Economic history and economic theory
Since the mid-1950s the spread of formal models and econometric method has greatly improved the study of the past, giving rise to the 'new' economic history; at the same time, the influence of economic history on economists and economics has markedly declined. This paper argues that the contribution of history to the advancement of economics is still paramount, as is evident from the evolution of monetary theory and institutions.JEL classification: NO1, A12
Volume (Year): 13 (2006)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJEC20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJEC20|
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Robert A. Mundell, 2000.
"A Reconsideration of the Twentieth Century,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 90(3), pages 327-340, June.
- Kuznets, Simon, 1957. "Summary of Discusson and Postscript," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(04), pages 545-553, December.
- North, Douglass C, 1976. "The Place of Economic History in the Discipline of Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(4), pages 461-65, December.
- McCloskey, Donald N, 1976. "Does the Past Have Useful Economics?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 434-61, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:13:y:2006:i:4:p:447-467. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.