Where Is There Consensus Among American Economic Historians? The Results of a Survey on Forty Propositions

Abstract

This article examines where consensus does and does not exist among American economic historians by analyzing the results of a questionnaire mailed to 178 randomly selected members of the Economic History Association. The questions address many of the important debates in American economic history. The answers show consensus on a number of issues, but substantial disagreement in many areas—including the causes of the Great Depression and the aftermath of emancipation. They also expose some areas of disagreement between historians and economists.

Economic Growth Assumptions in Climate and Energy Policy

“…These economic disasters were generally precipitated by political events, such as world wars and civil wars, or by combinations of political and economic factors, as in the Great Depression, which were not only unforeseen at the time, but whose causes continue to be debated. (Whaples [32] (p. 151) suggests, based on the level of disagreement revealed in a survey of economic historians, that "Despite considerable innovative and painstaking subsequent research about the causes and nature of the Great Depression, this may be a debate from which no consensus will ever emerge.") The equally unforeseen 1973 Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries oil embargo was followed by a slowdown in world economic growth (seen as a break in slope in Figure 1), with per capita production actually falling for decades in some regions, notably Africa [3].…”

Is there a consensus among Hungarian agricultural economists?

“…The survey technique has also been extended to explore opinions within fields of economics. For example, Fuchs et al (1998) investigated the views of labour and public economists, Whaples (1995) surveyed economic historians, and Alston and Vaughan (1993) analysed the opinions of institutional economists.…”

Professional Specialization: Why Labour Market Changes Have Undermined the Role of Economic History in Economics Departments

“…The useful survey of contemporary economic history thinking by Whaples (1995) shares this bias. The list of issues that he thinks are crucial for the interpretation of the economic history of the United States are heavily weighted towards issues that the new economic historians have lavished their greatest attention upon.…”

“…The list of issues that he thinks are crucial for the interpretation of the economic history of the United States are heavily weighted towards issues that the new economic historians have lavished their greatest attention upon. That said, it is worth pointing out that Whaples (1995) does point to intellectual differences between historian and economics members of the Economic History Association.…”