What Happened and Why?

An Introduction to Themes and Approaches in Economic and Social History

Michaelmas term 2010 and Hilary term 2011

Dr Deborah Oxley, All Souls College and History Faculty

For formal assessment criteria and submission deadlines see Instructions to Candidates for your degree at:  http://www.history.ox.ac.uk/postgrad/noticeboard/index.htm#examsUH

H

HOBJECTIVES

The course is designed (in conjunction with the quantitative methods courses) to prepare graduates for research in economic and social history. It provides an opportunity to view the subject as a whole and to consider its origins, its methodological foundations, its relations with adjacent disciplines and its current trends, achievements, and problems. It presents some of the central methodological issues of the social sciences, and some of their recent advances. The course is structured loosely around the problem of rationality. The rational choice paradigm dominates economics, and has strongly influenced the other social sciences. It presents an intellectual challenge which historians need to acknowledge, even if they come to reject it. The problem of rationality is wider still, and embraces social, psychological, political and moral issues. This focus is meant to provide coherence and continuity: to raise a set of questions at the outset, for which answers will begin to emerge towards the end. It is not intended to endorse any of the particular approaches, but rather to highlight their respective strengths and limitations.

COURSE ARRANGEMENTS

This course provides a philosophical and methodological grounding for social and economic history. It will be taught over the Michaelmas Term, with four additional lectures and seminars in the Hilary term. During the Michaelmas term there will be two sessions a week (two every other week in Hilary term). The first consists of a lecture on a particular method (held on Thursdays). The second session is a seminar in which the method is applied to an historical problem (held on Fridays). The seminars are structured loosely around the theme ‘From agrarian society to industrial capitalism’, focused mainly on Britain, and provide a substantive historical course. Seminar introductions are assigned to students, taking account of their preferences.

• Lectures: Thursday 11.30-1.00 in the Large Lecture Room at Nuffield College. Arrive early and expect to leave late. (Note. The postgraduate seminar follows on from this across the courtyard). Coffee from 11.15.
• Seminars: Friday in the Hovenden Room at All Souls College. 
• Group A will meet at 9.00-10.45
• Group B will meet at 11.15-1.00
• Weeks 1 to 8 in Michaelmas term
• Weeks 2, 4, 6 and 8 in Hilary term

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

Attendance at lectures and seminars is mandatory. Students will be required to introduce one session per term (sometimes jointly with another student). The introductions should be approximately fifteen to twenty minutes long, followed by seminar discussion. Preparation for this presentation should go beyond the reading lists below.  Students will write two 4,000 word essays, and present at a workshop:

• At the end of the first term, students will submit a paper on one of the lecture or seminar themes (not the one introduced), or on another theme agreed in advance, of up to 4,000 words. The paper is due no later than noon on the last Friday of tenth week in Michaelmas term, i.e. Friday 17 December 2010. 
• Students should begin to work on their dissertation topics during the Michaelmas term, and in assigning presentations, this research interest (as well as prior expertise) will be taken into account. During the Hilary term, they will be required to prepare a methodological introduction to the course dissertation, based on the coursework and their own research.  The essay of up to 4,000 words should explain the historical problem addressed in the dissertation, it should describe the method chosen and justify this choice, and it should also provide some indication of the existing literature and of any findings already available.  This methodological essay is due no later than noon on the first Monday of Trinity term, i.e. Monday 2 May 2011 (to be handed in to the Examination Schools).
• The methodological essay will also be the subject of a twenty-minute presentation to a forum of students and course tutors at a Workshop in the third week of Trinity Term, i.e. Thursday 19 - Friday 20 May 2011.  Full attendance and participation are requirements for the successful completion of the qualifying course.  All students are required to submit an abstract of no more than 100 words no later than 5.00pm on the first Monday of Trinity term, i.e. Monday 2 May 2011 for inclusion in the conference proceedings.  Abstracts are to be emailed to deborah.oxley@all-souls.ox.ac.ukUH.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Copies of the majority of course readings will be available on the ESH shelves in the lower reading room of HUNuffield College libraryUH. A set of readings will also be available in the HUSocial Science libraryUH, with at least one copy of every reading confined to the library. We also hope to have a good selection of the main readings behind the issue desk for temporary use. These copies cannot be borrowed. Students are requested to return items without fail after photocopying.

Note: You are unlikely to succeed in reading everything; use your interests to guide your selection; readings marked with an asterisk (*) are especially recommended.

A good deal of the journal literature can now be read on-line. See Oxford University’s e-Journals at http://ejournals.bodleian.ox.ac.uk. Some are bookmarked at Delicious, http://www.delicious.com/HFLOxford/. Also see WebLearn at: https://weblearn.ox.ac.uk/portal/hierarchy/humdiv/histfac/lib

COURSE PROGRAMME

MICHAELMAS TERM LECTURES: Eight lectures held weekly on Thursdays (starting on 14 October 2010) promptly at 11.30 a.m. at Nuffield College. Each is followed by a seminar on the Friday.

21BSession 1.   HISTORY:  HOW DO WE KNOW?

1. Who killed Berardelli?
2. Approaches to understanding: laws, axioms and narratives
3. Objectivity and subjectivity
4. Origins of economic and social history (Britain, Germany, France, USA).
5. Causation, inference and Bayesian reasoning

Lecture readings

G. Cappoccia and R. D. Kelemen, ‘The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism’, World Politics, 59 (April 2007), pp. 341-69U.

*E. H. Carr, What is History (1964), chs. 1, 4–5 [classic macro approach]

*Paul A. David, ‘Understanding the Economics of QWERTY: The Necessity of History’, in W.N. Parker (ed.), Economic History and the Modern Economist (1986).  A more demanding article is: Paul David, ‘Path Dependence—A Foundational Concept for Historical Social Science’, Cliometrica 1, 2 (2007). HU

Richard J. Evans, In Defence of History (1997), chs. 4, 8. [critical]

Paul M. Hohenberg, ‘Towards a More Useful Economic History’, Journal of Economic History 68 (2008), pp.339-54

J. B. Kadane and D.A. Schum, A Probablistic Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Evidence (1996), chs.1–2, 4 [a short introduction to Bayseian reasoning in Kadane & Schum, pp. 121–131, and Judea Pearl, Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference (2000), pp. 2–8 combined. After reading these, you might wish to try A. P.Dawid, ‘Baye’s Theorem and the Weighting of Evidence by Juries’ in Richard Swinburne, ed., Baye’s Theorem (2002), pp. 71–90 Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. 113, or D. Dion, 'Evidence and inference in a comparative case study', Comparative Politics, 30.2 (1998), pp.127-45.] Available here.  For a recent piece see Angela Saini, 'Justice You Can Count On', New Scientist (24.10.2009), pp.43-5

P. Novick, That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession (1988), ch. 1, ‘The European Legacy: Ranke, Bacon, Flaubert’.

P. M. Rosenau, Post-Modernism and the Social Sciences: Insights, Inroads and Intrusions (1992), esp. chs. 4–5.

Sacco and Vanzetti website:
HUhttp://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/SaccoV/SaccoV.htmU

*M. Weber, ‘Science as a Vocation’, in From Max Weber, ed. H. Gerth and C.Wright Mills (1970), pp. 129–56. [is value-free science possible?]

Session 2.   SCIENCE: IN PURSUIT OF OBJECTIVITY

1. Enlightenment and Logical Positivism
2. Deduction and induction
3. Confirmation vs falsification
4. Scientific revolutions and personal knowledge
5. Scientific research programmes
6. Methodological pluralism
7. Social construction of knowledge

Lecture readings

F. Chalmers, What is this Thing Called Science? (3rd edn. 1999) [basic outline; OR Deborah A. Redman, Economics and the Philosophy of Science, chs.1–4]

Apostolos Doxiadis and Christos H. Papadimitriou, Logicomix: An Epic Search for Truth (2009) (yes, it is a comic book)

Ian Hacking, The Social Construction of What? (1999), chs. 1, 3

P. K. Feyerabend, Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge (rev. edn. 1988), ‘Analytical Index’, ‘Introduction’, chs. 1–3, 15.

Herbert S. Klein and Charles Stockley, ‘Historical Background of Quantitative Social Science’, in Andrew Gelman and Jeronimo Cortina (eds.), A Quantitative Tour of the Social Sciences (2009), Ch.4 pp.35-51.

Noretta Koertge, ‘“New Age” Philosophies of Science: Constructivism, Feminism and Postmodernism’, in Clark, Peter and Hawley, Katherine (eds.), Philosophy of Science Today (2003), pp. 83–99.

*T. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd edn. 1970), esp. chs. 4–7.

*I. Lakatos, ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’ in I.Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (1970).

P. Lipton, Inference to the Best Explanation (1991, revised 2004), ch. 4.

Bryan Magee, ‘Logical Positivism and its Legacy: Dialogue with A. J. Ayer’, in his Men of Ideas: Some Creators of Contemporary Philosophy (1978)

K. Popper, ‘Science: Conjectures and Refutations’, in his Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge (5th edn. 1989)

23BSession 3.   ECONOMICS: THE CHICAGO SCHOOL 

1. A deductive science? Positive and normative economics
2. Core beliefs, methodological individualism and the Invisible Hand
3. Order, equilibriums and self-regulation
4. Marginalists, preferences, and rationality
5. Welfare economics

Lecture readings

Kenneth Arrow, 'Economic Theory and the Hypothesis of Rationality', John Eatwell and Murray Millgate (eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (1987 or 2008 revised edition) - especially for economists.

M. Blaug, The Methodology of Economics, or How Economists Explain (1980), chs. 1–2, 15.

*D. M. Hausman, The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics (1992), chs. 1–3. [Economists, have a look at V. C Walsh, Rationality, Allocation, and Reproduction (1996), Introduction and ch. 7.]

Milton Friedman, ‘The Methodology of Positive Economics’, in F. Hahn and M.Hollis (eds.), Philosophy and Economic Theory (1979); also in M. Martin and L.C. McIntyre (eds.), Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science (1994), 647–660; and in M. Friedman, Essays in Positive Economics  (1953).

Philip Mirowski, ‘Physics and the “Marginalist Revolution’ in his Against Mechanism: Protecting Economics from Science (1987), ch. 1

*M. Reder, ‘Chicago School’, in J. Eatwell et al. (eds.), The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (1987); more extended version in idem., ‘Chicago Economics: Permanence and Change’, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 20, 1 (March 1982), pp. 1–38.

24BSession 4. EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS: COLLECTIVE ACTION AND SOCIAL DILEMMAS

1. Social ordering, Condorcet and Arrow's impossibility theorem
2. Game theory: Prisoner's dilemma, Chicken
3. Competition, free-riding
4. The tragedy of the commons
5. Co-operation and altruism

Lecture readings

Robert Axelrod, The Evolution of Co Operation (1984), ch. 2.

Colin Camerer and Ernest Fehr, ‘Measuring Social Norms and Preferences Using Experimental Games: A Guide for Social Scientists’, in  J.F. Henrich et.al.,  Foundations of Human Sociality : Economic Experiments and Ethnographic Evidence from Fifteen Small-Scale Societies (2004), ch. 3, 55-95.

*G. Hardin, ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’, Science vol. 162 (1968), 1243–8; also in Scott W. Menard and Elizabeth W. Moen (eds.), Perspectives on Population (1987). http://dieoff.org/page95.htmU

*Shaun Hargreaves Heap, et al., The Theory of Choice: A Critical Guide (1992), chs. 7–9.

A.R. Poteete, Marco A. Janssen and Elinor Ostrom, Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice (2010), Ch.7

*M. Olson, The Rise and Decline of Nations (1982), esp. ch. 2.

Elinor Ostrom, 'Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems', American Economic Review 100 (2010), pp. 641-72

Two game theory references:

Leon Felkins, ‘The Social Dilemmas’: http://perspicuity.net/sd/sd.htmlU

Ian MacLean, Public Choice: An Introduction (1989), ch. 7

Session 5.   ANTHROPOLOGY: RECIPROCITY OR SELF-REGARD?

1. Out of the armchair
2. Emic and etic
3. Ellusive and illusory: problems with evidence and analysis
4. Social preferences and reciprocity
5. Do archaic societies maximize?
6. Social capital

Lecture readings

Peter S. Bellwood, First Farmers: The Origins of Agricultural Societies (Malden, Mass., 2005), ch. 1.

*Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher, ‘Why Social Preferences Matter – The Impact of Non-selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives’, Economic Journal, vol. 112, 478 (2002), pp. C1–33 OR Ernst Fehr and Urs Fischbacher, 'The economics of strong reciprocity' in H. Gintis et al., Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life (2005), ch. 5, pp. 151-91.

H. Gintis et al., Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The Foundations of Cooperation in Economic Life (2005), ch. 1.  HUhttp://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/0262072521chap1.pdfU

*Marvin Harris, ‘History and Significance of the Emic–Etic Distinction’, Annual Review of Anthropology vol. 5 (1976), 329–50

 J. F. Henrich et al.,  Foundations of Human Sociality : Economic Experiments and Ethnographic Evidence from Fifteen Small-Scale Societies (2004), ‘Overview and Synthesis’, 8-54.

David I. Kertzer, ‘Social Anthropology and Social Science History’, Social Science History 33 (2009), pp.1-16

Rebecca Lemov, ‘Towards a Data Base of Dreams: Assembling an Archive of Elusive Materials, c. 1947-61’, History Workshop Journal, 67 (2009), pp. 44-68

*E. Malinowski, Argonauts of the Western Pacific (1922), chs. 2, 3, 22.

M. Mauss, The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies (1stpubl. Paris, 1925; transl. W.D. Halls, 1990 [much better than 1954 translation]), Introduction, chs. 1–3, pp. 1–46.

M. Sahlins, Stone Age Economics (1972), chs.1, 4, 5.

 B

Session 6.   NEW INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMICS: WHO CAN YOU TRUST?

1. Parable of the farmer and the rancher: Coase Theorem and property rights
2. Transaction costs
3. Markets or hierarchies?
4. Principals and Agents
5. Importance of institutions

Lecture readings

Éric Brousseau and Jean-Michel Glachant (eds), New Institutional Economics: A Guidebook (2009), especially ch.4 Benito Arruňada, ‘Human Nature and Institutional Analysis’, pp. 67-80

*T. Eggertsson, Economic Behavior and Institutions (1990), chs. 5–6

Robert C. Ellickson, 'Of Coase and Cattle: Dispute Resolution among Neighbors in Shasta County', Stanford Law Review 38.3 (1986), pp. 623-8

Mark, Granovetter, 'Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness', American Journal of Sociology, 91, 3 (Nov. 1985), pp. 481-510.

Y. Hayami and O.Keijiro, The Economics of Contract Choice: An Agrarian Perspective (1992), chs.1, 6, 8, 10; or Otsuka, Keijiro, Chuman, Hiruyoki and Hayami, Yujiro, ‘Land and Labor Contracts in Agrarian Economies: Theories and Facts’, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 30 (1992), pp. 1965–2018.

Stewart Macaulay, ‘Non-Contractual Relations in Business: A Preliminary Study’, American Sociological Review, 28, 1 (1963), pp. 55–67.

*J. W. Pratt and R. J. Zeckhauser (eds.), Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business (1985), chs.1–2

O. Williamson, Sidney Winter and Ronald Coase, The Nature of the Firm: Origins, Evolution and Development (1991), esp. chs. 1–2, 7.

Session 7.   PSYCHOLOGY: MAKING CHOICES

1. Myopic time preference and commitment devices
2. Decision making under uncertainty
3. Cognitive biases in reasoning. Bounded rationalities
4. Neuroeconomics
5. Co-operation and conformity

Lecture readings

Bahador Bahrami et.al., 'Optimally Interacting Minds', Science 329 (2010), pp. 1081-5

 [*]Camerer, Colin, George Loewenstein, and Drazen Prelec, 'Neuroeconomics: How Neuroscience can Inform Economics', Journal of Economic Literature, 48 (2005), pp. 9-64. [paradigm-breaking article – but requires big effort!]

Crystal N. Feimster, Southern Horrors: Women and the Politics of Rape and Lynching (2009)

*Gerd Gigerenzer, and Reinhard Selten, (eds.), Bounded Rationality : The Adaptive Toolbox (2001), esp. chs. 2–3. or Peter M. Todd and Geoffrey F. Miller ‘From Pride and Prejudice to Persuasion: Satisficing in Mate Search’ in Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart, ed. G. Gigerenzer and P.M. Todd (1999), pp. 287–308.

Avner Offer, The Challenge of Affluence: Self-Control and Well-Being in the United States and Britain since 1950 (2006), ch. 3.

*A.Tversky and D. Kahneman, ‘Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases’, Science, vol. 185 (1974), pp. 1124–31; reprinted D. Kahneman, P.Slovic and A. Tversky (eds.), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1982); also in P.K. Moser (ed.), Rationality in Action: Contemporary Approaches (1990), pp. 171–88.

D.Kahneman, ‘New Challenges to the Rationality Assumption’, in D.Kahneman and Amos Tversky (eds.), Choices, Values, and Frames (2000), pp. 758–74.

28BSession 8.   CRIMINOLOGY: UNACCEPTABLE SELF-REGARD?

1. Classical criminology and rationality
2. Conceptualising criminals: the positivist tradition
3. Other theories on crime and deviance
4. Gender and criminality
5. Punishment and policy

Lecture readings

Brad Bushman and Roy F. Baumeister, ‘Threatened Egotism, Narcissism, Self-Esteem, and Direct and Displaced Aggression: Does Self-Love or Self-Hate Lead to Violence?’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1 (1998), 219-229. [or light version,HU R. Baumeister, ‘Violent Pride: Do people turn violent because of self-hate or self-love?’, Scientific American Mind, Aug-Sept. 2006, pp. 54-59UH.]

*Clive Coleman and Clive Norris, Introducing Criminology (2000), Ch.4 'Thinking seriously about serial killers'

*J.R. Lilly, Francis T. Cullen and Richard A. Ball, Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences (2007 or earlier edition) Chs2 & 8 OR Vold, G.B., Bernard, T.J., and Snipes, J.B. (2002) Theoretical Criminology. Oxford University Press. Chs 1, 2 & 11.

Judith Pallot, 'Russia's Penal Peripheries: Space, Place and Penality in Soviet and post-Soviet Russia',  Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 30.1 (2005), pp. 98-112.

Carol Smart, ‘Feminist Approaches to Criminology: Postmodern Woman meets Atavistic Man’, in A. Morris and L. Gelsthorpe (eds.), Feminist Perspectives in Criminology (1990), pp. 71-84.

HILARY TERM LECTURES: Four lectures held fortnightly on Thursdays (starting on 27 January 2011) promptly at 11.30 a.m. at Nuffield College. Each is followed by a seminar on the Friday.

29BSession 9.   POLITICAL SCIENCE: GOVERNMENT AND RATIONALITY

1. Legitimate roles of government
2. Welfare economics versus public choice
3. Voting

Lecture readings

 T. Besley, Principled Agents? The Political Economy of Good Government (2006), ch. 1.

*J. M. Buchanan, and R. A. Musgrave, Public Finance and Public Choice : Two Contrasting Visions of the State (1999),chs. 1.2, 1.3, pp. 11-49.

D. P. Green and I. Shapiro, Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory : A Critique of Applications in Political Science (1994), chs. 1–4, 7.

P. H. Lindert, Growing Public : Social Spending and Economic Growth since the Eighteenth Century (2005), chs. 1, 2.

D. C. Mueller, Public Choice III (2003), chs. 14, 15, 28, 29.

30B

Session 10. GENDER STUDIES: THE FAMILY

1. Feminisms
2. Gynocentric to industrial production
3. Market sector and gender gaps
4. Household sector and the gender division of labour
5. Is it rational to form families?

Lecture readings

Maristella Botticini and Aloysius Siow, 'Why Dowries?' American Economic Review, 93 (2003), pp. 1385-1398.

*W. Chafe, The Paradox of Change: American Women in the Twentieth Century (1991)

Dora L. Costa, ‘From Mill Town to Board Room: The Rise of Women’s Paid Labor’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 14, 4 (2000), pp. 101–122.

Tamara K. Hareven, ‘The History of the Family and the Complexity of Social Change’, American Historical Review vol. 96, 1, Feb. (1991), 95–124

H. Hartmann, ‘The Family as the Locus of Gender, Class and Political Struggle: the Example of Housework’, Signs, vol.6 (1981), 366–94

A. Offer, The Challenge of Afflence: Self-Control and Well-Being in the USA and Britain since 1950 (2006), chs. 13-14.

*Joyce P. Jacobsen, The Economics of Gender (1994), chs. 3–5.

Joan Scott, ‘Women’s History’, in P. Burke (ed.), New Perspectives on Historical Writing (1991), ch. 3.

Session 11. SOCIOLOGY: SOCIAL BONDS AND STRATIFICATION

1. Holding society together: Adam Smith
2. Pulling society apart: Karl Marxist
3. Max Weber: the iron cage
4. Emile Durkheim: social cohesion
5. Homo economicus versus homo sociologicus

Lecture readings

Emile Durkheim, ‘Suicide’ in Readings from Emile Durkheim, ed. Kenneth Thompson (1985) OR sample in editions of Durkheim, Suicide.

David B Grusky (ed.), Social Stratification : Class, Race, and Gender in Sociological Perspective (1st edn. 1994), articles by Sorensen (basic concepts), pp.229ff. & Lieberson (ascriptive stratification, i.e. discrimination), pp.649ff.

Gordon Marshall, Stephen Roberts, and Adam Swift, Against the Odds? Social Class and Social Justice in Industrial Societies (1997), chs. 3–4.

J. Roemer, ‘Historical Materialism’, ch. 8 in his Free to Lose: An Introduction to Marxist Economic Philosophy (1988)

*Albert Weale, ‘Homo Economicus, Homo Sociologicus’, in Shaun Hargreaves Heap et al., The Theory of Choice: A Critical Guide (1992), pp. 62–72.

Nancy L. Stokey,  ‘Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves: The Economics of Social Mobility’ in Jacobs, Donald P., Kalai, Ehud, Kamien, Morton I., eds. Frontiers of Research in Economic Theory (1998).

*Max Weber, ‘Class, Status and Party’, in From Max Weber, ed. H. Gerth and C.Wright Mills (1970), pp. 180–95

2

Session 12. TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

1. Technological revolutions
2. Where does technology come from?
3. Path dependency in technological form
4. Technology as epoch making
5. Environmental consequences of technological change

Lecture readings

Robert C. Allen, The British Industrial Revolution in Global Perspective (2009), Ch.10.

S. N. Broadberry, The Productivity Race: British Manufacturing in International Perspective, 1850–1990 (1997), ch. 6, ‘Technology’.

David Hounshell, From the American System to Mass Production, 1800–1932 (1984), chs. 6–7

Ray Kurzweil, The Age of Spiritual Machines : How We Will Live Work and Think in the New Age of Intelligent Machines (1999), ch. 1. See also HUhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularityU

J. Mokyr, The Gifts of Athena (2002), chs. 1, 6.

J. Mokyr, The Enlightened Economy: An Economic History of Britain, 1700-1850 (2009)

David C. Mowery and Nathan Rosenberg, Paths of Innovation: Technological Change in 20th-Century America (1998), ch. 1, ‘The Institutionalization of Innovation’.

N. Rosenberg, Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics (1982), chs. 1, 10.

*B. Steil, D. G. Victor, R. R., Nelson (eds.), Technological Innovation and Economic Performance (2002), chs. 1 (Steil et al.), 2 (Mokyr).

top of page