The article by Aileen Fyfe (this issue) raises a number of important issues about academic identity and the importance of the disciplinary community in the creation and maintenance of that identity. It also discusses some of the additional difficulties faced by interdisciplinary disciplines; lack of recognition (and thus institutional support), isolation of individual academics in ‘foreign’ communities and a general anxiety and lack of self-confidence by the practitioners in that discipline as to the worth of their field. Finally, the article hints at the dangers these difficulties pose for the sustainability of the discipline – as lack of a clear identity and an institutionally marginal existence can make developing and attracting future practitioners difficult. In Fyfe’s article, the focus was on the history of science. This article explores some of the many similarities, and differences, that exist for individuals in the field of economic history. For many economic historians, locating themselves within their discipline is still a major issue.
AdamsKHeanSSturgisP (2006) Investigating the factors influencing professional identity of first-year health and social care students. Learning in Health and Social Care5(2): 55–68.
2.
AndreanoRL (1970) The New Economic History. Recent Papers on Methodology, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
3.
BatenJMuschallikJ (2012) The global status of economic history. Economic History of Developing Regions27(1): 93–113.
4.
BértolaL (2013) Another brick in the wall? A comment on Francesco Boldizzoni’s The Poverty of Clio. Investigaciones de Historia Económica – Economic History Research9(1): 7–10.
5.
BleakleyA (2006) You are who I say you are: The rhetorical construction of identity in the operating theatre. Journal of Workplace Learning17(7): 414–425.
CarlosAM (2010) Reflections on reflections: Review essay of reflections on the cliometric revolution: Conversations with economic historians. Cliometrica. Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History4(1): 97–111.
ConradAMeyerJ (1958) The economies of slavery in the Ante Bellum South. Journal of Political Economy66(2): 95–130.
10.
Daudin G (2010) Quantitative methods and economic history. Centre de recherché en economie de Sciences Po, Document de travail de l’OFCE No 15, Observatoire Francais des Conjojonctures Economiques (OFCE). Available at: http://www.ofce.sciences-po.fr/ (accessed March 2013).
11.
Di VaioGWeisdorfJL (2010) Ranking economic history journals: A citation-based impact-adjusted analysis. Cliometrica4(1): 1–17.
12.
EichengreenB (2012) Economic history and economic policy. Journal of Economic history72(2): 289–307.
13.
FeinsteinCHThomasM (2002) Making history count. A primer in quantitative methods for historians, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
FieldAJ (1987) The future of economic history. In: FieldA (ed.) The future of Economic History, Boston: Klewer Nijhoff, pp. 1–41.
15.
FogelRW (1964) Railroads and American Economic Growth: Essays in Economic History, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
16.
FogelRW (1965) The reunification of economic history with economic theory. American Economic Review55(May): 92–98.
17.
FridensonP (2007) Business history and history. In: JonesGZeitlinJ (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Business History, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 9–36.
18.
Goldin C (1994) Cliometrics and the Nobel. NBER Working Paper Series on Historical Factors in Long Run Growth. Historical Paper no 65. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
19.
GreasleyDOxleyL (2010) Clio and the economist: Making historians count. Journal of Economic Surveys24(5): 755–774.
20.
GreifA (1997) Cliometrics after 40 years. The American Economic Review87(2): 400–403.
21.
HoffmanPT (2010) Response to Robert Whaples. Historically Speaking11(2): 20–22.
22.
HudsonP (2001) Living Economic and Social History. Historians Explain Their Interest in, and the Nature of, Their Subject. Essays to Mark the 75th Anniversary of the Economic History Society, Glasgow: Economic History Society.
23.
JonesGvan LeeuwenMHDBroadberryS (2012) The future of economic, business and social history. Scandinavian Economic History Review60(3): 225–253.
24.
LyonsJSCainLPWilliamsonSH (2008) Reflections on the Cliometric Revolution: Conversations with Economic Historians, Oxford: Routledge.
25.
MandyAMiltonCMandyP (2004) Professional stereotyping and inter-professional education. Learning in Health and Social Care3(3): 154–170.
26.
McCloskeyDN (1976) Does the past have useful economics?Journal of Economic Literature14(2): 434–461.
27.
McCloskeyDN (2010) One more step: An agreeable reply to Whaples. Historically Speaking11(2): 22–23.
28.
McCloskeyDN (2013) The poverty of Boldizzoni: Resurrecting the German Historical School. Investigaciones de Historia Económica – Economic History Research9(1): 2–6.
29.
MorganSShanahanM (2010) The supply of economic history in Australasia: The Australian Economic History Review at 50. Australian Economic History Review50(3): 217–239.
30.
MoykerJ (2010) On the supposed decline and fall of economic history. Historically Speaking11(2): 23–25.
31.
NicholasS (1997) The future of economic history in Australia. Australian Economic History Review37(3): 267–275.
32.
NixonJ (1996) Professional identity and the restructuring of higher education. Studies in Higher Education21(1): 5–16.
33.
NorthD (1961) The Economic Growth of the United States 1790-1860, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
34.
RawskiTGCarterSBCohenJS (1996) Economics and the Historian, Berkley: University of California Press.
35.
Reid A., Dahlgren MA, Dahlgren LO, et al. (2011) From Expert Student to Novice Professional. Professional Learning and Development in Schools and Higher Education no. 5. New York: Springer.
36.
RojasAM (2007) Cliometrics: A market account of a scientific community (1957–2006). Lecturas de Economia Universidad de Antioquia-Lecturas de Economia66: 47–82.
37.
SnowCP (1959) The Two Cultures, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Toninelli PM (2002) Europe vs North America. On the epistemological background of the 1940–1980 methodological differences in economic history. Paper presented to the XIII Congress of the International Economic History Association, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 22–26 July.
39.
TroeskenW (2010) Toward a richer, more diverse intellectual marketplace? A response to Whaples. Historically Speaking11(2): 25–26.
40.
WengerE (1998) Communities of Practice. Learning, Meaning and Identity, New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
WhaplesR (1991) A quantitative history of the Journal of Economic history and the Cliometric Revolution. The Journal of Economic History51(2): 289–301.
42.
WhaplesR (1995) Where is the consensus among American Economic Historians? The results of a survey on forty propositions. The Journal of Economic History55(1): 139–154.
43.
WhaplesR (2002) The supply and demand of economic history: Recent trends in the Journal of Economic History. The Journal of Economic History62(2): 524–532.
44.
WhaplesR (2010) Is economic history a neglected field of study?Historically Speaking11(2): 17–20. 27.
45.
Wrigley EA (1999) The Review during the last 50 years. Economic History Society, 1–21. Available at: http://www.ehs.org.uk/archive/pdf/EHR.PDF (accessed March 2013).
