Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Talent-Scouting for New Faculty, Joint Appointments and Visiting Faculty, 1945

__________________________

On April 10, 1945, the chairman of the University of Chicago’s economics department, Professor Simeon E. Leland, submitted a 77 page (!) memorandum to President Robert M. Hutchins entitled “Postwar Plans of the Department of Economics–A Wide Variety of Observations and Suggestions All Intended To Be Helpful in Improving the State of the University”.

In his cover letter Leland wrote “…in the preparation of the memorandum, I learned much that was new about the past history of the Department. Some of this, incorporated in the memorandum, looks like filler stuck in, but I thought it ought to be included for historical reasons and to furnish some background for a few of the suggestions.” 

In recent posts I have provided a list of visiting professors who taught economics at the University of Chicago up through 1944 (excluding those visitors who were to receive permanent appointments) and supporting tables with enrollment trends and faculty data (ages and educational backgrounds).

In this post we have three lists of names for economists who in 1945 could be taken into consideration for either permanent economics, joint appointments with other department or visiting appointments at the University of Chicago. Many names are immediately recognisable, others less so, and other known names left unnamed. Instead of observing the actual choices of the department, we have, so to speak, an observation of the “choice set” as perceived by the department.

______________________________

          The following list of possible additions to the staff of the Department of Economics represents an enumeration of suggestions made by various members of the Department. It, of course, does not include all of those whom the Department would like to invite as permanent members of the University staff. Many of those whom we would most like to have, it is well-known, are not available; nor can the Department be sure that those listed below would favorably consider an invitation to join our staff. Likewise, this list must not be construed as nominations for membership in the Department. Some members of the staff are known to object to the inclusion of some of the names listed below. But if unanimous consent were required before suggestions could be made, little progress in building a Department would be possible. In its present state, the list is only an enumeration of suggestions warranting further inquiry. The fields of interest of many of the potential candidates overlap and the appointment of some individuals would make it undesirable, or at least uneconomic, to appoint others. Nevertheless, the list does given an idea of some persons who might be considered for future appointments. This list, like any other enumeration, is subject to constant revision, both in the addition or subtraction of names.

Name

Present Location

Field of Interest or Specialization

Abraham (sic) Bergson University of Texas Wages and Wage Theory
Robert Bryce Ottawa, Canada
Norman Buchanan University of California Public Utilities, Corporation Finance, Business Cycles (also possible interest in United States Economic History)
Earl Hamilton Northwestern University Economic History
Albert G. Hart C.E.D., Chicago Theory, Finance, etc.
J. R. Hicks University of Manchester, England Economic Theory
Harold A. Innis University of Toronto Economic History
Maurice Kelso University of Wisconsin Land Economics
Tjalling Koopmans Cowles Commission Statistics; Mathematical Economics; Business Cycles; Shipping
Simon Kuznets University of Pennsylvania National Income; Historical Statistics
Sanford Mosk University of California Economic History
Charles A. Myers Massachusetts Institute of Technology Labor; Industrial Relations
Walter Rostow Columbia University Economic History (XIX Century)
Leonard Salter University of Wisconsin Land Economics
T. Scitovszky London School of Economics; U.S. Army Theory of Capital and Interest; Theory of Tariffs
Arthur Smithies University of Michigan; Bureau of the Budget, Washington, D. C. Fiscal Policy; Theory; Money and Banking
Eugene Staley School of Advanced International Studies (Washington, D.C.) International Economics; Foreign Trade
George Stigler University of Minnesota Theory and Foreign Trade
R. H. Tawney London School of Economics Economic History
Allen Wallis Stanford University Statistics

______________________________

Joint Appointments

The Department of Economics shares an interest in many fields with other departments, schools and divisions of the University. It recognizes that most problems of the Social Sciences have economic aspects, and other aspects as well. Many of the fields embraced within particular disciplines are explained by accident or tradition, not always by logic. No one department can, therefore, assert a valid claim for the exclusive staffing of fields of interest held in common with other branches of knowledge. It seems wisest to develop these common grounds through joint appointments. Not only does this enable us to attract to the University more outstanding scholars than the fellowship of one department might provide, but it should also place at the disposition of those interested in promoting joint fields, perhaps, larger resources than either acting alone could command.

Joint appointments, too, will tend to integrate the Social Sciences with the other schools and departments affected, as well as contribute to the unity of the University as a whole. The Department of Economics, therefore, ventures to suggest joint appointments in the following fields:

Fields Units Affected
Trusts and Monopolies Business, Law, Economics
Railroads and Transportation Business, Economics
Public Utilities Economics, Political Science, Law
Social Control of Business Business, Law, Political Science, Economics
Advanced Applied Mathematics and Statistics Economics, Mathematics, Business, Institute of Statistics, other departments interested in statistics
Urban Planning (or the Utilization of Land) Geography, Political Science, Economics, Law, Business, Sociology
Social Legislation, particularly affecting Labor Business, Sociology, Social Service Administration, Law, Political Science, Economics

[…]

Among those who might be proposed for joint appointments are the following:

Name Present Location Field of Interest Appropriate Appointment
Charles L. Dearing Brookings Institution and U.S. Government Transportation Economics, Business
Corwin D. Edwards Northwestern University Trusts, Monopolies, Control of Business Political Science, Law, Economics
Milton Friedman Columbia University Economic Theory, Public Finance, Monetary Policy Economics, Institute of Statistics
Homer Hoyt Regional Plan Association, Inc., New York, N.Y. Land Planning Economic Geography, Political Science
David E. Lilienthal T. V. A. Public Utilities Political Science, Law, Economics
Abraham Wald Columbia University Applied Mathematics, Statistics Mathematics, Economics
Allen Wallis Columbia University Applied Mathematics, Statistics Mathematics, Economics
Samuel S. Wilks Princeton University Applied Mathematics, Statistics Mathematics, Economics

Visiting Professorships

Each department needs to diversify its courses. Too frequently the attempt at diversification is made by adding permanent members to the regular staff. The need can best be met by the appointment of visiting professors.

[…]

A list of some who might be invited to the University as Visiting Professors is as follows:

Name Present Location Fields of Interest
John D. Black Harvard Agricultural Economics
(J.) Roy Blough U. S. Treasury Public Finance
Kenneth Boulding Iowa State College Economic Analysis; Theory of Capital
Karl Brandt Food Institute, Stanford U. Agricultural Economics
Harry G. Brown University of Missouri Economic Theory, Public Finance
J. Douglas Brown Princeton University Industrial Relations
Edward H. Chamberlain(sic) Harvard Economic Theory; Monopolistic Competition
J. M. Clark Columbia University Economic theory
J. B. Condliffe California International Trade; International Commercial Policy
Joseph S. Davis Food Institute, Stanford U. Agricultural Economics
Milton Gilbert Office of Price Administration, Washington, D.C. Economic Theory; Price Control
T. Haavelmo Norwegian Shipping Administration, New York, N.Y. Econometrics
Alvin Hansen Harvard Economic Theory; Fiscal Policy
F. A. Hayek London School of Economics and Political Science History of Social Thought; Economic Theory; Monetary Policy
J. R. Hicks University of Manchester Economic Theory
George Jaszy U. S. Dept. of Commerce National Income; Business Analysis
O. B. Jesness University of Minnesota Agricultural Economics
Nicholas Kaldor London School of Economics Theory of the Firm; Imperfect Competition; Money; Business Cycles
M. Kalecki Institute of Statistics of University of Oxford, England Economic Fluctuations; Expenditure Rationing
M. Slade Kendrick Cornell University Public Finance; Farm Taxation
Arthur Kent San Francisco Attorney-at-Law Taxation
J. M. Keynes Cambridge University Fiscal and Monetary Policy
Simon S. Kuznets National Bureau of Economic Research; University of Pennsylvania Statistics; National Income and Its Problem
A. P. Lerner New School for Social Research Economic Theory; Fiscal Policy; Public Finance
Edward S. Mason Harvard University Economic Theory; International Trade and Trade Practices
Wesley C. Mitchell Columbia University Money and Prices
Jacob Mosak Office of Price Administration, Washington, D.C. Economic Theory; Statistics; Control of Prices
R. A. Musgrave Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D. C. Public Finance
Randolph Paul Lord, Day and Lord, Attorneys-at-Law Taxation
Paul A. Samuelson Massachusetts Institute of Technology Economic Theory; Money and Banking; Fiscal Policy
Lawrence H. Seltzer Wayne University Money and Banking; Public Debts; Fiscal Policy
Carl S. Shoup Columbia University Public Finance
Sumner H. Slichter Harvard University Business Economics
Richard Stone England Statistics; National Income
R. H. Tawney London School of Economics Economic History
Abraham Wald Columbia University Mathematics and Statistics
John H. Williams Harvard University Money and Banking

In the past, the Department has supplemented its staff by the appointment of visiting professors, but the invitations have ordinarily been restricted to the Summer Quarter in order (1) to relieve the regular staff from summer teaching and (2) to provide “window-dressing” to make the Summer Quarters more attractive to new students. The potentialities of the visiting professorship can hardly be realized when the practice is applied only to the Summer Quarter. That it has made that Quarter more attractive would seem to be indicated by the outstanding economists who have been guests of the University of Chicago.

[…]

The practice of inviting outstanding men to the University of Chicago seems to have been more prevalent in the early years of the University than it is today. Visiting appointments also declined with the strained finances of the University during the late depression. The Department is anxious to develop a program of instruction and research based upon the policy of the regular employment of visitors. A sum, equal to the stipend of a full professor, if used to finance a program of regular visitors, would add greater content and prestige to the Department than could be secured in any other way.

Source: University of Chicago Library, Department of Special Collections. Office of the President. Hutchins Administration Records. Box 73, Folder “Economics Dept., “Post-War Plans” Simeon E. Leland, 1945″.

Categories
Economists Harvard

Harvard. 24 Ph.D. candidates examined 1926-27

In one box at the Harvard Archives (Harvard University/Examinations for the Ph.D. [HUC7000.70]), I found an incomplete run of published Ph.D. examination announcements for the Division of History and Political Science [later Division of History, Government, and Economics] from 1903-04 through 1926-27. Earlier I transcribed the announcement for 1915-16. Today’s posting gives us (1) the date of the scheduled general or special Ph.D. examinations (2) the names of the examination committee (3) the subjects of the general examination, and (4) the academic history of the examinees for two dozen economics Ph.D. candidates examined during the academic year 1926-27.

The largest shadows cast by members of this cohort belong to the (later) Harvard economics professor Edward H. Chamberlin and the co-author of The Modern Corporation and Private Property, Gardiner C. MeansLaughlin Currie and Harry Dexter White also belonged to this cohort of examinees.

Fun fact: Richard Vincent Gilbert was the father of Walter Myron Gilbert, Nobel laureate in Chemistry, 1980.

________________________________________

 

DIVISION OF HISTORY, GOVERNMENT, AND ECONOMICS

EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEGREE OF PH.D.
1926-27

Notice of hour and place will be sent out three days in advance of each examination.
The hour will ordinarily be 4 p.m.

James Ackley Maxwell.

Special Examination in Economics, Monday, October 25, 1926.
General Examination passed, October 30, 1923.
Academic History: Dalhousie University, 1919-21; Harvard College, 1921-23; Harvard Graduate School, 1923-27. B.A., Dalhousie, 1921; A.M., Harvard, 1923. Assistant Professor of Economics, Clark University, 1925-.
General Subjects: 1. Money and Banking. 2. Economic Theory and its History. 3. Economic History to 1750. 4. Statistics. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Public Finance.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Burbank, A. H. Cole, and Usher.
Thesis Subject: A Financial History of Nova Scotia, 1848-99. (With Professor Bullock.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Bullock, Burbank, and Usher.

Kan Lee.

Special Examination in Economics, Thursday, October 28, 1926.
General Examination passed, January 6, 1926.
Academic History: Tsing Hua College, China, 1917-20; University of Missouri, 1920-22; University of Chicago, summer of 1921; Harvard Graduate School, 1922-27. B.J., Missouri, 1922; A.B., ibid., 1922; A.M., Harvard, 1924
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Money, Banking, and Crises. 3. Public Finance. 4. International Trade and Tariff Problems. 5. History of the Far East. 6. Socialism and Social Reconstruction.
Special Subject: Socialism and Social Reconstruction.
Committee: Professors Carver (chairman), James Ford, Mason, and Young.
Thesis Subject: British Socialists: Their Concept of Capital. (With Professor Carver.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Carver, Mason, and Young.

Donald Wood Gilbert.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, October 29, 1926.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), Crum, Gay, McIlwain, and Williams.
Academic History: University of Rochester, 1917-21; Harvard Graduate School, 1923-25. A.B., Rochester, 1921; M.A., ibid., 1923. Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1924-25; Instructor in Economics, Rochester, 1925-.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Statistical Method and its Application. 4. History of Political Theory. 5. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 6. Commercial Crises.
Special Subject: Commercial Crises.
Thesis Subject: Undecided.

Arthur William Marget.

Special Examination in Economics, Thursday, January 20, 1927.
General Examination passed, May 24, 1923..
Academic History: Harvard College, 1916-20; Cambridge University, England, fall term, 1920; London School of Economics, winter term 1920-21, University of Berlin, summer term 1921; Harvard Graduate School, 1921-27 A.B., Harvard, 1920; A.M., ibid., 1921. Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1923-27.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Socialism and Social Reform. 3. Public Finance. 4. Statistical Method and its Application. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Money, Banking, and Crises.
Special Subject: Money and Banking.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), A.H. Cole, Taussig, and Williams.
Thesis Subject: The Loan Fund: A pecuniary approach to the problem of the determination of the rate of interest.. (With Professor Young.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Young, Taussig, and Williams.

Richard Vincent Gilbert.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, February 9, 1927.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), Crum, Monroe, Usher, and Woods.
Academic History: University of Pennsylvania, 1919-20; Harvard College, 1920-23; Harvard Graduate School, 1923-. B.S., Harvard, 1923; M.A., Harvard, 1925. Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1923-.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Money and Banking. 3. Statistics. 4. Economic History since 1776. 5. History of Ancient Philosophy. 6. Theory of International Trade.
Special Subject: Theory of International Trade.
Thesis Subject: Theory of International Trade. (With Professor Taussig.)

Melvin Gardner deChazeau.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, February 21, 1927.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), A.H. Cole, Crum, Demos, and Young.
Academic History: University of Washington, 1921-25; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-. A.B., Washington, 1924; M.A., ibid., 1925. Instructor and Tutor, Harvard, 1926-27.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Statistics. 4. Money and Banking. 5. Ethics. 6. Regulation of Public Utilities.
Special Subject: Regulation of Public Utilities.
Thesis Subject: Undecided.

Donald Milton Erb.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, February 25, 1927.
Committee: Professors Carver (chairman), Burbank, Gay, Morison, and Williams.
Academic History: University of Illinois, 1918-22, 1923-25; Harvard Graduate School. 1925-. S.B., Illinois, 1922; S.M., ibid., 1924. Assistant in Economics, Illinois, 1923-25.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Sociology. 4. Public Finance. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Transportation.
Special Subject: Transportation.
Thesis Subject: Railroad Abandonments and Additions in the United States since 1920. (With Professor Ripley.)

Douglass Vincent Brown.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, March 2, 1927.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Bullock, Ford, Persons and Schlesinger.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1921-25; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-. A.B., Harvard, 1925; A.M., ibid., 1926.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Statistics. 3. Sociology. 4. Money, Banking, and Crises. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Labor Problems.
Special Subject: Labor Problems.
Thesis Subject: Restriction of Output. (With Professors Taussig and Ripley.)

Mark Anson Smith.

Special Examination in Economics, Friday, April 8, 1927.
General Examination passed, May 11, 1916.
Academic History: Dartmouth College, 1906-10; University of Wisconsin, 1911-14; Harvard Graduate School, 1915-17. A.B., Dartmouth, 1910; A.M., Wisconsin, 1913. Instructor in Economics at Simmons College, 1916-17.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Money, Banking, and Crises. 4. Economics of Corporations. 5. American Government and Constitutional Law.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Bullock, Usher, and Williams.
Thesis Subject: Economic Aspects of the Duties on Wool, with special reference to the period, 1912-1924. (With Professor Bullock.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Taussig, A. H. Cole, and Usher.

Lauchlin Bernard Currie.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, April 11, 1927.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), Burbank, A.H. Cole, Usher, and Wright.
Academic History: St. Francis Zavier College, 1921-22; London School of Economics, 1922-25; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-. B.Sc., London, 1925.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Public Finance. 4. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Money, Banking, and Crises.
Special Subject: Money, Banking, and Crises.
Thesis Subject: Monetary History of Canada, 1914-26. (With Professor Young.)

Harry Dexter White.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, April 14, 1927.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Dewing, Elliott, Monroe, and Usher.
Academic History: Columbia University, 1921-23; Stanford University, 1924-25; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-. A.B., Stanford, 1924; A.M., ibid., 1925. Instructor in Economics, Harvard, 1926-.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Money, Banking, and Crises. 3. Economic History since 1750. 4. Economics of Corporations. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. International Trade .
Special Subject: International Trade.
Thesis Subject: Foreign Trade of France. (With Professor Taussig.)

Margaret Randolph Gay.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, April 15, 1927.
Committee: Professors Usher (chairman), A.H. Cole, McIlwain, Taussig, and Young.
Academic History: Radcliffe College, 1918-22, 1922-23, 1925-. A.B., Radcliffe, 1922; A.M., ibid., 1923.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Money, Banking, and Crises. 3. International Trade. 4. Economic History after 1750. 5. Political Theory. 6. English Economic History before 1750.
Special Subject: English Economic History, 1485-1750.
Thesis Subject: The Statute of Artificers, 1563-1811. (With Professor Gay.)

(Mary) Gertrude Brown.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, April 28, 1927.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Elliott, Taussig, Williams, and Young.
Academic History: Mount Holyoke College, 1920-24; Columbia University, summer of 1924; Radcliffe College, 1924-. A.B., Mount Holyoke, 1924; A.M., Radcliffe, 1926. Assistant in Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1924-26. Tutor, Bryn Mawr Summer School, 1926.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 3. Money, Banking, and Crises. 4. Comparative Modern Government. 5. Labor Problems. 6. Economic History since 1750.
Special Subject: Economic History since 1750.
Thesis Subject: The History of the American Silk Industry. (With Professor Gay.)

Eric Englund.

General Examination in Economics, Monday, May 2, 1927.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Black, Dickinson, Usher, and Young.
Academic History: Oregon Agricultural College, 1914-18; University of Oregon, summers of 1915, 1916, and 1917; University of Wisconsin, 1919-21; University of Chicago, summer of 1920; Harvard Graduate School, 1926-. B.S., Oregon Agricultural College, 1918; A.B., University of Oregon, 1919; M.S., Wisconsin, 1920. Professor of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State Agricultural College, 1921-26.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Money, Banking, and Crises. 3. Economics of Agriculture. 4. Economic History since 1750. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Public Finance.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Thesis Subject: Studies in Taxation in Kansas. (With Professor Bullock.)

Walter Edwards Beach.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, May 4, 1927.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), Baxter, A.H. Cole, Dewing, and Williams.
Academic History: State College of Washington, 1919-20; Stanford University, 1920-22; 1923-24, Harvard Graduate School, 1925-26. A.B., Stanford, 1922; A.M., Harvard, 1926. Instructor in Economics, Bowdoin, 1926-.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economics of Corporations. 3. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 4. Economic History since 1750. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Money, Banking, and Crises.
Special Subject: Money, Banking, and Crises.
Thesis Subject: International Gold Movements in Relation to Business Cycles. (With Professor Young.)

Ram Ganesh Deshmukh.

Special Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 5, 1927.
General Examination passed, May 13, 1926.
Academic History: Wilson College, India, 1912-17; Bombay University Law School, 1917-20; Harvard Graduate School, 1922-27. B.A., Bombay University, 1917; LL.B., ibid., 1920; A.M., Harvard, 1924.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. Economics of Agriculture. 4. Sociology. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Public Finance.
Special Subject: Public Finance.
Committee: Professors Bullock (chairman), Burbank, A.H. Cole, and Williams.
Thesis Subject: State Highways in Massachusetts. (With Professor Bullock.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Bullock (chairman), Burbank, and A.H. Cole.

Charles Donald Jackson.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 5, 1927.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), Black, Crum, Merk, and Taussig.
Academic History: Leland Stanford Junior University, 1915-16; Northwestern University, 1916-17, 1919-21; University of Wisconsin, summer of 1920 and 1921; Harvard Graduate School, 1921-22, 1924-. S.B., Northwestern, 1920; M.B.A., ibid., 1921; A.M., Harvard, 1925.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Agricultural Economics. 3. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 4. Statistics. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Money, Banking, and Crises.
Special Subject: Money, Banking, and Crises.
Thesis Subject: Agricultural Credit. (With Professor Young.)

Elmer Joseph Working.

General Examination in Economics, Friday, May 6, 1927.
Committee: Professors Carver (chairman), Crum, Morison, Williams, and Young.
Academic History: University of Denver, 1916-17, 1918-19; George Washington University, 1917-18; University of Arizona, 1919-21; Iowa State College, 1921-23; University of Minnesota, 1922-23, second half-year; Brookings Graduate School, 1924-25; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-26. B.S., Arizona, 1921; M.S., Iowa, 1922. Assistant professor of Economics, University of Minnesota, 1926-27.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Statistical Method and its Application. 3. Money, Banking, and Crises. 4. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Economics of Agriculture.
Special Subject: Economics of Agriculture.
Thesis Subject: The Orderly Marketing of Grain. (With Professor Taussig.)

Gardiner Coit Means.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 12, 1927.
Committee: Professors Williams (chairman), Baxter, A.H. Cole, Dewing, and Gay.
Academic History: Harvard College, 1914-18; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-. A.B., Harvard, 1918.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. International Trade and Tariff Policy. 3. Economics of Corporations. 4. Economic History since 1750. 5. American History since 1789. 6. Money, Banking, and Crises.
Special Subject: Money, Banking, and Crises.
Thesis Subject: Fluctuations in New England’s Balance of Trade. (With Professor Williams.)

Bishop Carleton Hunt.

Special Examination in Economics, Friday, May 13, 1927.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), W.M. Cole, Gay, McIlwain, and Williams.
Academic History: Boston University, 1916-20; Harvard Graduate School, 1925-27, summers of 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, and 1925. B.B.A., Boston University, 1920; A.M., Harvard, 1926. Professor of Commerce, Dalhousie University, 1920-; Lecturer in Economics, Nova Scotia Technical College, 1920-23.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Economic History since 1750. 3. International Trade. 4. Accounting. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Money and Banking.
Special Subject: Money and Banking.
Thesis Subject: Underwriting Syndicates and the Supply of Capital. (With Professor Young.)

Edward Hastings Chamberlin.

Special Examination in Economics, Friday, May 20, 1927.
General Examination passed, May 22, 1924.
Academic History: State University of Iowa, 1916-20; University of Michigan, 1920-22; Harvard Graduate School, 1922-27. B.S., Iowa, 1920; M.A., Michigan, 1922. Instructor in Economics, Iowa, summer of 1921. Assistant in economics, Harvard, 1922-. Tutor in Economics, ibid., 1924-27.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Statistics. 3. Accounting. 4. Economic History. 5. History of Political Theory. 6. Modern Theories of Value and Distribution.
Special Subject: Modern Theories of Value and Distribution.
Committee: Professors Young (chairman), Monroe, Taussig, and Williams.
Thesis Subject: The Theory of Monopolistic Competition. (With Professor Young.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Young, Carver, and Taussig.

Christopher Roberts.

Special Examination in Economics, Monday, May 23, 1927.
General Examination passed, April 3, 1925.
Academic History: Haverford College, 1916-18, 1919-21; Harvard Graduate School, 1921-27. S.B., Haverford, 1921; A.M., Harvard, 1922. Assistant in Economics, Harvard 1922-25; Tutor in Economics, ibid., 1925-27.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. International Trade and Finance. 3. Statistics. 4. International Law. 5. Public Finance. 6. Economic History since 1750.
Special Subject: Economic History since 1750.
Committee: Professors Gay (chairman), Burbank, A.H. Cole, and Usher.
Thesis Subject: The History of the Middlesex Canal. (With Professor Gay.)
Committee on Thesis: Professors Gay, A.H. Cole, and Cunningham.

Clayton Crowell Bayard.

General Examination in Economics, Wednesday, May 25, 1927.
Committee: Professors Carver (chairman), James Ford, Hanford, Taussig, and Usher.
Academic History: University of Maine, 1918-22; Harvard Graduate School, 1924-. A.B., Maine, 1922; A.M., Harvard, 1925. Assistant in Social Ethics, Harvard, 1925-26; Tutor in Social Ethics, ibid., 1926-27.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Economic History before 1750. 3. Socialism and Social Reform. 4. American Labor Problems. 5. Municipal Government. 6. Sociology.
Special Subject: Sociology and Social Problems.
Thesis Subject: Undecided.

Dorothy Carolin Bacon.

General Examination in Economics, Thursday, May 26, 1927.
Committee: Professors Persons (chairman), Carver, Crum, Gay and Holcombe.
Academic History: Simmons College, 1918-19; Radcliffe College, 1919-22, 1923-24, 1926-. A.B., Radcliffe, 1922; A.M., ibid., 1924. Assistant in Economics, Vassar College, 1924-25. Instructor in Economics, ibid., 1925-26.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory. 2. Sociology. 3. History of Political Theory. 4. Statistics. 5. Economic History. 6., Money, Banking and Crises.
Special Subject: Money, Banking and Crises.
Thesis Subject: A Study of the Dispersion of Wholesale Commodity Prices, 1890-1896.  (With Professor Persons.)

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1926-1927”.

Image Source:  Photo of Emerson Hall (1905). Harvard Album, 1920. 

Categories
Courses Harvard

Harvard. Harvard Crimson Economics Course Guides, 1927-1938

The Harvard Crimson regularly published “Confidential Guides” to classes. The Crimson on-line archive is easy to search and I’ve selected some of the economics courses that were reviewed. I have added enrollment figures and staffing from the annual reports of the Presidents of Harvard. The coverage is spotty, but maybe I get lucky and find other course guides later.

___________________________________________

1926-27
 Harvard Crimson, December 6, 1927.

Economics 7b
Second semester, 1926-27
[Dr. Mason.—Programs of Social Reconstruction]

This course, originally intended as a small, intimate course on the socialist economists, when given for the first time last year, proved too popular to be labelled as small. Its intimate nature however was retained through Mr. Mason.

One of the youthful prodigies of the Economics department, with an Oxford education behind him, Mr. Mason conducts the course along lines that are wholly enjoyable. Informal lectures—you may interrupt any time you wish—are the backbone of the course, but there are also occasional sessions devoted to a general class room discussion, with the conservative students standing off their more radical colleagues and with Mr. Mason holding the scales.

Examinations are few and far between, and when given display a broadness not displeasing to the student who is taking the course as a study of history rather than as a study of economics.

Enrollment: Economics 7b
Second semester, 1926-27

Total 81: 4 Graduates, 44 Seniors, 23 Juniors, 6 Sophomores, 4 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1926-27, p. 75.

___________________________________________

1928-29
Harvard Crimson, December 11, 1929.

Economics 4b
Second semester, 1928-29
[Professor A. S. Dewing and Dr. Opie. Economics of Corporations]

Professor Dewing has written a book on the Financial Policy of Corporations which is so formidable that it may scare off the average undergraduate who does not know that Professor Dewing’s lecture delivery is one of the least puzzling in the College. Most undergraduates on the first day of the course look wildly around for the nearest exit, convinced that they have wandered into a philosophy lecture. Bailing his trap with a summary of the corporation from Rome to the present day. Professor Dewing has the class following him, at a distance of several sea leagues, by the third lecture. Then he hops briskly to the present time, and proceeds to probe into the motives of the business man. The wheels of the large corporation, the relative advantages of the various forms of business enterprise, the actions of the stock market and the types of securities, in rapid-fire succession. Even future professors of Sanskrit, now undergraduates, would do well to take this course in order to learn where their breakfast bacon comes from, and why Bacon, Preferred sells around 30 these days. Dr. Opie will alternate with Professor Dewing, and what Professor Dewing does for the corporation’s past, Dr. Opie may be expected to do for its future, showing how modern trends to consolidation have not yet run their course.

Enrollment: Economics 4b
Second semester, 1928-29

Total 187: 12 Graduates, 56 Seniors, 104 Juniors, 12 Sophomores, 3 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1928-29, p. 72.

**********************

Economics 6a
Second semester, 1928-29
[Dr. C. E. Persons. Trade Unionism and Allied Problems]

For those who are interested in the ever present problems arising from the conflict between capital and labor, Economics 6a presents an admirable summary of the most vital issues. This course, given by Professor Ripley for many years, was taken over by Professor Persons of Boston University last year. The latter instructor, however, was called to Washington this fall to take up a government position as an expert on the question of unemployment, and to date no successor has been announced for the course.

Regardless of whom the instructor may be, the subject matter of the course dealing with strikes, governmental control of labor policies, arbitration, unemployment, and other problems closely associated with the labor question should prove valuable to all who have any interest in current problems. For those who think courses in Economics too theoretical, Economics 6a is an excellent corrective, for throughout the half year, one is constantly finding instances in the daily newspapers with which the week’s work is directly concerned. For those concentrating in labor problems, the course is indispensable, since it takes in a wide field which would take many hours to cover in tutorial conferences.

Enrollment: Economics 6a
Second semester, 1928-29

Total 50: 1 Graduates, 22 Seniors, 21 Juniors, 3 Sophomores, 3 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1928-29, p. 72.

**********************

Economics 7b
Second semester, 1928-29
[Asst. Professor Mason. Programs of Social Reconstruction]

This course on the various programs for social reconstruction limits itself to fairly modern times. No undergraduate alive, whether he was born a little Lib-e-ral or a little Conserve-a-tive, can afford to be ignorant of the social ferment which goes on in the world around him, and threatens to involve him as employer or employee, taxpayer or taxpayer in our time. This course will not introduce him to the manifestations of these doctrines now current in Harbin or in Gastonia, but it will enable him to learn something of the ideas held by anarchists, social-[incomplete]

Enrollment: Economics 7b
Second semester, 1928-29

Total 77: 6 Graduates, 38 Seniors, 27 Juniors, 1 Freshman, 5 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1928-29, p. 72.

___________________________________________

1929-30
Harvard Crimson, September 22, 1930.

Economics A
1929-30
[Prof. Burbank and Asst. Prof. Chamberlin, & Assistants. Principles of Economics]

The problem of how to introduce students to the subject of economics is admirably met in ec A. Of all the large survey courses in the undergraduate curriculum, ec A is perhaps the best organized and the most ably conducted.

Facts as such play a very small part in this course; it is much more a systematic method of thinking that the student must master; reasoning power, not memory, is necessary in order to understand and succeed in ec A. By this one should not understand that no work is required, that all one needs to do to get a good grade, is to go to quizzes once a month and exercise his reasoning power. Not at all; reasoning power and concentration are quite as necessary in studying the principles of economics as they are in answering questions on examinations.

The one really serious criticism of the course, in this reviewer’s opinion, lies in its failure to impress upon the student that Professor Taussig’s book which serves as the text book and foundation of all the work done, is not an economic bible. The general opinion of most students after taking ec A is that the last word on questions economic has been spoken, that the final truth is known and that Professor Taussig is the interpreter thereof. If they continue with the study of economics and learn that Taussig’s “Principles” is only a comparatively minor product of a particular school of though, they will probably be more than a little surprised and their view of economics as a study will undergo considerable revision.

Enrollment: Economics A
1929-30

Total 498: 2 Graduates, 41 Seniors, 123 Juniors, 270 Sophomores, 24 Freshmen, 38 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1929-30, p. 77.

**********************

Economics 3
1929-30
[Professor Williams. Money, Banking, and Commercial Crises]

This is a course which will be taken sooner or later by practically all men concentrating in economics. Money, banking, and financial crises are all subjects which despite their complexity necessarily demand some consideration from all who aspire to have anything approaching a working knowledge of economics.

It may be gathered from what has been said above that (1) Economics 3 is a large course with students of all degrees of ability enrolled in it, and (2) that it deals with subjects which are far from satisfactorily solved and which are difficult even for advanced students of economics. Corrolary: Economics 3 is conducted in a very slow and deliberate fashion; it tends toward oversimplification; and the lectures remind one of one’s preparatory school days in their careful topical organization and their constant repetition.

Professor Williams, however, has chosen the only practicable method of getting the subjects over and is to be congratulated on the general success of his system.

A parting word to embryonic bankers might not be out of place here. Economics 3 deals with theory almost exclusively and will be of very little assistance in getting a job as a clerk next summer.

Enrollment: Economics 3
1929-30

Total 176: 2 Graduates, 67 Seniors, 88 Juniors, 12 Sophomores, 7 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1929-30, p. 77.

___________________________________________

1932-33
Harvard Crimson, April 18, 1933.

Economics A
1932-33
[Professor Burbank, Asst. Prof. Chamberlin, Frickey, and Ham & Assistants, Principles of Economics]

Economics A is the whole field of Economics in microcosm; it is a study of the economic problem. So much land, labor, and instruments are available. Men must eat. But they want to do more than that. How can they use the available tools to produce the largest amount of what they most want? The problem requires much thought and discussion, and there are many different solutions. Capitalism, Socialism, Communism are but attempts to solve it.

The facts treated in Economics A are closely related to the business world. But while the business man is mainly concerned with particular costs, selling methods, and profits, the economist tries to put all the general facts in the proper sequence and order of importance. He talks about prices in general, the national income, and the distribution of that income among individuals. The student gains more than the ability to talk glibly about tariffs, money standards, and the business cycle. In seeking the essence of economic life he has developed a method of thought.

The textbook used in the course, Taussig’s Principles, is in many places out of date and seems unduly simple in the light of conflicting theories. Wherever possible, the Department is trying to supplement it with other reading. The course is conducted wholly in sections, probably the best method in a subject of this kind. Obviously everything depends on the instructors, and for the most part they are among the best in the University. Their task is made difficult by the necessity of trying to satisfy both those men who are content with the broad outlines of the work and those who desire a more detailed discussion. It has been suggested that more honor sections be formed; and that they be organized after November hours. If this were done and if more Freshmen were admitted to the course, men concentrating in Economics could get an early and thorough start in the subject, other men would be better satisfied, and tutors might start their work more effectively in the sophomore year.

In general it may be said that Economics. A is not a difficult course for the student endowed with ordinary intelligence. The value of the subject is undisputed. As an instructor in another course remarked during the Hoover administration, “The great trouble with Congress is that it is composed of men who have never taken History 1 or Economics A.”

Enrollment: Economics A
1932-33

Total 390: 18 Seniors, 109 Juniors, 224 Sophomores, 23 Freshmen, 16 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 65.

**********************

Economics 3
1932-33
[Prof. Williams and Schumpeter, and Dr. Currie. Money, Banking and Commercial Crises]

In Economics 3 the instructors are faced with the uniquely difficult task of explaining the intricacies of “Money and Banking” with not a few words on foreign trade. The course requires a thesis although certain Seniors are exempt.

Professor Williams is undoubtedly not only an authority of world reputation and an excellent lecturer, but a sympathetic teacher. There is, however, the chance that he may be called away next year. Although his absence would be a serious blow to the course, indication is that the course would still be in capable hands.

It is fortunate that, in such a difficult course, the sections conducted by Dr. Currie should be such as to clear up the problems of the individual student, add to the knowledge of the group as a whole, and attain timeliness and interest throughout.

Enrollment: Economics 3
1932-33

Total 151: 32 Seniors, 103 Juniors, 8 Sophomores, 1 Freshman, 7 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 65.

**********************

Economics 4
1932-33
[Assoc. Prof. Mason, Asst. Prof. Chamberlin, Dr. Wallace. Monopolistic Industries and their Regulation]

Economics 4, run on the plan of two lectures and one section a week, deals with railroads, corporations, and government control of industry. The course is conducted by Associate Professor E. S. Mason, Assistant Professor E. H. Chamberlin, and Mr. D. H. Wallace.

The subject matter of the course has a contemporary and living significance that has as much primary interest as it is possible to find in the Economics Department. This timeliness has been intelligently capitalized with out sacrificing scholarship.

The reading, while it seems extensive, has great variety and has been excellently chosen. The lectures are well coordinated with it and at the same time avoid repetition. The lectures themselves vary, but on the whole, are fair enough. They can be expected to show considerable improvement, as this is the first year they have been delivered by the men in charge. One gets the impression that Chamberlin and Mason are more interesting than some of their presentations would indicate.

Enrollment: Economics 4
1932-33

Total 155: 5 Graduates, 30 Seniors, 104 Juniors, 14 Sophomores, 2 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 65.

**********************

Economics 50 [sic, Economics 38]
1932-33
[Prof. Williams and Schumpeter. Principles of Money and of Banking]

Very much the same general remarks apply to Economics 50 as to Economics 3, also reviewed in this Confidential Guide. The course is more advanced and goes considerably deeper into the fundamental aspects of money and business cycles as well as international trade. Professor Williams is always stimulating and clear-headed, while in this course he has opportunities for exercising his extraordinary critical ability to a far greater degree than in the elementary course.

Such controversial subjects as the monetary and cycle theories of Hawtrey, Keynes, Hayes and Foster and Catchings are treated at length; while much light is also thrown on the mechanism and control of credit, and international trade in general. It would be rash to go further into the subject matter of the course for monetary theory and practice are in such a state of rapid development that next year may find a new set of problems which will call for new treatment. It can, however, be confidently concluded that if such changes do occur Professor Williams, to a greater degree than most economists, will not be restrained by dogma and tradition from treating the new conditions in a spirit both open-minded and critical [incomplete]

Enrollment: Economics 38
1932-33

Total 61: 36 Graduates, 16 Seniors, 1 Junior, 8 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1932-33, p. 66.

___________________________________________

1934-35
Harvard Crimson, April 23, 1934.

Economics A
1934-35
[Prof. Burbank, Asst. Profs. Chamberlin, Frickey, and Ham, and Assistants. Principles of Economics]

Since the purposes of Economics A is to teach the beginner the economic way of thinking, economic questions of the day are considered in a purely subsidiary light. It is the general outlines of economic theory, rather than the details of its structure, which are presented the student. Although he may develop during the year the desired line of attack, he is apt to feel that he has learned less about economics than he wished.

That Economics A is an introductory course, and a difficult one to administer, should be kept in mind. Nevertheless, it would seem that the economic way of thinking might be brought home more vividly by applying it directly to the questions facing the country today.

Long experiment has determined that the course shall consist of three section meetings a week. Since it is the section man who guides the discussions, a great deal depends on his calibre. The reading, though rather difficult for a beginner, is of reasonable length and easily handled.

Enrollment: Economics A
1934-35

Total 498: 38 Seniors, 174 Juniors, 262 Sophomores, 21 Freshmen, 3 Other.

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College, 1934-35, p. 80.

___________________________________________

1937-38
Harvard Crimson, May 31, 1938

Economics [as Field of Concentration]

Economics is the center around which our present civilization revolves; some even claim that all human history has been determined fundamentally by economic forces. Almost every occupation fits into the economic structure, and for certain ones like government and business, a knowledge of the economic structure is essential. The field of Economics increased 20 per cent from 1935-36 to 1937-38 and is now the largest in College with 477 concentrators.

From the nature and aims of the field it is obvious that it might better be entitled Political Economy, for every course tends to emphasize the fact that economics cannot be separated from politics. Through full courses on various special subjects like Public Finance and Utilities a broad survey of the subject is attempted, and although each course is designed to include the major problems existent today, it is of course impossible for them to provide the answers. Thus, the field does not intend to offer practical value–in the narrow vocational sense, since it feels that practical training should be obtained after College in places like the Business School. Instead, it offers a thorough theoretical background of economics useful in any business career.

A student who does not want to concentrate in Economics but desires an auxiliary foothold in the subject would do best to combine the theory of Economics A [Principles of Economics] with the more specific material in Economics 41, on Money and Banking.

Concentrators in Economics will have to pass in the spring of their Junior year a general examination in the department of Economics, and in the spring of their Senior year an examination correlating Economics with either History or Government (this correlating exam may be abolished by 1942), and a third one on the student’s special field, which is chosen from a list of eleven, including economic theory, economic history, money and banking, industry, public utilities, public finance, labor problems, international economics, policies and agriculture.

Courses in allied fields, including Philosophy, Mathematics, History, Government, and Sociology, are suggested by the department for each of the special fields. In addition, Geography 1 is recommended in connection with international policies or agriculture.

According to members, there has not been enough organization of tutorial work. In preparing men for their Junior divisionals the tutors have each gone off on independent tacks, often haphazardly. A list of books drawn up by the Board of Tutors for each special field, large enough to allow the student a reasonable amount of choice and yet limited enough to assure both student and tutor that he is working in some prescribed direction, would remedy this situation. The tutors themselves are good, on the whole, and willing to give time to those students whose interest and ability warrant it.

Economics A is required for admittance into every advanced course, although there are a few which allow it to be taken at the same time. It is by no means too difficult for Freshmen, may be taken by them with the consent of the instructor, and concentrators urge all Freshmen who think they may go into the field to take this course during their first year. This will enable them to begin taking advanced courses their Sophomore year, as History and Government concentrators do, and thereby allow a much wider range of study during their last two years, both in courses and in tutorial. History 1 and Government 1 are both required for concentration in Economics. The former should be taken Freshman year.

Of the two basic courses in theory Economics 1 [Economic Theory] is much better than the half year course 2a [Economic Theory (shorter course)], but it is open only to honors candidates. Professor Chamberlin lectures excellently in course 1, but there is still need for a half course such as 2a. Nearly all the advanced courses will be found worth while, but they cannot all be taken and must be chosen with the interests and the special field of the concentrator in mind. Course 21a [Introduction to Economic Statistics]was blamed for wasting the effort of Professor Frickey, for students claimed the material could be covered in less than a mouth. It is necessary for graduate work, and cannot be expected to be very interesting. Mason’s Economics 11a and b, on the history and economics of Socialism, while they are not well organized, represent–especially the history–a field which has been practically ignored in the social sciences, although it is listed as a special topic for the correlation exam–the History of Political and Economic Thought. A course on the History of Economic Theory is notably lacking, and the History of Socialism could well be matched with a History of Capitalism, Sociology 3 comes nearest to filling this gap now, but it leans less towards economics than towards social progress. Economics 36, on Economic History [1750-1914], is concerned with the material development of industry, railroads, etc. Hansen was liked in course 45a on Business Cycles, and the material covered in 43a and b [International Economic Relations] is valuable.

Expanding its labor instruction, the department will make Economics 81, on Labor Problems, a full course, to be given by Professor Slichter, Dr. Reynolds, and Mr. Pollard. Social security, as well as the economics of labor, will be taught.

 

 

 

Categories
Courses Harvard Syllabus

Harvard. First year Graduate Economic Theory. Haberler, 1950-51

The first theory course for economics graduate students around mid-20th century, Economics 201 (earlier 101), was taught most of the time by Edward Chamberlin. But in 1950-51 Chamberlin was on leave in France as a Fulbright Scholar and Gottfried Haberler taught the first year of theory instead. 

New addition: Here is the link to the two semester final exams.

Somewhat peculiar is Haberler’s written intention to include Keynesian Economics together with Marxian Economics as the last item of his Fall semester course. However one can see that by the time the second semester rolled around, Haberler had decided to throw Marxian economics under the bus and Keynesian Economics then became the sole final theory to be discussed in his course. Also worthy of note are references to the recommended textbook treatments in German and French.

I’ll note here that the second year of theory, Economics 202, was usually taught by Wassily Leontief who, like Chamberlin, was also not listed in the course announcements for 1950-51 (he had been award a John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation Fellowship for the year). Instead the second year course was taught by William Fellner from Berkeley (the syllabus for his undergraduate History of Economics course has been posted earlier). I’ll post the Fellner reading list for Economics 202 soon. Thus we see that Austro-Hungarian hands were rocking the cradle of baby economists at Harvard at the exact midpoint of the twentieth century.

The last time I saw my undergraduate mentor William Fellner was when he took me to lunch at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. in 1976 or 1977. He was accompanied by his American Enterprise Institute colleague Gottfried Haberler, who was William Fellner’s regular AEI lunch buddy. Only with this posting did I realize that the two of them overlapped 1950-51 at Harvard.

_____________________________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

_____________________________________

[Course Description]

Economics 201 (formerly Economics 101a and 101b). Economic Theory
Full course. Tu., Th., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Sat. at 10. Professor Haberler.

This course is normally taken by graduate students in their first year of residence.

 

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

______________________________________

 

Fall Term, 1950
Economics 201 – Economic Theory

I.       Introduction

“Scope and Method”
Types of Economic Theory
Historical Sketch

II.      General Survey of The Economic Process

The Institutional Setting
Income Flows
System of Markets

III.    Demand and Supply Analysis

Cost vs. Utility Theory of Value
Stability of Equilibrium
Some Formal Relationships
Demand and Supply Curves
Elasticity of Demand and Supply
Marginal, Average, Total Revenue
Marginal, Average, Total Cost

IV.     Theory of the Household and Consumption

Utility Theory
Indifference Line Analysis
Complementarity and Substitution
Income Effects, Substitution Effects, Price Effects
Application of Indifference Line Analysis to Theory of Exchange
Measurability of Utility
Interpersonal Comparisons
Joint Demand

V.      Theory of the Firm and Production

Cost Curves
Production Function
Marginal Productivity
Joint Supply

VI.     Theory of Distribution

A.      General
B.      Theory of Wages
C.      Theory of Rent
D.      Theory of Interest and Capital: The Time Factor
E.      Theory of Profits: Uncertainty

VII.   Theory of Market Structures

Competition
Monopoly
Discriminating Monopoly
Monopolistic Competition and Imperfect Competition
Duopoly and Oligopoly
Bilateral Monopoly
Theory of Games

VIII.  Welfare Economics

IX.     Keynesian Economics, Marxian Economics

 

Bibliography and Reading Assignments

The literature on the subjects covered by this course is enormous and is growing rapidly, textbook literature as well as monographs and articles on special topics. No hard and fast assignment will be made but rather suggestions from which students should choose according to their individual needs and preparation.

General

The general texts coming nearest to covering the topics which are treated in the present course are:

Boulding, Economic Analysis (1st or 2nd edition)
Stigler, Theory of Price

In German:
Erich Schneider: Einführung in die Wirtschaftstheorie (Vol. I and II, Vol. III to appear later)
H. v. Stackelberg: Grundlagen der theoretischen Volkswirtschaftslehre

In French:
Jean Marchal: Cours d’Économie Politique (Vol. I) or (shorter and better) Le Mécanisme des Prix [et la Structure de l’Économie] (2nd ed.)

A. Marshall’s Principles is still indispensable

See also:

Survey of Contemporary Economics (Especially Ch. 1)
Readings in Economic Analysis (Ed., R. V. Clemence, 2 vols.)
Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution (Blakiston)

I.      Introduction

Literature on “Scope and Method” is on the whole arid. Many texts have introductory chapters on those subjects (e.g., Stigler’s Theory of Price). Some reading on that subject along with, rather than prior to, the study of substantive problems is advisable.

Suggestions:

Readings Volume I, by Clemence, First two chapters
L. Robbins: Nature and Significance of Economic Science
J. N. (not M) Keynes: Scope and Method of Political Economy
O. Lange: “The Scope and Method of Economics,” in Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XIII(1), 1945-46
L. Robbins: “Live and Dead Issues in the Methodology of Economics,” Economica, New Series, Vol. V, 1938
L. Robbins: “The Economist in the 20th Century,” Economica, New Series, Vol. XVI, 1949.
F. Machlup: “Why Bother With Methodology?” Economica, New Series, Vol. III, 1936.
M. Friedman, “Lange on Price Flexibility and Employment: A Methodological Criticism,” A.E.R., Vol. 36, 1946.
T. C. Koopmans: “Measurement Without Theory,” R.E.Statistics, Volume 29, 1947.
(Review of Economic Statistics, Vol. 31, 1949, Criticism by Vining and reply by Koopmans)
Numerous writings by F. H. Knight deal with methodological questions. Most of them are collected in The Ethics of Competition and Freedom and Reform
T. W. Hutchison: Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory (Positivistic)
Of older writers, Cairnes (Logical Method of Political Economy), N. W. Senior (Outline), and W. Bagehot (Postulates of English Political Economy) may be mentioned.

II.      General Survey of Economic Process

Modern literature on National Income frequently presents graphic pictures of economic process as a whole. See Schneider, op.cit., Vol. I.

III.    Demand and Supply Analysis

Henderson: Supply and Demand, Ch. 2
Marshall, Principles, Book V, Chs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, Appendix I
Mill, Principles, Book III, Chs. 1-4
Stigler, Chapter 4
Boulding, Parti I (See especially Appendix on Elasticity, p. 137)
J. Robinson: The Economics of Imperfect Competition, Ch. 2

IV.     Theory of Household and Consumption

Hicks: Value and Capital, Part I
Boulding: 2nd ed., Chs. 29, 33
Stigler: Chapters 5 and 6
Relevant chapters in Marshall
Relevant chapters in Stackelberg and Schneider
Leontief, “The Pure Theory of the Guaranteed Annual Wage Contract,” J.P.E., February, 1946

V.      Theory of the Firm and of Production

Hicks: Value and Capital, Chs. 6 and 7
Viner: “Cost Curves and Supply Curves,” reprinted in Readings in Economic Analysis, Vol. II
Boulding: Economic Analysis, new edition, Chs. 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 31
Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, Chs. 6, 5
Knight, Risk Uncertainty, and Profits, Ch. 4
Marshall, Principles, Book V, Ch. VI, “Joint and Composite Demand and Supply”
Lerner: The Economics of Control, Chs. 10-18

______________________________________

Economics 201
Economic Theory — G. Haberler
Spring Term, 1951

I.       Theory of Distribution

A.      General
B.      Wages
C.      Rent
D.      Interest
E.      Profits

II.      Welfare Economics

III.    Theory of Market Structures

Perfect, pure, workable competition
Monopoly
Duopoly and Oligopoly
Bilateral Monopoly

IV.     Keynesian Economics

 

Literature

I.       Theory of Distribution

1.      General

Boulding, Economic Analysis, Ch. 11
J. M. Clark, Distribution in Encyclopedia of The Social Sciences and Readings in Income Distribution.
Douglas, Theory of Wages, Part I
Marshall, Principoles, Book V., Ch. VI, “Joint Demand”

Further Suggested Reading:

Stigler, Production and Distribution Theories
J. B. Clark, The Distribution of Wealth
Douglas, “Are There Laws of Production?” A.E.R., Vol. 38, 1948

2.      Wages

Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chs. 1-4
Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, Ch. 12 (Robertson)
Lester-Machlup, Discussion on Marginal Analysis (A.E.R., 1946-47 and Readings in Economic Analysis, Vol. 2
Stigler, “The Economics of Minimum Wage Legislation,” A.E.R., 1949 and in Readings in Labor Economics
Keynes, General Theory, Chs. 1,2

Further Suggested Reading:

Douglas, Theory of Wages
Readings in Income Distribution, Chs. 14, 16, 17, 18, 19
Readings in Labor Economics

3.      Rent

Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Ch. 8
Readings in Income Distribution, Chs. 31, 32.

4.      Capital and Interest

Böhm-Bawerk, Positive Theory of Capital, Book I, Ch. II; Book II; Book V.
Wicksell, Lectures, Vol. I, pp. 144-218
Fisher, Part I, II, III, Chs. X, XI
Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development, Chs. IV, VI
Readings in Income Distribution, Chs. 20, 21

Further Suggested Reading:

Metzler, “The Rate of Interest and the Marginal Product of Capital,” J.P.E., August 1950
Knight, “Interest,” in The Ethics of Competition and Encycloopaedia of the Social Sciences
Readings, Chs. 22, 23, 26
Hayek, The Pure Theory of Capital

5.      Profits

Beddy James, Profits, Ch. X
Readings in Income Distribution, Chs. 27, 29.
Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development

Further Suggested Reading:

Readings, Ch. 30
Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profits, Part III.

 

II.      Welfare Economics

Hicks, “The Foundations of Welfare Economics,” Economic Journal, Vol. 49, 1939
Samuelson, Foundations of Economic Analysis, Ch. VIII

Further Suggested Reading:

A. Burk (Bergson), “A Reformulation of Certain aspects of Welfare Economics”, Q.J.E., February 1938, and Readings in Economic Analysis, Vol. I
Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Parts I and II
Lerner, Economics of Control
Reder, Studies in the Theory of Welfare Economics
Myint, Theories of Welfare Economics
Little, Critique of Welfare Economics
Samuelson, Evaluation of Real National Income
Ruggles, Nancy, “Marginal Cost Pricing,” two articles, Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 17, 1949-50.

 

III.    Market Structures

Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition
Fellner, Competition Among the Few
Hayek, “The Meaning of Competition,” in Individualism and Economic Order
J. M. Clark, “Workable Competition,” A.E.R., and Readings in the Control of Industry, 1940
F. Machlup, “Competition, Pliopoly and Profit,” Economica, February, May, 1942
Rothschild, “Price Theory and Oligopoly,” Economic Journal, Sept., 1947

Further Suggested Reading:

Cost Behavior and Price Policy, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1943
Hall and Hitch, Price Theory and Business Behavior
Harrod, “Price and Cost in Entrepreneurs’ Policy,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 2, May 1939
Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Chs. on “Discriminating Monopoly,” and “The Special Problem of Railway Rates”
Joan Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Book V

 

IV.     Keynesian Economics

Hicks, “Keynes and the Classics,” in Readings in Income Distribution, Ch. 23
J. H. Williams, An Appraisal of Keynesian Economics
Tarshis, An Exposition of Keynesian Economics
Lawrence Klein, “Theories of Effective Demand,” in Readings in Economic Analysis, Vol. I.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 5, Folder “Economics 1950-1951 (2 of 2)”.

Copy also found in Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 80, Folder 8 “University of Chicago [sic] Syllabi by others”.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1950.

 

Categories
Courses Curriculum Harvard

Harvard. Mathematical Economics, 1933-37

In the Spring of 1933 Joseph Schumpeter got the ball rolling for a project to introduce an introductory course in mathematical economics at Harvard. I include here first a memo from statistics professor W. L. Crum to the economics department chair, Professor H. H. Burbank. This is followed by the subsequent proposal signed by six professors (Burbank, Chamberlin, Crum, Mason, Schumpeter and Taussig), presumably sent to some university level curriculum approval committee. From the enrollment records included below we see that 23 people attended that class in the first term of 1933-34. Starting the following academic year the course was taught by Leontief and a new course “primarily for Graduates”, “Mathematical Economics”, was introduced by Professor E. B. Wilson. Course descriptions and enrollments through 1936-37 are included in this posting. Here is an interesting 1936 letter from E. B. Wilson to Columbia’s W. C. Mitchell about what Schumpeter has wrought with economics in the curriculum.

An update with additional material for this course has been included in a later post.

__________________________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below. There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting….

__________________________________

 

Memorandum for Professor Burbank

4 April 1933

  1. I discussed, at his request, the mathematical economics project with Professor Schumpeter last Friday. I will give further consideration to his suggestions, and to the conversations I have had with you on the same subject; and then I will write out, for discussion with you, an outline of my thoughts on the matter.
  1. In the meantime, I am making a specific suggestion with reference to one of the points you raised earlier. You indicated that it might be desirable for those officers interested in mathematical economics to get together as a group and discuss prospects. As things are developing rapidly it seems to me that such a committee (perhaps informal) could well be set up promptly. I hope you will feel that you can meet with the group and act as its chairman. If you cannot, I suggest Professor Schumpeter be asked to head the group. I suggest that its members include also: Professor Black (I think it very desirable that he be brought in early), Professor Wilson, and me. I think it well that this original group be empowered to add shortly the following: Professor Frickey, Dr. Leontief, and Professor Chamberlin (or one of the other interested younger men).

[Signed]
WLC

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence & Papers, 1902-1950. (UAV.349.10) Box 23, Folder “Course Administration: 1932-37-40”.

__________________________________

 

Tentative Proposals for a Course on the Elements of Mathematical Economics to be Given during the Winter Term

The advanced student who is interested in the mathematical aspects of our subject has had in most cases some mathematical training and can be taken care of individually. But something should be done to acquaint a wider circle of less advanced students, or even of beginners, with those fundamental concepts of mathematics which are necessary to understand, say, Marshall’s Appendix and the more important and more accessible parts of the literature of mathematical economics, such as the works of Cournot, Walras, Edgeworth, and a few others. Since the necessary minimum of mathematics can be procured with little expenditure of time and energy, the experiment is proposed of importing this modicum of information to such graduate and undergraduate students as may wish to have it–subject to the approval of tutors in the case of undergraduates.

A half-course two hours a week would meet the case. Since any teaching of mathematics must work with examples if it is to convey any meaning, these examples will be drawn from economic problems. The course, therefore, should not be simply one on “mathematics for economists” but rather on “mathematical theory of economics.” Discussion will cover a number of simple and fundamental problems of economic theory, the mathematical concepts being explained as they present themselves. In the first term the whole venture will be frankly experimental. Coöperation and critique from all members of the economic staff is cordially invited. The final shape of this addition to our offering should, through common effort, be evolved during the next term. The following list is suggested of mathematics subjects with which it is proposed to deal in which seem to be both necessary and sufficient. The economic problems from which, and in connection with which, these mathematical topics are to be developed are merely the time-honored problems of marginal analysis.

(1) The fundamental concepts of analytic geometry, coordinates, transformations, equations of straight-line and curves, tangents, and so forth.

(2) Some fundamental notions of algebra, the theory of equations, forms, matrices, determinants, vectors, and vectorial operations.

(3) The concept of the integral and some of its applications, definite integrals, multiple integrals, and multiple integrals in polar coordinates.

(4) Functions and limits, differential coefficients, the elementary differential operations, maxima and minima, partial differentiations, developments, Taylor series.

(5) Simplest elements of the theory of differential equations. Functional equations and here and there some simple and useful tools from other mathematical fields as occasions may arise.

The course should be open to all who are interested, and participation of those wishing to follow it as auditors will be welcomed. It is highly desirable that as many tutors as possible should be present at the sessions of the first experimental term in order to contribute their advice, so that in the future the course may embody those topics and methods of present presentation which are found to be useful.

 

April 1933

H. H. Burbank
E. H. Chamberlin
W. L. Crum
E. S. Mason
J. A. Schumpeter
F. W. Taussig

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence & Papers, 1902-1950. (UAV.349.10) Box 23, Folder “Course offerings 1926-1937”.

__________________________________

1933-1934

[Courses offered]

Economics 8a 1hf. Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory

Half-course (first half-year). Mon. 4 to 6, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Professor Schumpeter, and other members of the Department.

Economics 8a is open to those who have passed Economics A and Mathematics A, or its equivalent. The aim of this course is to acquaint such students as may wish it with the elements of the mathematical technique necessary to understand the simpler contributions to the mathematical theory of Economics.

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences during 1933-34, 2n ed., p. 126.

 

[Course Enrollment]

[Economics] 8a 1hf. Professor Schumpeter and other members of the Department. — Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory.

15 Graduates, 3 Seniors, 5 Instructors. Total 23.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1933-1934, p. 85.

__________________________________

 

1934-35

[Courses offered]

Economics 8a 1hf. Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory

Half-course (first half-year). Mon. 4 to 6, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor. Professor Schumpeter.

Economics A and Mathematics A, or their equivalents, are prerequisites for this course.

Economics 13b 2hf. Mathematical Economics

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., 3 to 4.30. Professor E. B. Wilson.

Arrangements for admission should be made with the Chairman of the Department
Omitted in 1935-36.

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences during 1934-35, 2n ed., p. 126-7.

 

[Course Enrollments]

[Economics] 8a 1hf. Professor Schumpeter. — Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory.

2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 1 Sophomore. Total 4.

[Economics] 13b 2hf. Professor E. B. Wilson. — Mathematical Economics.

2 Graduates, 1 Junior, Total 3.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1934-1935, p. 81.

__________________________________

 

1935-1936

[Course offered]

Economics 8a 2hf. Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory

Half-course (second half-year). Mon. 4 to 6. Assistant Professor Leontief.

Economics A and Mathematics A, or their equivalents, are prerequisites for this course.

 

[Economics 13b 2hf. Mathematical Economics]

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., at 2. Professor E. B. Wilson.

Arrangements for admission should be made with the Chairman of the Department
Omitted in 1935-36.

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences during 1935-36, 2nd ed., p. 138-9.

 

[Course Enrollment]

[Economics] 8a 2hf. Professor Leontief. — Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory.

4 Juniors, 2 Sophomores. Total 6.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1935-1936, p. 82.

__________________________________

 

1936-1937

[Courses offered]

Economics 4a 2hf. (formerly 8a) Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory

Half-course (second half-year). Mon. 4 to 6. Assistant Professor Leontief.

Economics A and Mathematics A, or their equivalents, are prerequisites for this course.

Economics 104b 2hf. (formerly 13b). Mathematical Economics

Half-course (second half-year). Tu., Th., at 2. Professor E. B. Wilson.

Arrangements for admission should be made with the Chairman of the Department

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences during 1936-7, 2nd ed., p. 140, 142.

 

[Course Enrollments]

[Economics] 4a 2hf. Professor Leontief. — Introduction to the Mathematical Treatment of Economic Theory.

1 Graduate, 2 Seniors, 3 Juniors, 2 Sophomores, 1 Other. Total 9.

[Economics] 104b 2hf. (formerly 13b) Professor E. B. Wilson. — Mathematical Economics.

2 Graduates. Total 2.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1936-1937, pp. 92,93.

Image Source: Schumpeter, Leontief, Wilson from Harvard Album, 1934, 1939.

 

 

Categories
Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Honors Economic Theory, Chamberlin/Leontief/Taylor, 1939-40

In the following academic year (1940-41) this year-long course was broken into two distinct semester courses, Economics 1a (Economic Theory/Chamberlin) and Economics 1b (The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought/Taylor). From the enrollment statistics and the course catalogue we see that this was mainly a course taken in the junior year by undergraduates pursuing an A.B. with honors in economics.

Since this posting, I have included a transcription of the final examination questions for the second term of this course.

____________________

[Harvard Catalogue Course Listing]

Economics 1. Economic Theory

Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructors) Fri., at 11. Professor Chamberlin, Dr. O. H. Taylor, and Associate Professor Leontief.

This course will be conducted mainly by discussion. It is open only to candidates for the degree with honors. The first half (but not the second) may be taken as a half-course with the consent of the instructor.

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences During 1939-40 (2nd ed.). Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXVI, No. 42 (September 22, 1939), p. 154.

____________________

[Course Enrollment]

[Economics] 1.  Professor Chamberlin, Dr. O. H. Taylor, and Associate Professor Leontief. – Economic Theory.

1 Graduate, 1 Senior, 51 Juniors, 1 Other:  Total, 54.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of the Departments, 1939-40, p. 98.

____________________

ECONOMICS 1

1939-40

First Semester

  1. The Law of Supply and Demand. Meaning and Generality. Relation to the Law of Cost. Cost curves and supply curves. Relation to monopoly and to competition. Pure and perfect competition. Market problem illustrating deviations from “equilibrium” as defined by perfect competition. Equilibrium vs. the equation of supply and demand.
    Mill – Principles, Book III, chapters 2, 3, 5.
    Chamberlin – Monopolistic Competition, chapters 1, 2.
    Henderson – Supply and Demand, chapters 1, 2.
    Marshall – Principles, pp. 348-50; p. 806 note.
  2. Competitive theory, illustrated by Marshall.
    Marshall – Principles, Book V, chapters 1-5; Book IV, chapter 13; Book V, chapters 8, 9, 10, 12.
  3. The effect of small numbers in the market.
    Monopolistic Competition, chapter 3.
  4. Product differentiation. Co-existence and blending of monopoly and competition. Output (sales) as a function of price, “product” and selling outlays. Price-quantity relationships examined in some detail, selling costs and products as variables more briefly.
    Monopolistic Competition, chapters 4, 5, 6, 7 (pp. 130-149); Appendices C, D, E.
    Alsberg, C.L. – “Economic Aspects of Adulteration and Imitation”, Q.J.E., Vol. 46, p. 1 (1931).
  5. Production and Distribution. Diminishing returns. Diminishing marginal productivity. The laws of cost. General effect of monopoly elements on the analysis.
    Garver & Hansen – Principles, chapter 5.
    Wicksell – Lectures on Political Economy, Vol. I, pp. 101-133 (omit all small type except on pages 111, 113, 114 and 115.) [Knut Wicksell, Vorlesungen über Nationalökonomie auf Grundlage des Marginalprinzipes, 2 vols. [1913]]
    Viner, J.  – “Cost Curves and Supply Curves,” Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 1931.
    Monopolistic Competition, Appendix B.
  6. Theory of Wages.
    Hicks – Theory of Wages, Part I.

____________________

Economics 1
Second Semester
1939-40

  1. Theory of Wages (continued). Professor Leontief.
    Hicks, J. R., Theory of Wages, Chs. 9 and 10.
    Lester, R. A., “Overtime Wage Rates,” The American Economic Review, December, 1939. (Suggested)
    Douglas, P. H., The Theory of Wages, Ch. 13.
  2. Theory of Rent.
    Ricardo, D.Principles, Ch. 3 [sic, Ch. 2 intended].
    Marshall, Principles, Book V, Chs. 10,11.
  3. Theory of Capital and Interest.
    Clark, J. B., Distribution of Wealth, Chs. 9, 20.
    Böhm-Bawerk, Positive Theory of Capital, Books II, Chs. 2 and 5, Book V.
    Fisher, Irving, The Rate of Interest, Chs. 5, 6, and 7.
  4. Production and Distribution Interrelated.
    Wicksell, Lectures on Political Economy, Vol. I, pp. 196-206 (omit small type)
    [Knut Wicksell, Vorlesungen über Nationalökonomie auf Grundlage des Marginalprinzipes, 2 vols. [1913]].
    Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Chs. 2 and 8, paragraph B.
  5. Profits. Professor Chamberlin.
    Marshall, Book VI, chapter 5, section 7; Chs. 7, 8.
    Taussig, Principles, Vol. II, Ch. 50, section 1.
    Henderson, Supply and Demand, chapter 7.
    Berle and Means, The Modern Corporation, Book IV.
    Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 5, section 6; Ch. 7, section 6: Appendices D, E; Ch. 8.
  6. Welfare Economics. Dr. O. H. Taylor.
    Pigou, A. C. Economics of Welfare (3rd ed.), Part I, Chs. 1, 2, 3, 7, 8; and Part II, Chs. 1-8 inclusive, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17. [4th edition, 1932]
  7. Criticisms of Economic Theory, its Method and Assumptions. I. Psychology and Economics.
    Mitchell, W. C., “The Rationality of Economic Activity,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 18, pp. 97 ff., and 197 ff. (February, March 1910).
    Mitchell, W. C., “Human Behavior and Economics,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 29, p. 1 ff. (November 1914).
    Mitchell, W. C., “The Prospects of Economics,” in The Trend of Economics, volume edited by R. G. Tugwell.
  8. Criticisms of Economic Theory, its Method and Assumptions. II. Economic Principles as “Natural Laws.”
    Tugwell, R. G. “Experimental Economics,” part on “Natural Law,” in volume The Trends of Economics.
    Taylor, O. H., “Economics and Natural Law,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 44, p. 1ff., and p. 205 ff.

 

___________________________

Source:  Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and Reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1), Box 2; Folder: “Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1939-40”.

Categories
Courses Harvard Syllabus

Harvard. O.H. Taylor’s undergraduate course, Intellectual Background of Economic Thought, 1941

 

 

Starting in the academic year 1940-41, Harvard’s advanced undergraduate honors course in economic theory (Economics 1) was split into two semester courses Economics 1a (Chamberlin: Economic Theory) and 1b (This post. Taylor: Intellectual Background of Economic Thought). The last time Economics 1 was offered as a year course (1939-40), it was taught by Professor Chamberlin, Associate Professor Leontief and Instructor O.H. Taylor. Two years later, 1941-42, the second semester course 1b was taught by Professor Haberler and Associate Professor Leontief under the title “Theory of Production and Distribution of the National Income”. In 1942-43, Economics 1b as “Theory of Production and Distribution of the National Income” was taught a last time by Professor Leontief and Dr. Monroe.

Only for the second semester of 1940-41 was Dr. Overton Hume Taylor to offer Economics 1b according to the syllabus transcribed for this posting. Not a mover and shaker within the Harvard economics department, he was clearly a serious scholar-economist, though out of step with the economics profession of his day. Most historians of economics will recognize a soulmate in Taylor.

Overton Hume Taylor (1897-1987) was born in Colorado, received his B.A. at the University of Colorado in 1921 and Ph.D. from Harvard in 1928. He held the rank of instructor 1929-1960, promoted to professor, 1960-64. He retired from Harvard in 1964, going on to teach at Vanderbilt University.

Here is a link to Taylor’s A History of Economic Thought (1960). 

Recent addition: the final examination questions for “The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought” from the Spring term of 1940-41

______________________________________

[Course Listing]

Economics 1b 2hf. The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought.

Half-course (second half-year). Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri. at 11. Dr. O. H. Taylor.

 

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences for the Academic Year 1940-41, Second Edition, p. 55.

______________________________________

[Course Enrollment]

[Economics] 1b 2hf. Dr. O. H. Taylor.—The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought.

14 Juniors, 1 Sophomore:   Total 15.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1940-41, p. 58.

______________________________________

 

Economics 1b

The Intellectual Background of Economic Thought

Reading, Lectures, and Discussions. February – May, 1941

 

Read during semester

G. H. Sabine: A History of Political Theory

 

During February

Morris Cohen: Reason and Nature, pp.
A. N. Whitehead: The Function of Reason
Carl Becker: The Heavenly City of the 18th C. Phil’s
O. H. Taylor: Two Articles, Econ. and Nat. Law, Q.J.E. vol. 44, p. 1 and 205.

 

During March

Crane Brinton: The Pol. Ideas of the Eng. Romanticists
Othmar Spann: A History of Econ. Theory
Sidney Hook: The Meaning of Marx
and others

 

During April

Crane Brinton: Eng. Pol. Thought in the 19th Cent. Sections (see Table of Contents) on Bentham, Coleridge, Mill, Cobden, Carlyle, Bagehot, T.H. Green, Spencer.
Alexander Gray: The Development of Econ. Doctrine
R. G. Tugwell and Others: The Trend of Economics. Chapters by Mitchell, Tugwell, Wolfe, Clark, and Knight
Henry Simons: A Positive Program for Laissez-Faire

 

Lectures and Discussions

February 3. Introductory Lecture. Ideologies and Economics. Classical Economics and Liberalism, Marxism, Romantic Nationalism, Modern Liberalism and Positivism. General Background of Intellectual History. Beginnings of Modern Science, Liberalism, Positivism, and Romanticism.
February 5. Lecture. A Criticism of the Economic Interpretation of History.
February 7. Class Discussion of Two Previous Lectures.
February 10. Lecture. Classical Economics and the Moral Basis of Free Enterprise Liberalism.
February 12. Lecture. The Defects of the Old Liberalism, and the Present Crisis.
February 14. Class Discussion of Two Previous Lectures.
February 17. Lecture. Western Positivism and German Romanticism.
February 19. Lecture. Western Positivism and German Romanticism – continued.
February 21. Class Discussion.
February 24. Lecture. The Origins of Positivism and the Mechanistic Cosmology and Sociology.
February 26. Lecture. Teleology and Mechanism, Moral and Natural Science, Mediaeval and Modern Phil.
February 28. Class Discussion.
March 3. Lecture. The Transition from the Moral to the Social Sciences. Ambiguities in the Transition Period. Classical Economics and Liberalism.
March 5. Lecture. The recent Growth of Pure Positivism, and the Change in Liberalism.
March 7. Class Discussion.
March 10. Lecture. The Origins and Nature of the Romantic Movement.
March 12. Lecture. Kant, and Romanticism in German Philosophy and Social Science.
March 14. Class Discussion.
March 17. Lecture. Adam Mueller, Frederich List, and the Historical School: Organicism, Nationalism, and Historical Relativity.
March 19. Lecture. Spiritual-Cultural Science, Culture Epochs; Sombart and Weber; Spann and the Nazis.
March 21. Class Discussion.
March 24. Lecture. The Backgrounds of Marx: Utopian Socialism, Classical Economics, and Hegel. Contributions of Each.
March 26. Lecture. The Essentials of Marxism, and its Relations to the Liberal and Romantic Traditions.
March 28. Class Discussion.
April 7. Lecture. The Physiocrats and Adam Smith. Economic Self-Interest and a Moral, Social Order.
April 9. Lecture. Utilitarianism and Classical Economics.
April 11. Class Discussion.
April 14. Lecture. Ricardian Economics, Utility Economics, and Mathematical Economics.
April 16. Lecture. Marginal Productivity and Distributive Justice.
April 18. Class Discussion.
April 21. Lecture. Monopolistic Competition and its Implications for Public Policy.
April 23. Lecture. The Positivist—and—Modern-Liberal Trend in Monetary and Cycle Theory. J. M. Keynes.
April 25. Class Discussion.
April 28. Lecture. Capitalism, Democracy, Class Struggle, and Liberalism.
April 30. Lecture. Economic Planning in a Free Society.
May 2. Class Discussion.

______________________________________

Reading Period
May 5-27, 1941

Economics 1b:   Read the following:

Robbins, Nature and Significance of Economic Science.

______________________________________

Source: Harvard University Archives (HUC 8522.2.1). Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003: Box 2. Folder “1940-41”.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1952.

Categories
Courses Harvard Syllabus

Harvard. The Corporation and its Regulation. Course Syllabus. Crum, Mason & Chamberlin, 1934

The division of labor among the three professors jointly responsible for this course appears to be according to topic. The accounting business clearly fell to Crum.  Why Mason is listed ahead of Chamberlin (seniority? or order of topic within the course) is not explicit. For now I’ll just conjecture that Mason taught the Dewing (i.e. Finance) part of the course and Chamberlin then taught the Berle and Means material. The enrollment numbers indicate it was a popular course (maybe as pre-law or pre-MBA preparation for economics majors?).

More recently added:  the final examination questions for the course.

______________________________

[From the Course Catalogue]

Economics 4a 1hf. The Corporation and its Regulation

Half-course (first half-year). Tu., Th., Sat., at 11. Professor Crum, Associate Professor Mason, and Associate Professor Chamberlin.

 

Source: Announcement of the Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences during 1934—35 (second edition). Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. 31, No. 38 (September 20, 1934), p.126.

______________________________

[Course Enrollment]

4a 1hf. Professor Crum, Associate Professors Mason and Chamberlin.—The Corporation and its Regulation.

161 Total: 1 Graduate, 52 Seniors, 86 Juniors, 11 Sophomores, 11 Others.

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

______________________________

 

Economics 4a
The Corporation and its Regulation

Reading Assignments, 19341935

BOOKS:

S. Baldwin, Modern Political Institutions
Paton and Stevenson, Accounting Principles
A. S. Dewing, Financial Policy of Corporations (1934 edition) [link to 1926 edition]
Berle and Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property
Bonbright and Means, The Holding Company
Seager and Gulick, Trust and Corporation Problems
J. B. Hubbard, ed., Current Economic Policies

* * * * * * *

October 1-6: Baldwin, Ch. 6.
October 8-13: Paton and Stevenson, pp. 1-207 (Omit Ch. 5)
October 15-20: Paton and Stevenson, Ch. 22.
October 22-17: Dewing, Book IV, Chs. 7, 8,9.
October 29-November 3: Dewing, Book III, Chs. 3, 4.
November 5-10: Dewing, Book I, Chs. 3, 4, 5.
November 12-17: Dewing, Book V, Ch. 3 and pp. 730-736.
November 19-24: Berle and Means, Book II, Chs. 1, 2, 3.
November 26-December 1 Berle and Means, Book II, Chs. 5-8, Book IV (complete).
December 3-8: Bonbright and Means, Chs. 1, 2, 3, 6 (omit Supplment), 13.
December 10-15: Berle and Means, Book III (complete).
Hubbard, pp. 575-610.
December 17-22: Seager and Gulick, Chs. 25, 27.
Hubbard, pp. 110-126.

* * *  * * * *

Reading Period: Dewing, Book V, Chs. 9, 11, 12; Book VI, Ch. 5.
Berle and Means, Book I, Chs. 3, 4.
Hubbard, pp. 610-636.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC8522.2.1). Box 2, Folder “1934-1935”.

Image Source: Crum, Mason and Chamberlin from Harvard Album 1934.

Categories
Economists Harvard

Harvard. From Self-Report on Behavioral Sciences to Ford Foundation. Economics, 1953.

In 1953 five universities—Chicago, Harvard, Michigan, North Carolina and Stanford—were granted funds by the Ford Foundation to review the behavioral sciences in their institutions. The Committee that wrote Harvard’s Report was chaired by economist Edward S. Mason, then Dean of the Graduate School of Public Administration. Harvard’s Report sought “to evaluate strengths and weaknesses in the fields of the behavioral sciences at this university, to appraise needs, and to look forward to the future.”

Behavioral sciences was defined for the study to include “the fields of anthropology, economics, government, history, psychology, and sociology, with their applications in business, education, law, medicine, public health, and elsewhere.”

The following excerpt dealing with economics and its applications comes from Part II of the Report — Research and Scholarly Activity: Recent or Current, A. The Topical Classification.

This report presents a most convenient self-representation of Harvard Economics at mid-twentieth century. 

______________________________________

[p. 127]

V. Economic Institutions and Behavior

As in the other sections of this inventory, we have sought to view the study of economic institutions and behavior at Harvard in a fashion which reaches over disciplinary and organizational lines. The professional economists in the Department of Economics, the Graduate School of Public Administration, the Business School, and the Russian Research Center of course carry by far the largest part of economic studies at Harvard. In general we follow the economists’ divisions of subject matter but attempt to take notice of pertinent work in other fields. A substantial and important part of Harvard’s economic studies are conducted in the Business School and in relations with the Law School. While some of these studies gain attention here we would remind the reader that our primary focus is on the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and the reports on the professional schools in Part VI should be consulted as supplements to the account given here.

Special resources for the study of economics exist at Harvard and deserve to be recalled. In addition to the collections in the Widener Library, the Baker Library at the Harvard Business School and the library of the Graduate School of Public Administration provide exceptional facilities. Two journals, the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Review of Economics and Statistics, are edited and published through the Department of Economics. The seminars of the Graduate School of Public Administration are equipped with special funds and facilities for research activities. All of them direct and encourage the research of graduate students, and some have close connections with major research products.

One further general point calls for comment. The infusion of policy concerns into the work of Harvard’s economists is very strong. In classifying theses we originally sought to discriminate studies directed toward public policy, and we contemplated a separate topical discussion. It was, however, soon pointed out to us by economists that the pervasiveness of policy concerns made this unwise, and our final topical heading (v. 16) treats more of special applications than policy questions in general. This strength of policy orientation has brought sharp criticisms and cautions from some of our informants but it is generally accepted as an inevitable and desirable pattern in contemporary economic studies.

 

I. Economic Theory

Economic theory is certainly one of the proudest possessions of the behavioralsciences. Within Harvard as elsewhere it penetrates professional studies so extensively that separation of the discussion of theory from the discussion of special fields threatens to be artificial and arbitrary. In a sense our discussion of economic theory thus be [p. 128] comes a general introduction to much of what follows under later headings.

Economics at Harvard has always had a firm attachment to the main traditions of economic theory. The assaults of institutionalists and other critics of abstract theory have been felt less at Harvard than at some other major American universities — a fact which was pointed to with satisfaction by some of our informants in this survey. Instruction in the received body of economic theory has been of central importance in the curriculum, and the faculty has been prominent in the theoretical advances of the past generation. One of our professional informants traced the recent history of theory at Harvard in close relationship to the major trends in the field. He thought that the major developments between the end of the Twenties and World War II were the theory of monopolistic competition and the Keynesian “revolution” and that Harvard had been prominent in both. In the first of these, Professor Edward H. Chamberlin made the major American contribution in his Theory of Monopolistic Competition (now in its sixth edition, 1948). Professor Chamberlin has continued to devote his energies to the development of this theory, his latest efforts (as editor and author) appearing in Monopoly and Competition and Their Regulation (1954). The American phase of the Keynesian revolution is associated with the name of Professor Alvin H. Hansen and others of the Harvard staff, who were important disseminators and critics of the theory. Professor Hansen has recently published A Guide to Keynes, and another of Harvard’s Keynesians, Professor Seymour E. Harris, has a study of the life and influence of Keynes on the press.

Both of these developments in economic theory continue to have major importance at Harvard, both as general theory and in more particular contexts noted later.

The more recent development of economic theory is, like all contemporary movements, difficult to envisage clearly. It is particularly complicated by the strong upsurgence of mathematical economics, and the growing intimacy of relations among theory, econometrics, and statistics. One of the principal issues in the development of economics at Harvard centers around this shift in the character of the field. Some of the younger men we interviewed in this survey felt that Harvard was lagging in the kind of mathematical theory which is being vigorously developed at Chicago, Stanford, and to a lesser extent at some other institutions. One man expressed a strong concern that the training he had received at Harvard might be “out of date.” More senior economists expressed varied views on this issue. It is felt by several men that in Professor Wassily W. Leontief’s input-output analysis, Harvard has been the scene of one of the most important [p. 129] newer developments in economic theory. This work, with its intimate combination of empirical procedure and theory, is thought to typify the more recent patterns of economic analysis and to offer one of the major prospects for future development. Mathematical economics has also not gone without representation in the curriculum, as we note below (v. 14), in a more direct and extended discussion of the subject.

Harvard economists point with satisfaction to the penetration of theory into all the special domains of their field, and tend to rank the prestige of specializations in terms of the theoretical development they display. Pure theory has a prestige in economics which has no close parallel in any of the other fields we have studied. The feeling that it needs to be brought into close conjunction with empirical data is, nevertheless, strong, and we report the vigorous comments of one of our informants on the point:

“I think economics is the most advanced of the social sciences in some respects and the most backward in others. I would say that the critical thing for the development of any social science is effective integration between empirical data and the theoretical system of the social science. 1 would say that economics has achieved a unified body of analytical thought which the other social sciences have not yet reached. An important aspect of this theory is that it is genuinely not a theory of individuals, but a theory of the way a whole society operates. I think that the theory of general equilibrium, despite all the difficulties with it, is the crowning achievement of economics. All that Marshallian analysis amounts to is a little step beyond what the entrepreneur knows; it amounts to a kind of theory of rational behavior that might tell people how they ought to behave, but it doesn’t really tell people things that they haven’t known before. The general equilibrium theory does this, so that we’ve got a valuable theoretical tool. And now we’re getting to the stage where we’re filling our boxes with data. For a long time the statistical work really wasn’t very good. Instead of linking observations with theory, statisticians got interested in how you made observations. Now, I think, we’re getting farther. We’re beyond the stage of illustration; we’re to the pilot plant stage definitely, and perhaps even to large scale operations in some things. I think that the important things that lie before us are not so much in the kind of integration that crosses fields, perhaps, as in the correlation of theory and data within given problems — perhaps in given fields. I think that this sort of work has to be done by individuals too, or people working on both ends of the problem. You can’t have the kind of division of labor where the National Bureau takes care of the data and the Cowles Commission takes care of the theory; these things have to be worked out together.”

Given the prestige of theory, it would be offensive as well as inaccurate to permit the impression that only work mentioned under this heading qualifies as theory. Despairing of abstracting theoretical efforts from their special contexts, we have sought to note many of them in the discussion of special fields below. An alternative organization which considered all of the work of each staff member successively might have displayed the interpretation of theory and empirical investigation better than the organization here used. Reasons for the difficulty in drawing lines between special fields would also have [p. 130] appeared with special clarity. There are, however, compensating advantages in the procedure we have followed which recommended it as the best solution we could find to a difficult problem.

 

2. Economic Institutions and Systems

A broad concern with economic institutions and systems characterizes many types of behavioral scientists. The historian of the ancient world, of medieval Europe, or Tokugawa, Japan, must depict a set of economic institutions. The sociologist seeking a comprehensive view of a total society — and this is not an uncommon activity of Harvard’s sociologists, as we have seen in iv.6 — must describe and analyze economic institutions in a wider setting. The anthropologist doing a rounded ethnography or seeking a comparative understanding of primitive economics must delineate the institutional framework within which economic processes occur. These varied activities often proceed from no very explicit conceptual base or eschew an aim toward general analysis and theory. The work of historians and ethnologists typically has this a-theoretical character. A substantial amount of more generalizing or conceptual work can nevertheless be detected among behavioral scientists other than economists at Harvard.

Among the anthropologists at Harvard, Professors Douglas L. Oliver and John Pelzel have perhaps the most active concern with primitive economics; Professor Pelzel offers a graduate seminar in the field and has engaged in researches already noted (iv.6). The Values Project (ii.2) has included a study of Navaho Acquisitive Values, by Richard Hobson, to be published in the Peabody Museum Papers, vol. XLII, no. 3.

Professor Talcott Parsons in the Social Relations Department has had a special interest in economic questions throughout his career. His recent series of Marshall lectures (iv.l) are the latest fruits of this interest, which has had many facets but has laid special stress on the institutional structure typically assumed by economic theory. Dr. Francis X. Sutton, of the Department of Social Relations, has joined with Professor James S. Duesenberry, of the Department of Economics, in a course on the sociological analysis of economic behavior, which has laid particular stress on institutionalized patterns.

While a special “institutionalist” bias is avoided by Harvard’s economists, there is a substantial body of work which attends to the institutional characteristics of different economic systems. Instruction in the economics of socialism has had an established position in the curriculum. The late Professor Joseph Schumpeter’s Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy reflected his long association with this instruction, which is now continued by Dr. O. H. Taylor. The economic institutions of various countries of the contemporary world win attention in the work on economic development (v.9). [p. 131] The economy of Soviet Russia is the subject of extensive study. A major project of the Russian Research Center, under the direction of Professor Alexander Gerschenkron, includes the extensive variety of studies indicated in the following list:

J. S. Berliner, The Theory and Operation of the Soviet Firm
[Bibliography of economic articles in Soviet periodicals]
R. Campbell, Soviet Accounting Methods and their Influence on Pricing
R. Holtzman, A Study of Soviet Taxation
M. G. Clark, Economics of Soviet Steel
N. T. Dodge, The Soviet Tractor Industry and Mechanization
A. Erlich, Soviet Industrialization Controversy, 1925-1928
G. Grossman, Capital-Intensity: A Problem in Soviet Planning
D. R. Hodgman, Soviet Industrial Production, 1928-1951
H. Hunter, Soviet Transportation Policy
C. A. Recht, Urbanization and the Soviet Housing Shortage
F. Seton, The Structure of Soviet Economy, 1934

In another section of the Russian Research Center, a study of the budgets of Soviet urban families in 1940 is in progress. Professor Gerschenkron has also been engaged in other studies of the Russian economy under the auspices of the Rand Corporation. The construction of a machinery production index, investigations of the iron and steel, coal, and petroleum industries, and a study of power, have recently been brought to completion and a study of ruble-dollar prices for Soviet machinery is under way.

A number of studies of the American economy, which depart from the strictly technical framework of economic theory and emphasize broader political and social elements, probably deserve to be considered in this connection. Professor John K. Galbraith’s recent book, American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power (1952), presents a general account of the working of the American economy with particular emphasis on the role of monopolistic elements on both sides of many markets which act to limit the disadvantages to the economy which would result from such imperfections operating on either side alone. He is currently engaged in further development of this analysis. Professor Sumner H. Slichter has also devoted himself to a general account of the economic system of the United States, The American Economy (1953), and is presently engaged in a consideration of the long-run prospects for American capitalism.

The diffuse nature of considerations which can be brought to bear on economic institutions and systems suggest this context for our remarks on the relation between economics and other disciplines at Harvard. The physical juxtaposition of economists and political scientists in the Littauer building of the Graduate School of Public Administration is viewed with satisfaction by men from both fields. Great intimacy of working relations between the fields seems not, however, to be common practice. While a joint degree in Political Economy and [p. 132] Government is offered and we encountered two men who spoke warmly of political economy as a worthy discipline, a serious effort at merging of fields (comparable say, to that which has been attempted in the Department of Social Relations) has not been made. The highly technical character of economics and the consequent demands it makes on graduate students and younger men in the field were pointed out to us as deterrents to interdisciplinary work. An “atmosphere” discouraging such ventures was alleged by one of our informants:

“I saw something of the so-called field of political economy at X University and certainly didn’t think much of it. I don’t know of anything in particular of that sort that is going on around here. I used to be interested in this kind of thing myself; I was interested in sociology and economics, but when I got into my work, I found that there was a real requirement of specialization. This was something that was gently indicated to me by the professors and people in the Department. I don’t know that anybody actually ever told me I had better watch out for combined fields, but the opinion that you had to was unanimous among graduate students. If a man started to work in some other field, Professor X always tried to get him transferred to that other department.”

Ties between the Social Relations area and economics have been noted above in a joint course, but they have not been extensive and we encountered only very mild sentiment that they should be strengthened.

 

3. Consumption and Distribution (including Marketing)

A logical and secure place for consumption and distribution as a distinct subject in the curriculum of economic studies is perhaps not easy to establish. Given a theoretical cast the subject merges into the general framework of economic analysis; given a more empirical cast it tends toward the concrete, practical problems which make up courses in marketing and bring it under a professional school rather than the Arts and Sciences curricula. Nevertheless, consumption and distribution has a place of de facto importance in the instruction and research of the economics staff. The problems of agricultural economics have stimulated much attention to the subject by Professor John D. Black and others associated with him. In this general area, Dr. Ayers Brinser is currently bringing to conclusion a two-year study of the consumption of meat, which was sponsored by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. The study sought to determine the varying patterns of meat purchases among a sample of consumers from different economic classes.

A collaborative report on the economy of Puerto Rico by a group of Harvard economists headed by Professor Galbraith is now ready for the press. This report emphasizes the marketing aspects of the economic growth problem. Drawing on his experience in field studies in Puerto Rico, Assistant Professor Richard H. Holton is studying the role of commodity distribution in pre-industrial societies. A study of Saving among Upper-Income Families in Puerto Rico by Dr. Eleanor E. Maccoby of the Department of Social Relations (in collaboration with [p. 133] Frances Fielder) appeared in the past year. An extensive interviewing program provided the data for this study, which was sponsored by the Social Science Research Center of the University of Puerto Rico. Professor Duesenberry has continued work on the theory of consumption presented in his Income, Saving, and the Theory of Consumer Behavior (1949).

 

4. Public Finance, Fiscal Policy, and Taxation (cf. also Law and Business School reports in VI)

The strong interests in public finance, fiscal policy, and taxation, which have characterized economics in the recent past have been amply represented at Harvard. Professor Hansen’s pioneering role in the development and implementation of fiscal policy is well known and his work continues at the present time. His recent appearances before Congressional committees on the proposed tax program and the President’s Economic Report point to his continuing interest in national policies. Professor Arthur Smithies has recently completed a book on the federal budgeting process and other aspects of fiscal policy and public finance. The study is an attempt to bring theoretical analysis to bear on the decisions involved in governmental spending, and public investment.

A substantial part of Harvard’s work on taxation is located in the Law School and the Business School and is noted in the reports on these schools. Professor Stanley S. Surrey of the Law School, Professor Smithies, and Professor John Keith Butters of the Business School come together for a Seminar on Taxation offered jointly by the Department of Economics and the Graduate School of Public Administration. Professor Butters, who has been collaborating in a large-scale Merrill Foundation study of the effects of taxation on investment and incentives, at the Business School, also offers instruction in public finance under the Department of Economics (with Assistant Professor Lawrence E. Thompson of the Business School faculty).

A work like Professor Harris’ report on the New England economy includes much material on comparable problems. Assistant Professor Arnold M. Soloway is presently engaged in the study of indirect or consumption taxes for the city of Boston, and has a general interest in the financial problems of state and local government. The finance of state and local governments has, however, been less extensively studied at Harvard than has public finance at the national level. Recent planning in the Graduate School of Public Administration aims toward extending such work in the context of a general program on state and local government.

Dr. Theodore S. Baer of the Department of Government has recently turned his interests to taxation and public finance and has devoted the past year to these studies under a Ford Foundation fellowship. An examination of our classification of theses reveals that economists have [p. 134] not monopolized the study of these fields. Theses on the grain tribute system of the Manchus in China, Spanish royal finances in the sixteenth century, and the development of direct taxation in nineteenth-century England remind us that historians occasionally venture into these fields. Political scientists have also studied the financial problems of local governments in four recent theses.

Despite the apparent abundance of activity, members of the Depart ment of Economics have pointed out to us that no economist on the present staff is primarily devoted to research and instruction in public finance. Arrangements for instruction have depended on ties with the Business School in the persons of Professors Dan Throop Smith and John Keith Butters.

 

5. Money and Banking

The traditional field of money and banking has undergone marked changes in recent years. A decrease in attention to the institutional detail of banking operations and a heightened concern with the general analysis of money and income has blurred the lines between this field and others. Harvard’s practice in retaining the traditional label was pointed out to us as a conservative one, but the work of the staff follows modern tendencies and spreads over traditional divisions. Professors Alvin H. Hansen, John H. Williams and Seymour E. Harris have been principal figures in Harvard’s work in this area. In long association with the Federal Reserve System, Professor Williams has applied economic doctrine to the guidance of policy, and has contributed extensively to the discussion of monetary problems. His recent publications include Postwar Monetary Plans and Other Essays, and the noted Stamp Memorial Lecture for 1952. His recent work has been particularly concerned with international monetary problems and is noted below under v.ll. Professor Harris does no current teaching in the field but has made many contributions to the literature.

Among the junior staff, Dr. Ira O. Scott is preparing for publication his study of postwar monetary policy, which includes a theory of assets.

 

6. Business Fluctuations

The difficulty of establishing clear divisions among the special fields of economics shows itself strongly with respect to business fluctuations. So much of economic theory and its applications in fields such as international trade, or money and banking, has been concerned with business fluctuations that the subject is altogether lacking in clear boundaries. We confine ourselves here to reporting work in which the concern with business fluctuations seems especially prominent. Professor Hansen has devoted much of his career to the subject and his recent contributions include a volume on Business Cycles and National Income (1952). Professor Haberler’s earlier study made a large contribu [p. 135] tion to this subject, which remains one of his principal interests. Professor Duesenberry is working on a study which attempts to integrate the business cycle with the mechanism of economic growth in a coherent theory. Professor Slichter’s numerous publications contain much analysis of fluctuations in business conditions.

 

7. Industrial Organization

We use the label “industrial organization” here in a somewhat broader sense than is common at Harvard. At least three sorts of work can be detected in the University at present which have to do with the organization of industry. The first of these is the work in industrial sociology carried out in the Department of Social Relations, the Business School, and among the labor economists. The second sort of work is represented in the technical studies of management problems which bulk large in the output of the Division of Research of the Harvard Business School. Thirdly, there are the studies of particular industries, problems of monopoly and competition, etc., which have won a coherent status among Harvard’s economists as the special field of “industrial organization.” We divide each of these ranges of work separately.

a. Industrial Sociology. Sociological journals now burgeon with studies of the internal structure of business organization, many of which continue a tradition established some twenty years ago at the Harvard Business School in the work of Professors Elton Mayo and Fritz J. Roethlisberger. The present work at the Business School is discussed in the section of our report on that school, and we here confine ourselves to the rather limited work within the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Professor George C. Homans of the Department of Social Relations has continued an interest of long standing in the field. His recent activities have included a study of the social organization of a large office in a public utility company, and an effort to bring the study of work groups into a general analysis of small group structure (iv.2). Recent theses from the Department of Social Relations include the published studies by Elliott Jaques, The Changing Culture of a Factory, and Theodore V. Purcell, S.J., The Worker Speaks his Mind on Company and Union. Some of the work by labor economists might merit classification here but is treated under another heading (v.8).

b. Technical Studies of Management Problems. By far the most important locus of studies of this character is to be found in the Business School. (See Part VI of this report.) We note, however, that economists’ work on industrial organization and in input-output analysis sometimes leads into highly technical studies of the nature of particular industries. A few theses seemed to us to reflect this tendency and the importance of technical data for input-output analyses and other “non- aggregative” studies was stressed by our informants. [p. 136]

c. Industry Studies, etc. The lists of recent theses in economics show a large number (some 38 in the five-year period, 1948-1953) devoted to pricing, competition, and other economic matters in particular industries. A majority of these industry studies derive from an extensive program of studies in what has come to be known as the field of “industrial organization.” The development of this field was described as follows in one of our interviews:

“Well. I should perhaps first begin by saying that this is very much of an American field, as it’s actually studied. Of course, there’s a background in the classical writers. Marshall’s book on Industry and Trade was really a pioneer work in this field, and along about 1916 there was Dennis Robertson’s book on the control of industry. It’s only been rather recently that this field has gotten consolidated, that it’s gotten a recognizable structure. There was, of course, a lot of work on the industries that we now attend to. There was, for example, a great deal of work on the railroads. There were a lot of people who were railroad economists, but they really didn’t have any solid theoretical grounding in their work. Really, the first good article on railroad pricing policies was Don Wallace’s article in which he got involved in a controversy with I’igou. The trouble with these railroad economists was that they were not analytically well-trained people. And there was a great deal of work in public utility economics. All of this, however, had nothing much to go on but the classical pure competition model. It was really the theory of monopolistic competition that brought a new interest and gave a new focus to the field. Essentially, this has provided the conceptual framework for the industry studies, and it set up a whole new line of problems in general terms that people could get their teeth into. I would say that now over the last couple of decades the field has gotten very well established. J. M. Clark holds one of the leading positions in this field, and there are also Professor Edward S. Mason and a number of his students. There were other people, and other lines of work that went into this development, that I perhaps ought to mention. There was all the old stuff on trusts and monopolies, people like W. Z. Ripley and Elliott Jones, and so forth, but it was really only after the monopolistic competition theory appeared and the subject got tied to theoretical interests of a general sort that the subject developed. There were industry studies in the Marshallian tradition, but the important work seems to have been done in the last couple of decades.”

As our informant indicates, instruction and research in this field at Harvard has been guided by Professor Mason, with the collaboration of Professor Carl Kaysen, Assistant Professor James W. McKie and others. A graduate seminar and a major project serve as foci for the research effort. The seminar serves to guide graduate students undertaking the industry studies which provide basic materials for more general studies in the field. The Merrill Foundation for the Advancement of Financial Knowledge has sponsored the major research project now under way with the collaboration of several economists and lawyers from Harvard and other institutions. The ultimate aim of this five-year study is the development of workable policy in the fields of monopoly and competition. In addition to industry studies, a series of so-called “functional” studies have been planned on such subjects as patents, industrial research, advertising, the areas exempted under the existing antitrust legislation, and procedural problems under the present [p. 137] law. Several members of Harvard Law faculty (Professors David F. Cavers, Robert R. Bowie, and Kingman Brewster; Assistant Professors Albert M. Sacks and Donald T. Trautman), the Business School faculty (Professors John V. Lintner and Bertrand Fox), and economists from other institutions have been members of the group. Extended seminar discussions have been devoted to working out a conceptual scheme for the guidance of the project and the general volume which is planned to embody its conclusions.

In addition to his work on this project, Professor Kaysen is working on a book the intent of which is the derivation of typical patterns of reaction in oligopolistic market structures and the application of probability techniques to the determinate of price and output under such conditions. He has also recently completed work as a “law clerk” for Federal Judge Charles E. Wyzanski in the antitrust prosecution of the United Shoe Machinery Company. Assistant Professor McKie has been engaged as a member of the Merrill project and is also working on two additional projects, one on oil exploration and the other on oil conservation (this latter in collaboration with Professor Kaysen). A longer term project is a study of existing industry studies in an attempt to determine relationships between structure and functioning in these industries.

 

8. Labor and Collective Bargaining

A vigorous program of research and instruction in the field of labor economics has been maintained by Professors Sumner H. Slichter and John T. Dunlop. The Baker Library of the Harvard Business School and the Industrial Relations Library at the Graduate School of Public Administration have resources of exceptional magnitude for work in the field. A Trade Union Program was started in 1942 at the suggestion of leaders of the labor movement. The Program is directed by an Executive Committee from the Faculties of Arts and Science and of Business Administration and has the purpose of training union representatives for executive responsibility in the labor movement. The Jacob Wertheim Research Fellowship for the Betterment of Industrial Relations provides funds for a series of publications in the field, and twelve volumes have thus far appeared under the imprint of the Harvard University Press.

Professor Slichter, as Lamont University Professor, has guided instruction and research on both sides of the Charles River, at the Business School, in the Department of Economics, and at the Graduate School of Public Administration.

Professor Dunlop’s current research activities include several projects. A critical appraisal of wage stabilization is being conducted jointly with Professor Archibald Cox of the Law School under a grant from the Sloan Foundation. A comparative analysis of the labor [p. 138] problem in economic development joins Harvard with other universities (California, Chicago, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) in a project supported by the Ford Foundation. Professor Dunlop is directing work assigned to Harvard on France, Italy, and certain topical questions. In addition to these research projects, Professor Dunlop continues his primary interest in wage determination, and is completing a book on collective bargaining and public policy. In the near future he will begin a history of collective bargaining in the United States during the period of 1933-1953.

Dr. Martin Segal is currently working on two projects concerned with the study of intra-plant wage structures, and will soon begin a study of the internal wage structure of three industries located largely in New England. An investigation of the managerial decisions on the introduction of changes in unionized plants is also planned.

 

9. Economic Development

Economic studies inevitably reflect the major problems of the contemporary scene. As one of our informants pointed out to us, the great focus of economists’ efforts in the late Thirties was on the fiscal policy problems relating to the Keynesian doctrines and the Great Depression. At present, the dominant focus of interest seems to be on economic development, reflecting a broadened view of the world and a worried preoccupation with formerly exotic areas. Despite widespread dissatisfaction with the state of theoretical approaches to developmental problems, economists now seem to shape work in several special fields about these problems. Thus it is now rather arbitrary to divide the study of economic development from studies in agricultural economics (v.10) or international economic problems (v.11). These fields, which bore a quite different complexion a decade or so ago, have now become thoroughly infused with developmental problems.

The diffuse spread of work in economic development means that it is exceptionally difficult to draw the lines about those researches which merit note here. We note at least one general study; Assistant Professor Robert E. Baldwin is collaborating on a book dealing specifically with the mechanism of economic growth and drawing heavily on classical and neo-classical economics. Professor Dunlop’s participation in a comparative study of the labor problem in economic development has been mentioned above (v.8). A major Ford-sponsored project on the economic development of Pakistan is being directed by Professor Mason, Dean of the Graduate School of Public Administration. This is an action rather than a research program, but it depends upon research studies, and several members of the Harvard faculty, including Professor Leontief, will act as consultants. Dr. Douglas Paauw has specialized in the development problems of the Far East and is engaged in research and instruction on that area. The study of economic growth [p. 139] problems in Puerto Rico by Professor Galbraith, Assistant Professor Holton and others has been noted above (v.2). Professor Galbraith offers a seminar in the field and is currently working on a “theory of poverty” with important implications for underdeveloped areas. Professor Holton is studying the nature of the entrepreneurial activity in underdeveloped areas, an interest which also finds representation in the studies of the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History (cf. v. 12 below). Professor Duesenberry’s current research (v.6) bears heavily on the problem of differential development of economies, and Professor Gerschenkron’s studies in the industrialization of Europe (v. 12) are largely concerned with economic development. On the domestic scene, Professor Harris has recently directed a study of the problems of New England in general, and of the textile industry in particular. His book on The Economics of New England was published in 1952, and a report on the New England textile industry by a committee appointed by the Conference of New England Governors appeared in 1953. Professor Mason’s continued interest in resource supplies and in international oil problems involves him in a concern with underdeveloped areas.

The immediate future seems to promise a vigorous continuation of this varied work on development problems. The demand for such studies from the world at large and from the student body at Harvard is strong. Our list includes 20 theses on economic development in 1948—1953, and there are numerous others in progress at the moment. The interest of the foreign students who make up an increasingly important fraction of the student body in the Graduate School of Public Administration is strongly focused on developmental problems, since a high percentage of these students come from areas like Asia and Latin America where these problems have a compelling importance. The intellectual resources which economics and related fields can bring to these problems seem not to be altogether satisfactory. One economist put the problem sharply by asserting that all the established general propositions in the field could be written on a postcard. The area programs (cf. areal classification below) and Harvard’s extensive staff of scholars with competences in special areas provide extensive resources, but the lack of a general theoretical approach is keenly felt. The need for interdisciplinary attack on these problems is generally felt, and is exemplified in the area programs. A critic of this approach felt, however, that interdisciplinary study of particular areas tended to discourage the kind of general analysis he hoped might be developed and applied to an extensive array of cases. Other economists were not anxious to see economic development treated as a special field and suggested that the present dispersion of activity among economic historians, agricultural economists, and others, was appropriate to the current state of knowledge. [p. 140]

 

10. Agricultural Economics

 A remarkable total of 43 theses in agricultural economics accepted during the years 1948-1953 points to the prominence of this field at Harvard and the strong program maintained for many years by Professor Black. The work of Professor Black, now emeritus but still very active, has brought students to Harvard from all over the country and reached a sector of national life which no other part of the University’s work has reached so successfully. Particularly through students in the Graduate School of Public Administration, a major influence has been exerted on the direction of agricultural policies.

Professor Black’s long interest in production economics, or the application of economic reasoning to farm problems, is being channeled currently into a five-year input-output study of 241 dairy farms in New England. The goal is a determination of the best allocation of resources on such farms. Dr. Brinser has been associated with Professor Black in this and other work discussed under v.3 above. The increasing association of agricultural economics with development problems has been noted in our general comments on economic development. The interests of Professor Galbraith in agricultural economics bear this stamp as do Professor Black’s current and projected studies in India and Pakistan.

 

11. International Economic Problems

The field of international economics has very intimate ties to other special fields within the corpus of economic studies. It has always reflected the major currents of economic analysis in general; at present it shows the impress of economic development interests. Professors Seymour E. Harris, Gottfried Haberler, and John H. Williams have interests of long standing in the field, and have regularly offered courses and graduate seminars in it. Professor Williams has recently completed service on the Randall Commission and participated in the writing of its report. He is also currently revising for publication a series of five lectures on international financial problems given at the Center of Latin American Monetary Studies in August, 1953. Professor Harris has a volume on the dollar problem which will soon be ready for the press. A regular flow of articles, reviews, etc., from Professor Haberler point to his continuing activity in the field. A diversity of points of view is to be found among these men, with Professor Haberler advocating a free multilateral trade position which is not shared by his colleagues.

 

12. Economic History

The study of economic history at Harvard spreads over the departmental lines suggested by its name, and finds a home in other sites as well. In the Department of Economics, Professor Gerschenkron offers [p. 141] courses in the field and is engaged in various researches. The industrialization of Western Europe, particularly in the nineteenth century, will be the subject of books of general interest for the study of economic development. It will view the countries of Western Europe as “underdeveloped areas” of their time and treat their economic growth with attention to such factors as the role of investment bankers, resource patterns, etc. Professor Gerschenkron’s Russian studies (v.2) also include an economic history which he is currently writing. Other work includes the supervision of a translation of Eli Heckscher’s Economic History of Sweden, scheduled for publication in the fall of 1954.

Professor Gerschenkron has also been one of the directors of the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History. This Center, established in 1948 with a large grant from the Rockefeller Foundation, has fostered numerous studies in its designated field. Biographical studies of entrepreneurs have been prominent in the work of the Center, but studies of a more general character, such as those on the origins and backgrounds of American businessmen by William Miller and co-workers, have been fostered. A volume of essays, Men in Business (1952) edited by William Miller, H. L. Passer’s The Electrical Manufacturers 1875- 1880 (1953), and a study of Railway Leaders: 1845-1890 (1953) by Professor Thomas Cochran (University of Pennsylvania) have been published in a special series from this Center. From its inception, the Center has been an interuniversity project, although it has been closely associated with Harvard in its location and through Professor Arthur H. Cole (Harvard Business School), its director, others of its executive Committee, and the research staff. Through fellowships to graduate students, conferences, and the publication of a journal, Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, it has done much to stimulate work in the field.

A broad interest in social and economic history characterizes several members of the history staff. In the medieval field, Assistant Professor Bryce D. Lyon is preparing a study of the money fief in Western Europe, and offers a general course on social and economic history in the period. In later periods of European history, Professors Wilbur K. Jordan, David E. Owen, Michael Karpovich, and others have had an extensive concern with economic history. In the American field, Professors Frederick Merk and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Sr., have fostered economic history, both in their own studies and in theses of their students.

The work of the Business School in business history should be recalled in this connection, and the reader is referred to the Business School report for an account of it.

Although we have enumerated some 18 theses in economic history of the period 1948-1953, and several staff members pointed with satisfaction to present instruction or past achievements, there was concern [p. 142] expressed about the shortage of capable scholars in this field. A weakness in economic history in the United States, as compared with England or Germany, was alleged by economists. Professor Gerschenkron has recently brought about a notable upturn in activity, but the numbers of economists doing history theses have been relatively few at Harvard as at other American universities. Harvard historians were divided in their assessment of the field; there were some who thought that the record showed a commendable degree of interest and competence, but there were others who detected a general avoidance of economic history as dull and tedious work. The proper training of economic historians presents unresolved problems. Economists expressed the view that a sound background in theory and general economics was the indispensable base for studies in the field, and noted the difficulty of inducing men to add the labor of acquiring the necessary historical knowledge and linguistic equipment to the already formidable demands of graduate study in economics. Discussions in the Committee have led to some re-examination of the division of instructional labor between the Departments of History and Economics which may help solve the difficult problems of training.

 

13. Government and Business

Examination of course offerings and the lists of theses have led us to recognize studies of the relations of business and government under a special heading. In the arrangement of work characteristic at Harvard, however, the great bulk of work having to do with government regulation and related matters is encompassed in the field of industrial organization, and we have treated it as such (v.7.c above).

 

14. Statistics and Econometrics

The field of economics has long had a heavy dependence on statistical work, and the possibilities of mathematical expression of economic theory were realized in the nineteenth century. As long as statistics remained a fairly simple subject guiding the interpretation of empirical findings, and theory was contrived without precise attention to “operational” testing, a reasonably clear distinction between “economic statistics” and “mathematical economics” was possible. Recent decades have greatly complicated the picture. Technical developments in statistics have made the subject highly mathematical and brought it to convergence with other developments in mathematic economics. A new term, “econometrics,” which was fostered by the Econometric Society and its journal, Econometrica, now serves as a designation of much of the recent work, which might with equal propriety be called simply economic theory or statistics.

Harvard has responded to these developments and participated in them in varying measures. In Professor Leontief’s Harvard Economic [p. 143] Research Project, a major technique of econometric analysis, the input- output analysis, has had its principal locus of development. With intellectual roots in the general equilibrium analysis of Walras, the input-output technique is an attempt to give quantitative analyses of the behavior of total national economies without going over to the aggregative techniques of national income analysis (and thus sacrificing a picture of structural interrelations within the economy). Professor Leontief has been engaged in this work for more than two decades, beginning on a modest scale in the Thirties and expanding rapidly during the war in connection with several branches of the national government. Since the war, the Project has been maintained on a large scale with support from the government and the Rockefeller Foundation, employing about twenty people under the direction of Professor Leontief and his executive assistant, Mrs. Elizabeth Gilboy. Models for the American economy have been worked out which trace the interrelationships among as many as 500 different sectors. Such work is obviously expensive and requires a substantial organization such as Professor Leontief has maintained. Among many recent publications from the Project, we note the collaborative volume by Professor Leontief and others, Studies in the Structure of the American Economy (1953).

Instruction in this and other econometric techniques is offered in the Department of Economics by Professor Leontief and Assistant Professor John S. Chipman. Professor Chipman is carrying on two research programs, both concerned with capital and interest. The first is on the construction and application of dynamic models of the sort known as linear programming models, and involves attention to technological questions. The second is a study of liquidity preference.

Professor Guy H. Orcutt is the principal figure in the recent develop ment of other statistical and quantitative studies. His well-known work on the problem of auto-correlation in time series is continuing. He is preparing a book on statistical inference and a study of the demand for residential housing. The instruction on economic statistics is primarily in Professor Orcutt’s hands and as organizer and active participant in a Research Seminar on Quantitative Economics, he is actively working on problems concerned with the economic behavior of households and firms. Studies currently being conducted under the auspices of this seminar include:

E. Kuh — Statistical Investment Functions
J. Meyer — An Econometric Investigation of Postwar Investment in Manufacturing Industries
J. Tryon — Factors Influencing the Behavior of Business Inventories
F. Gillis — Sources and Uses of Funds: Selected Corporations: 1920-1950
B. Chinitz — The Demand for Cash Balances
H. Miller — An Empirical Study of the Demand for Refrigerators
V. Lippitt — Determinants of Demand for Consumer Durable Goods [p. 144]
H. Allison — Consumer Level Analysis of Demand for Meat, Fish, and Poultry
C. Zwick — The Demand for Meat

While there is respect for the work actually being carried out in these fields at Harvard, we encountered much discussion on the need for further development. It is generally conceded that Harvard is not so strong in mathematical economics and statistics as some other universities. The problem of statistics is one which transcends the Department of Economics and we devote a special section to it at the conclusion of this inventory. The general result of our survey of Harvard’s statistical resources may, however, be anticipated here; it is that they fall short of adequacy to the expanding needs of the behavioral sciences. Economists at Harvard feel this weakness in statistics and we repeatedly encountered the assertion that a man who wanted a first-rate training for technical work in the field would be better elsewhere. Others forms of mathematical work in economics show a similar weakness at Harvard as compared with some institutions.

As we suggested in our discussion of economic theory above, there is no clear unanimity on the need for Harvard to devote more of its resources to mathematical work. Especially among senior members of the Department of Economics, there is much disquietude at the luxuriant growth of this work. As one man put it sharply,

“I’d like to see a deflation of some of the mathematics that’s going on in economics. I think there’s a really serious threat here. This is the kind of work that attracts the ablest people, and they get so concentrated on mathematics that they scorn anything else … I think we ought to teach mathematical economics, but we ought to keep it in its proper place. I think there are real dangers of people getting involved with this kind of work and then making public policy proposals and forgetting the assumptions [in their abstract models]. . . . I’m disposed to fight this trend toward mathematics.”

Some members of the staff feel an uncomfortable lack of equipment in assessing mathematical work; one told of learning calculus when he was forty to “protect himself.” Others have the necessary training without being primarily mathematical economists. Among these latter there is a pronounced concern for balance. They regard much of the current mathematical work as of little consequence in the development of economics, and would deplore a heavy concentration of graduate training on mathematical technique. The importance of mathematical and statistical competence is nevertheless stressed and, on balance, it is probably accurate to say that sentiment tips toward further strengthening of Harvard training in these respects.

 

15. History of Thought

A generally poor state of American scholarship in the history of economic thought was pointed out by two economists we interviewed in this survey. The increasingly technical character of economics and [p. 145] its divorcement in America from the European traditions of broad, diffuse scholarship were suggested as possible explanations. The only active scholar currently on the staff is Dr. Taylor, who has offered courses which trace the history of economic thought in relation to the broad movements of intellectual history; he has published numerous essays in the field and is now engaged in preparing a volume of them for publication. There is a notable absence of younger men in the field — a situation in sharp contrast with the lively activity in intellectual history and the history of political thought. If Harvard has a recent record of strength in the field, hospitality to scholars trained abroad is in part responsible. The scholarly legacy of Professor Joseph Schumpeter included a monumental History of Economic Analysis (2 V., 1954) which appeared after his death. While not actively working in the field, Professors Haberler, Gerschenkron, and Leontief maintain serious interests in it.

 

16. Applications of Economic Analysis to Welfare Programs, Education, etc.

The pervasiveness of concerns with public policy in the work of Harvard’s economists has been pointed out above, and illustrated under various special fields. Problems of economic policy arise in many areas which are not as such the special concern of economists. Professor Harris has been particularly attentive to such problems and has devoted himself to a series of studies in the economics of social security, education, health, and other welfare programs. The economic problems posed by the social security programs are a familiar subject for economists and our theses list shows about one per year devoted to them. Less common is the kind of work represented in Professor Harris’ Market for College Graduates (1949), and his current work on the economics of cancer (for a University committee on cancer research). The need for more ample study of the support of public education was stressed in discussions during this survey, and we have heard the economics of medicine described as an “underdeveloped area” in economics.

 

Summary

An attempt to assess the strengths and weaknesses of economics at Harvard encounters the inevitable difficulty presented by the lack of commonly accepted standards of judgment. To some, the Department of Economics appears to give insufficient attention to mathematical economics and econometrics. To others, the heavy emphasis on theory is suspect. Still others may complain of the considerable extent and variety of attention given to applied fields. To these latter critics it should be pointed out that the Department is required not only to provide a professional training for economists, but to meet the needs [p. 146] of the Graduate School of Public Administration with its heavy emphasis on practice and policy. Perhaps the best general description of the economics offering is that it is relatively eclectic — not so much methodologically as in scope of attempted coverage — with all that this implies, both good and bad.

Despite this scope, there are inevitably important areas of economic inquiry that are neglected. The field of demography is one, and this field, which must necessarily overlap several departments, is, in fact, extensively treated by none. There is almost no systematic work in transportation and public utilities, fields which in many universities are-given a prominent place. The absence of mathematical statistics is a lack shared by many of the behavioral science departments, a lack sufficiently important to merit special treatment in this report. In an ideal department with unlimited resources, such deficiencies necessarily would excite adverse comment. Under existing circumstances, at Harvard, it is not so obvious that all such fields should be cultivated if their cultivation means the abandonment of current work. The emphasis preferred by the Department of Economics has always been on men rather than fields, and it is by no means clear that this emphasis is misplaced.

It seems fair to note that the Department has been criticized within the University, and to some extent outside, for emphasizing research at the expense of teaching, particularly of undergraduates. This criticism, however, seems less justified now than it was a few years ago and. in any case, it is within the competence of the Department to improve its teaching performance without in any material way lessening its emphasis on research.

Finally, there is some evidence that the Department of Economics is less inclined than most other behavioral science departments to explore the periphery of its field and to seek to establish bridges giving access to the other disciplines. The Committee suspects that this may be characteristic of Economics Departments in other universities. In some ways, of course, this confidence in its own “mystery” has been a source of strength to Economics. In dealing, however, with certain problems in which economists are becoming intensely interested, such as economic development and the various aspects of public policy, an isolationist attitude is not likely to prove fruitful.

 

Source: The behavioral sciences at Harvard; report by a faculty committee. June, 1954.

Image Source: Faculty picture of Edward S. Mason in Harvard Album, 1950.

Categories
Courses Harvard

Harvard. Economic Theory I. Chamberlin, 1947-48

The 1947 requirements for Ph.D. students are vague with respect to the precise courses that would adequately prepare candidates for their core theory examinations. At that time Economic Theory I (course number changed from 101 to 201 in 1948) was taught by Edward Chamberlin and Economic Theory II (course number changed from 102 to 202 in 1948) by Wassily Leontief. While I suppose there would have been graduate students with sufficient preparation who could have taken both the MW(F) course by Chamberlin and the TTh(S) course offered by Leontief (both at noon) simultaneously, I could easily imagine these courses would have been taken in sequence over two years by typical students. Thus this posting gives the reading list for Economics 101 with Chamberlin for 1947-48 and the next posting will be for Economics 202 with Leontief for 1948-49.

A comparison with Chamberlin’s reading list from a decade earlier reveals a modest streamlining of his course with the only major change being the addition of Welfare Economics to the end of the second semester.

From the Harvard archives’ collection of final examination papers, I was able to transcribe the questions from the final examinations in both Economics 101a and 101b for the 1947-48 academic year.

Bibliographic note: I have added the explicit titles of readings only identified by number in Chamberlin’s reading list from a published collection of reprinted essays and papers edited by Frank E. Norton. The title Explorations in economics refers to Explorations in economics: Notes and essays contributed in honor of F. W. Taussig published by McGraw-Hill in 1936.

__________________________

Economics 101a
Fall, 1947

 

I.  Brief Survey of Markets; Demand and Supply

Boulding, Economic Analysis, Chapters 1-5; pp. 177-9.

Marshall, Principles, Book V, chapters 1, 2.

Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 2.

Mill, Principles, Book III, Chapter 2.

 

II. Cost vs. Utility, and the Marshallian Synthesis

Mill, Principles, Book III, Chapters 3, 5.

Boehm-Bawerk, Positive Theory of Capital, Books III, IV.

Marshall, Principles, Appendix I; Book V, chapters 3-5; Book IV, Chapter 13; Book V, Chapters 8, 9, Appendix H.

Boulding, Economic Analysis, Chapter 7.

Suggested:

Ricardo, Political Economy, Chapter 1.

Mill, Book III, Chapters 1, 4, 6.

Jevons, Theory of Political Economy, Chapters 3, 4.

Marshall, Book III and remainder of Book V

Keynes – “Alfred Marshall,” Economic Journal, September 1924. (Also in Keynes, Essays in Biography.)

 

III.  Further Analysis of the Production and Consumption Functions; Indifference Curves

Boulding, Chapters 22, 23, 29, 30 (omit pp. 669-676).

Monopolistic Competition, Appendix B.

Suggested:

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chapters 1-3.

 

IV.  Monopoly and Monopolistic Competition

Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Chapter 2.

Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition, Chapters 1-7 (to page 149); Appendix C.

Alsberg, C. L., “Economic Aspects of Adulteration and Imitation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1931.

Robinson, Imperfect Competition, Chapter 15, Sections 1-4.

Suggested:

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 9.

Burns, A.R., The Decline of Competition, Chapter 8, “Non-Price Competition”.

Robinson, Imperfect Competition, balance of chapters 15, 16.

Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Chapters on “Price Discrimination” and “The Special Problem of Railway Rates.”

__________________________

Economics 101b
Spring Term, 1947-48
Economic Theory — Professor Chamberlin

I.   Selling Costs; Discrimination:

Monopolistic Competition, Chs. 6, 7 (to page 149)

Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Chapters 15, Sections 1-4.

Suggested:

1.  Monopolistic Competition, balance of Ch. 7.

2.  Robinson, Imperfect Competition, balance of 15, 16.

3.  Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Chs. on “Discriminating Monopoly,” and “The Special Problem of Railway Rates.”

 

II.  Distribution — General; Wages

Boulding, Economic Analysis, Ch. 11; Review 22, 23.

Marshall, Principles, Book VI, Chapters 1-2.

Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chs. 1-4.

Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, 8, 12.

[Norton, Frank E. (ed.). Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution. Philadelphia and Toronto: Blakiston Company, 1946.   8. Machlup, Fritz (1936). “On the meaning of the marginal product” in Explorations in Economics. 9. Robertson, Dennis H. (1931). “Wage-grumbles” in Economic Fragments.]

Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 8; pp. 215-18 (5th ed.).

Hicks, Chs. 6, 5.

Marshall, Book VI, Chs. 3-5.

Taussig, Principles, 4th ed., Ch. 52 (or 3rd revised ed., Ch. 47).

Mill, Principles, Book V, Ch. 10, Section 5.

Taussig, 4th ed., Vol. II, Ch. 59, Sections 1, 2, 7.

Hicks, Ch. 7, pp. 179-185.

Readings, 19

[19. Dunlop, John T. (1942). “Wage policies of trade unions,” American Economic Review.

Suggested:

1. Readings, 1-5.

[1. Kuznets, Simon S. (1933), “National income,” in Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences.
2. Gilbert, Milton and Jaszi, George (1944). “National product and income statistics as an aid in economic problems,” Dun’s Review.
3. Clark, John Maurice (1931). “Distribution” in Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences.
4. Bowman, Mary Jean (1945). “A graphical analysis of personal income distribution in the United States,” American Economic Review.
5. Cassels, John M. (1936). “On the law of variable proportions” in Explorations in Economics.]

2. Douglas, Theory of Wages, Chs. 1-3.

3. J. B. Clark, Distribution of Wealth, Chs. 7, 8.

4. Simonds, “Some Reflections on Syndicalism,” J.P.E., 1944.]

 

III. Interest:

Böhm–Bawerk, Positive Theory, Book I, Ch. 2; Book II, Book V.

Marshall, Principles, Book IV, Ch. 7; Book VI, Ch. 6.

Wicksell, Lectures, Vol. I, pp. 144-171,185-195, 207-218.

Clark, J. B., Distribution of Wealth, Chs. 9, 20.

Recommended: Fisher, I., Theory of Interest, Chs. 5, 6.
Readings, 20, 21

[20. Hayek, Friedrich A. von (1935-36). “The mythology of capital,” Quarterly Journal of Economics.
21. Knight, Frank H. (1946). “Capital and interest” in Encyclopaedia Brittanica.]

 

IV. Rent:

Ricardo, Ch. 2.

Marshall, Book V, Chs. 8-11.

Robinson, J., Economics of Imperfect Competition, Ch. 8.

 

V. Profits:

Marshall, Book VI, Ch. 5, Section 7; Chs. 7, 8.

Taussig, Principles, (4th ed.), Vol. II, chapter 49, section 1 (3rd revised ed., Ch. 50, Section 1)

Henderson, Supply & Demand, Ch. 7.

Readings, 29.

[29. Gordon, Robert A. (1936). “Enterprise, profits and the modern corporation” in Explorations in Economics.]

Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 5, Sec. 6; Ch. 7, Sec. 6; Appendices D, E.

Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development, Chs. 1-4.

Suggested:

Readings, 27.

[27. Knight, Frank H. (1934). “Profit” in Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences.]

 

VI. Welfare Economics:

Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Part I, Ch. 1.

Lerner, Economics of Control, Chs. 1-7, 9.

Meade and Hitch (or Meade), Economic Analysis and Policy, Part II, Ch. 6.

Robbins, L., “Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility: A Comment,” Economic Journal, December, 1938.

Hicks, “The Foundations of Welfare Economics,” Economic Journal, December, 1939.

Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Chs. 16, 17.

Suggested:

1. Lerner, Economics of Control, further chapters.

2. Pigou, Economics of Welfare, Part I; Part II, Chs. 1-11.

3. Lange, O., “The Scope and Method of Economics,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XIII (1).

4. de Scitovsky, T. “A Note on Welfare Propositions in Economics,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. IX (1).

 5. Baumol, W. J., “Community Indifference,” Review of Economic Studies, Vol. XIV (1).

6. Schelling, T. C., “On the Formulation of Welfare Propositions,” (Manuscript at desk in Littauer Library).

__________________________

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and Reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003 (HUC 8522.2.1). Box 2, Folder: Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1947-48.

Image Source: Harvard Album, 1946.