Introduction à la diversité des méthodes dites quantitatives, aux débats en histoire de la pensée et épistémologie économique sur l’usage de ces méthodes, ainsi qu’aux récents travaux produits avec ces méthodes.
Building an online interactive platform displaying bibliometric data on a large set of macroeconomic articles. Our goal is to settle the basis for a broad and long-run project on the history of macroeconomics, as well as to bring to historians tools to run quantitative inquiries to support their own research work.
This post comes back to my article "From the Stagflation to the Great Inflation" and proposes to navigate in the stagflation dataset I have built. Here, you can play interactively with the coupling and cocitation networks of my article.
The biblionetwork package provides functions to create fastly bibliometric networks like bibliographic coupling network, co-citation network and co-authorship network.
The networkflow package proposes functions to make it easier and quicker to work on networks. It mainly targets working on bibliometric networks. This package heavily relies on [igraph](https://igraph.org/r/) and [tidygraph](https://tidygraph.data-imaginist.com/index.html), and aims at producing ready-made networks for projecting them using [ggraph](https://ggraph.data-imaginist.com/).
This article proposes a history of the evolution of macroeconomists’ explanations of the 1970s US stagflation, from 1975 to 2013. Using qualitative and quantitative methods, 1) I observe the different types of explanations coexisting at different periods ; 2) I assess which was the dominant type of explanations for each period ; and 3) I identify the main sources of influence for the different types of explanation. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, supply-shocks and inflation inertia were fundamental concepts to explain stagflation. The interest on this topic progressively vanished after 1985. In the 1990s, it was a totally new literature which emerged almost without any reference to past explanations. This literature focused on the role played by monetary policy in the late 1960s and the 1970s to account for the rise of inflation. New Classical economists’ contributions, like Lucas (1976), Kydland and Prescott (1977) or Barro and Gordon (1983a), which were ignored by stagflation explanations in the 1970s/1980s, became major references to account for the 1970s stagflation in the 1990s.
The International Seminar on Macroeconomics (ISoM) is an annual conference, which was co-sponsored during 15 years (1978-1993) by the French EHESS and the NBER. This article uncovers the scientific and institutional dynamics unrolling from this cooperation. We argue that macroeconomists gathered by the ISoM contributed greatly to the making of a European network of economists sharing similar professional and intellectual standards. We illustrate how the ISoM stood at the crossroad of two types of ‘internationalisation’ of economics: the integration of European national communitiesand the process of ‘Americanisation’ of economics. While existing literature on ‘internationalisation’ focuses on the national level, our contribution investigates the European level. Moreover, we unveil how two research programmes in macroeconomics (namely the disequilibrium theory and large-scale macroeconometric modelling) played a significant role in this process.