Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T08:24:57.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Macroeconomic Instability and the “Natural” Processes in early Neoclassical Economics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2009

Philip Mirowski
Philip Mirowski
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 02155
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It may seem odd to disinter an economic theory—in this instance, William Stanley Jevons's claim that sunspots caused macroeconomic fluctuations—which no one now believes or much cares about. In fact, my purpose is not to scoff at a dead theory, but to use it as a pretext to discuss the following issues: economic historians often have suggested a dichotomy between a premodem and industrial macroeconomy, with the premodern economy largely at the mercy of weather and other natural phenomena; the dichotomy is rooted in early neoclassical economic theory (here restricting ourselves to Jevons); there is little historical evidence that premodern macro fluctuations were caused by natural disturbances, such as the weather (here restricting ourselves to the case of England); and the above three theses have some interesting implications for the way economic policy is conceived, both then and now.

Type
Papers Presented at the Forty-Third Annual Meeting of the Economic History Association
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 1984 , pp. 345 - 354
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Well, almost no one. Compare Cass, David and Shell, Karl, “Do Sunspots Matter?” Journal of Political Economy, 91 (04 1983), 193–227;CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Garcia-Mata, Carlos and Schaffner, Felix, “Solar and Economic Relationships”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 49 (11 1934), 1–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Jevons, W. S., “Economic Policy”, in Essays in Economic Method, ed. Smyth, R. L. (London, 1962), p. 26.Google Scholar

3 Ibid., p. 27.

4 See Polanyi, Karl, The Great Transformation (Boston, 1944), chaps. 12, 13, 17, 18; and J. K. Ingram, “The Present Position and Prospects of Political Economy”, in Essays in Economic Method.Google Scholar

5 One can observe this attitude in some rather harsh comments about “the crowning defects of the poorer classes”, in his address cited in footnote 2. Parenthetically, this very revealing talk is omitted in Jevons's Papers and Correspondence, and is not addressed in Hutchison, T. W., “The Politics and Philosophy in Jevons's Political Economy”, Manchester School, 50 (12 1982), 366–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 For those who consider it a joke, see Sheehan, R. G. and Grieves, A., “Sunspots and Cycles: A Test of Causation”, Southern Economics Journal (Jan. 1982), 775–77.Google Scholar As a cautionary parable, see Keynes, J. M., Essays in Biography (New York, 1963), pp. 278–79;Google Scholar and Stigler, Stephen M., “Jevons as Statistician”, Manchester School, 50 (12 1982), 363–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Mirowski, Philip, “Physics and the Marginalist Revolution”, Cambridge Journal of Economics (forthcoming).Google Scholar

8 The choice of weather rather than some other “natural” disturbance can be explained by Jevons's own background in meterology, and by his friendship at Owens College with Balfour Stewart, who was engaged in sunspot research.Google Scholar

9 Jevons, W. S., Papers and Correspondence, ed. Black, R. D. C., (London, 1977), vol. 7, p. 91.Google Scholar

10 Jevons, W. S., Investigations in Currency and Finance (London, 1884), p. 204.Google Scholar

11 Compare Willett, H. C. and Prohaska, J., “Long-Term Indices of Solar Activity” (NSF Report 5931, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 09 30, 1960), p. 9.Google Scholar

12 Jevons, Investigations, p. 230.Google Scholar

13 For the boat races: Jevons, , Papers and Correspondence, vol. 5, p. 51.Google Scholar For crisis criticism: Ibid., vol. 4, pp. 299–300.

14 Ibid., vol. 5, pp. 10–11.

15 Jevons, Investigations, p. 233.Google Scholar

16 Jevons, Investigations, pp. 237–38.Google Scholar See in this respect also Siddiqi, A., “Money and Prices in the Earlier Stages of Empire”, Indian Economic and Social History Review, 18 (07-12 1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Jevons, , Papers and Correspondence, vol. 5, p. 103, 147.Google Scholar

18 Mitchell, W. C., Business Cycles and Their Causes (Berkeley, 1941), p. 169.Google ScholarTugan-Baranowski, M., Les Crises Industrielles en Angleterre (Paris, 1913), p. 6.Google ScholarAkerman, J., Structures et Cycles Economiques (Paris, 1957), tome 2, p. 249.Google ScholarSchumpeter, Joseph, Business Cycles (New York, 1939), vol. 2, pp. 223, 249.Google ScholarMathias, Peter, The First Industrial Nation (London, 1969), pp. 228–31.Google ScholarDeane, Phyllis, The First Industrial Revolution (Cambridge, 1967), pp. 227–28.Google ScholarAshton, T. S., Economic Fluctuations in England, 1700–1800 (Oxford, 1959), chaps. 1, 2.Google ScholarRostow, W. W., The World Economy (Austin, 1978) ch p. 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Gorman, John, Time Series Analysis (Cambridge, 1981), part 1.Google Scholar

20 Ibid., p. 233.

21 Geweke, John, “Inference and Causality in Economic Time Series Models” in Handbook of Econometrics, ed. Griliches, Z. and Intrilligator, M. (North Holland, 1982);Google Scholar and Geweke, J., Meese, R., and Dent, W., “Comparing Alternative Tests of Causality in Temporal Systems” (University of Wisconsin SSRI Workshop Paper, no. 8212, 04 1982).Google Scholar

22 Lucas, Robert Jr, Studies in Business Cycle Theory (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1981), pp. 125, 284, 16.Google Scholar