Seminar examines Chinese economic history
The seminar on economic history recently held in Beijing Photo: RUC
A seminar on the disciplinary construction of economic history and theoretical economics was held in Beijing in late March.
Academic values
Economic history lays an important foundation for economic research, said Liu Wei, president of Renmin University of China. Summarizing experience gained from China’s economic development history and refining economic theories will lead to suggestions for this country’s socio-economic development and contribute Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to challenges facing mankind.
The systematized “joining” of economics and historiography is of great significance, said Li Bozhong, a professor from the history department at Peking University. Economic history merges economics and historiography and draws on their strengths, in a joint effort to deeply understand China’s development from the past to the future.
According to Dong Zhikai, a research fellow from the Institute of Economics at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS), economic history is the “source” of economics, and only through deeply comprehending economic history can we truly establish economics with Chinese characteristics and summarize the experience of China’s economic construction.
We can more accurately grasp the evolution of culture and international relations by comprehensively examining economic history, since the relationship between the economic base and the superstructure is the most fundamental relationship in history, said Wu Li, a research fellow from the Institute of Contemporary China Studies at CASS.
Wang Yuru, a professor from the School of Economics at Nankai University, said that economic history research requires the capability to fully excavate historical data and investigate economic theories from a historical perspective. In addition, constructing an economic theoretical system with Chinese characteristics is an arduous task for economic history researchers.
Economics provides theoretical frameworks and analytical tools for historiography, especially economic history, while historiography offers a “laboratory” for economists to test economic theories. Naturally, economic history is expected to facilitate both economics and historiography, Li continued.
The current function of economic history should be to summarize experience from China’s historical development. Its position in theoretical economics should be raised, and more attention should be paid to works on economic history when evaluating pertinent journals, suggested Wei Mingkong, president of the Chinese Economic History Society and a research fellow from the Institute of Economics at CASS.
Cheng Lin, a professor from the School of Economics at Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, noted the close relationship between economic history’s disciplinary construction and the development of theoretical economics, adding that an economic theoretical system with Chinese characteristics should be built upon our own historical experience. Scientific economic analysis is supposed to apply historical facts, statistical methods, and related theories, and to grasp the interactive connections between economics and historical research.
Research approaches
According to Peng Kaixiang, a professor from the School of Economics at Henan University, interactive research between economic history and economic theory has formed a “trilogy” in terms of research topics—from mainly studying production modes to resource allocation methods, from production modes to productive forces, and from general economic growth to long-term economic development. These changes demand more disciplinary interaction and historical reference.
As to economic history’s research paradigms, changes in the field of cliometrics, or econometric history, are mainly reflected in the development of natural experiments, multiple equilibria, and the effects of path dependence. Study is still needed for the basic tasks of diversifying economic history research paradigms, standardizing domestic cliometrics studies, and constructing a talent training system for cliometrics, said Li Nan, a professor from the School of Economics at Fudan University.
Zhou Jianbo, a professor from the School of Economics at Peking University, said that historical data is the basis of quantitative research, which needs to be improved via integrating localized and international research methods. Additionally, we should uphold both historical research’s descriptive method and mathematic modeling’s logical method, selecting research topics in line with the era to facilitate the development of economics with Chinese characteristics.
Precisely handling the relationship between economic history and theoretical economics is a core issue, said Liu Shouying, dean of the School of Economics at Renmin University of China. Economic history scholars must adhere to problem-oriented approaches, echoing major issues from our times with the dual perspectives of historiography and economics. Meanwhile, we need to avoid excessive emphasis on traditional historical research and the extremalization modern metering methods in economic history research, and instead conduct investigations based on historical data after identifying specific issues, to enhance the vitality of the field.
Edited by YANG LANLAN