend for ascendancy. The readings examine such mechanisms as control of mass media, the common training and outlook of American and European elites, pressure group influence on Congressional elections, and the weakening of countervailing interests.
*Otto Eckstein, Public Finance (2nd ed.), chapters 1-2.
Week 9 (November 20, Tuesday) Marxian Theory of the State
Ralph Miliband, The State in Capitalist Society (Basic Books), entire.
Week 10 (November 29) Elite Theory
C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite, chapters 1-13.
G. William Domhoff, Who Rules America? (Spectrum pb. 1967), 1-5, 7.
Week 11 (December 6) Pluralism
Arnold M. Rose, The Power Structure, (Oxford pb, 1967), pp. 1-10, 15-24, 26-39, 70-78, 89-127, 131-133.
**J.K. Galbraith, The New Industrial State, chapters I-IX, XXV, and XXXV: A strong statement of the technological impetus towards convergence.
**Walter Adams, “The Military-Industrial Complex and the New Industrial State,” American Economic Review (May, 1968), pp. 652-665.
Stanley Lieberson, “An Empirical Study of Military-Industrial Linkages,” American Journal of Sociology, (1971), pp. 562-82.
George J. Stigler, “The Theory of Economic Regulation,” Bell Journal of Economic and Manag. Sci., (Spring, 1971), pp. 3-17.
Joseph C. Palamountain, Jr., The Politics of Distribution (Harvard University Press, 1955), II, IV, VII, VIII.
J.Q. Wilson, “Politics of Business Regulation” (revised ed.), mimeographed.
Week 12 (December 13) Trade Policy
Raymond A. Bauer, Ithiel de Sola Pool, and Lewis Anthony Dexter, American Business and Public Policy, The Politics of Foreign Trade (Aldine, 2nded., 1972), Parts II, IV-VI.
F. Validation of Theories about Economic Action
Week 13 (December 20) Objectivity in Economics and Social Science
*Milton Friedman, “The Methodology of Positive Economics.”
Max Weber, “The Meaning of ‘Ethical Neutrality’ in Sociology and Economics,” and “’Objectivity’ in Social Science and Social Policy,” in Max Weber, The Methodology of the Social Sciences (Free Press, 1949), pp. 1-112.
Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge Cambridge University Press pb. (Essays by T.S. Kuhn, S.E. Toulmin, K.R. Popper, and I. Lakatos), pp. 1-24, 39-59, 91-196.
Term papers due by January 17.
Source: John Kenneth Galbraith Personal Papers. Series 5 Harvard University File, 1949-1990, Box 521, Folder “[courses]: Economics 280: Musgrave Lecture. 9 October 1973”.
Image Source: Martin C. Spechler from the Department of Economics webpage, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis archived at the Wayback Machine (February 18, 2003).
