|
|
Two thoughts.
First, I have recently begun teaching a standard introductory undergraduate
course on "The development of the international economy since about 1850",
after a gap of some years. I was somewhat startled to think that about a
quarter of what I was to teach had not occurred when I first took such a
course as a student in the 1960s, and I do not yet feel antiquated. It is
certainly worth spending some time thinking about the economic history of
the period since 1950 as distinct from relying on reminiscences.
Secondly, throughout the last 35 years, and in many countries, we have
wondered about the decline of economic history, and adopted various
strategies - in many cases assimilating economic history with social
history. In that time, there have been many successes of economic thinking
- the reinsertion into much national policy debate of concern with
incentives in relation to nationalised industries and social policies, the
demise of centralised planning, the failure of import-substitution
industrialisation relative to comparative advantage, the growth of an
economic conception of economic liberalisation relative to the legalistic
swapping of concessional entry to national markets as GATT gave way to the
WTO, etc. Writing the history of the period since 1950 requires real
economic understanding. Much else too, of course, but is there a bright
future for economic history?
Gary Hawke
Professor of Economic History
Victoria University of Wellington
Wellington, New Zealand
|
|
|
 Send comments and questions to admin@eh.net
|
||