Tradition and interaction: research trends in modern Japanese industrial history

This paper surveys research findings since the early 1970s, focusing on the growth processes of both traditional and modern industries and their relations with government activity in the period between the 1870s and 1940. Most of the surveyed research can be seen as a response to two theses: first, that pre-1940 Japan was essentially a market-led economy; and second, that the traditional sector did not decline in the industrialisation process, but in fact prospered. The survey argues that there were a good deal of interactions between the modern and traditional sectors at regional levels and that the regional economy occupied a significant place in the ways in which government business relations were structured.     

The growth of a population research group in economic history

Abstract

In Sweden there is a long tradition of studying the relationship between population and economic and social history. We have only to mention names such as Eli Heck-scher during the 40s and Gustaf Utterström during the 50s. Now population studies within the discipline of economic history are centered on the University of Lund. In the other departments of economic history population studies have had an occasional character. In Lund, however, they have been more “institutionalized” and for ten years have formed a special section of the Department, the “Research Group in Population Economics” with its own seminars, courses, etc. The causes are obvious: the different institutions are too small separately to carry out such a cost- and resource-intensive topic. A dispersion of the resources would also be an obstacle to develop its necessary research-continuity. In the following short survey of the development of the topic in Sweden it is therefore natural that I should concentrate on the population group in Lund. To characterize our research profile in a few words I emphasize     

全汉升与中国经济史研究

中国社会经济史研究的兴起 ,与 2 0世纪 2 0年代的社会革命运动密不可分。国民革命军北伐前后 ,随着革命运动的勃兴 ,知识分子多运用马克思主义理论 ,致力于探析当日中国的社会结构及经济关系实况 ,藉以指引革命的进程 ;学术界中最为扣人心弦的现象 ,当推 1 92 7—1 93 7年 1 0年间的中国社会史论战。论战不仅强化了当时知识分子对马克思主义的兴趣 ,论战中所提出的问题也促成了马克思主义在中国的成熟。一些学者注意到中国历史内部 ,特别是社会经济层面的复杂性 ,实非简单化的概念所能表述和概括 ,遂转趋穷研史料 ,撰写专题式的学术论著 ,…     

经济史研究的学术价值与现实意义

首先请允许我代表中国社会科学院，对这次年会的召开表示热烈的祝贺。对与会的领导、各位学者专家，表示热烈欢迎，并且通过与会的同志们，向在全国各地从事经济史研究的学者专家，致以衷心的敬意。     

淮安市现代服务业列统企业信息化及其核心竞争力研究

本文分析了企业信息化对企业核心竞争力的影响,通过对淮安现代服务业列统企业信息化建设的实际情况分析,帮助企业提高信息化建设意识,寻找信息化建设的途径,提升企业核心竞争力,促进淮安大流通,大旅游,大文化的发展。     

经验归纳方法、历史主义传统与制度经济史研究

归纳方法与历史经验事实所具有的天然亲和力,是历史主义哲学和历史研究(包括经济史研究)高度注重归纳方法的重要原因之一。本文概述了经验归纳方法及其在经济学研究中的应用,以及由此形成的历史主义传统,在此基础上,着重分析了经验归纳方法在西方制度经济史研究中的应用与创新,尤其是对诺思的新制度经济史学和格瑞夫的历史比较制度分析做了重点的阐发。     

Increased international integration is a prerequisite for more and better research in economic history

Abstract

In the article “Is Swedish Research in Economic History Internationally Integrated?” ¹ Daniel Waldenström, Is Swedish Research in Economic History Internationally Integrated?, Scandinavian Economic History Review, vol. LIII, 2005:2, 50–77 , I present new facts on the past international publications and conference participation activity of Swedish economic historians. In contrast to claims made in a recent large public investigation, my data show that Swedish economic historians have not published extensively in international journals, or books, in recent years. This can in part be explained by the custom to write predominantly monographs, to write mostly in Swedish, and to use hardly any quantitative methods or theory-based economic analysis. Naturally, I am well aware that there may also be some other factors at work, and that empirical investigations of this kind are always open to objections. Problems regarding sample selection, variable definitions and so forth cannot be avoided, and to focus mainly on journal article publications in a field where books and anthologies play an important role raises some concern. ² See, e.g., the discussion in my article on these issues relating to the works by Diana Hicks and others. However, my article does not advocate any methodological dogmatism and acknowledges that economic history research can be conducted and presented in many different ways, using several different methodologies. The important thing is to recognise that there is great potential in combining such an open-minded methodological attitude with an active interest and participation in the research that appears in the many international peer-reviewed journals. This would not be to import some foreign (American) methods or views of the field so much as trying to revive the true Swedish economic history in the spirit of Eli F. Heckscher. In my view, this is the most consistent strategy to ensure both more and better future Swedish research in economic history.     

A finnish textbook in economic history

Abstract

There is, to my knowledge, no work exactly corresponding to Professor Jutikkala's in any of the major languages. Uudenajan taloushistoria is a comprehensive and very skilful exposition of the economic development of the modern world and certainly much more than simply a good textbook in which material from generally recognized standard works, partial surveys, and particular investigations is brought together and rearranged. However much Professor jutikkala may have drawn upon the available modern literature, upon the writings of Heckscher, Clapham, Cole, Ashton, Ashley, Sombart, and other authorities, his book is stamped first and foremost by his own great familiarity with the vast field of his subject, by his own research and experience-especially in the field of agrarian and social history—and by his great versatility as a scholar. The author is not simply a historian with an economic training; he is also very conscious of the fact that economic development never occurs in society in forms which allow of a purely economic exposition. His method is—to     

Social history as economic history in Sweden. Some remarks

Abstract

During the last two decades social history as a subject has developed rapidly, with regard both to the number of its practicioners as well as the general interest it attracts within the international academic community. In a book of some years ago D.C. Coleman even emphasized that its success has been so great that it has had a tendency to outcompete discourses of older and more distinguished standing; that is, political history as well as economic history. In several countries — particularly Britain — social history has acquired its own departments, and has thus created problems for the older and less buoyant disciplines which have had to compete with this vital and growing new subject for funding and students.¹     

Salt and cloth in Swedish economic history

Abstract

The precise significance of foreign trade in the economic life of a nation at different periods in the past cannot usually be accurately assessed. In the few fortunate cases where it is possible to get at least an approximate idea of the extent of trade, the figures obtained can rarely be set in any firm relationship with other statistical data. Since, for example, the size of population is usually a matter of little more than guess work, it is impossible to calculate the quantity of exports or imports per head of population. It is more difficult still to determine the relation of exports and imports to national income, since domestic production is even more difficult to estimate than the volume and composition of foreign trade. Only rarely is it possible to ascertain how domestic production Teacted to an increase in imports or how much of any commodity which was mainly an export product was consumed within the country. Discussions of the history of foreign trade, therefore, unavoidably tend to be somewhat hypothetical: the problem being to assess the significance of a phenomenon which can only be seen in occasional glimpses for populations of unknown size and with unknown total production.     

The development of economic history in Norway

Abstract

It might be a matter of dispute whether economic history is today a subject in its own right in Norway, that is whether there is a significant body of historians who identify with one another and with the problems, techniques and assumptions of economic history. Economic history is not really formally established. In contrast to Denmark and Sweden, there are no departments of economic history in the universities. An important exception is the economic history department at the Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration in Bergen. At Oslo University there has also been for some time a chair in “economic and social history” in the history department. At the new Norwegian School of Management in Oslo there is also about to be established a “Business History Unit”. Those working with economic history outside these institutions will normally be attached in some way to the history departments of other universities or to the university colleges (distrikts-høgskoler).