Looking Ahead - The Future of Economic History

The 50th anniversary of the Economic and Social History Society of Ireland comes at an exciting time for considering the future of the field of economic history, especially on the island of Ireland. There have been a number of developments in the field in recent years which have led to a broader scope for research and impact, that will cause economic historians to think about how we approach the discipline going forward, and that will ensure the sustainability of the field into the future.

Economic history, and in particular Irish economic history, has always been marred by issues around data availability. The fire in the Public Records Office during the Civil War meant many records from before 1922 were lost to history, while many of the other records which did exist were simply too time consuming to digitise in the quantities needed to carry out the statistical inquiry which characterises the field. However, developments in recent years have changed the scope of research. The growing popularity of genealogy has facilitated a rapid increase in the digitisation and availability of personal records, such as birth and death certificates, ¹ that were previously beyond the reach of many researchers. Similarly, developments in Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and web scraping software have dramatically decreased both the financial and time costs associated with data collection. These advancements have changed, and will continue to change, the landscape of economic history, making many projects which before were simply not viable much more achievable. ²

Recent works in economic history point to the direction these data developments could be sending future research. There have been an increasing number of publications which focus on large-scale, disaggregated data sources. In the context of Irish studies, electoral districts and parishes are becoming an increasingly common level of study. This allows for greater variation to be exploited, leading to new insights to be uncovered on previously studied topics. For example, more is now known about the context in which the Irish Famine took place. Use of the 1833 Poor Inquiry ³ has allowed for parish-level analysis of pre-famine living conditions to try to explain the variation in famine severity across Ireland, ⁴ while census data has offered more insight into the role of population pressure. ⁵ More disaggregated data has also been used in studies of a number of other contexts, such as the 1918 Sinn Féin election victory ⁶ and the impact of Ireland's twentieth century social housing policy on long-term population change. ⁷ Future economic history research is likely to continue this trend, leading to the development of a range of new research areas and insights.

Alongside the changes in data availability, another change facing economic history going forward is the increasing use and integration of more advanced econometric techniques. As the structure of universities has changed, economic history departments are less likely to exist, with economic historians more likely to find themselves in economics departments within Business Schools. This leads to stronger links between economic historians and other economic disciplines, and therefore greater exposure to, and involvement with, econometric developments. Again, this opens the door to new avenues of research. One area which has seen increasing popularity in recent years has been the use of spatial econometrics. The data improvements previously mentioned have also been key in facilitating this. Much of the work previously mentioned which uses more disaggregated data has used spatial techniques in order to exploit this variation.

The use of spatial data and techniques also facilitates the production of choropleth, or statistically thematic, maps. The popularity of these as a data visualization tool has also experienced an increase. A great advantage of these is how accessible they are. While summary statistics and regression outputs require some level of specialist understanding to interpret, thematic maps do not present this challenge. Therefore, their growing use may open new avenues for research impact. Thematic maps have the potential to be embedded into teaching across all levels of education, and other forms of public engagement, such as infographics and specialist events. Equally, there is also the potential for the creation of interactive maps which allow users to engage with the statistics behind research without requiring expert knowledge or data collection. ⁸ One issue to consider with regards to this though is the cost associated with designing and maintaining the websites which host such resources, with project funding often only guaranteeing their existence for a fixed period of time. In spite of this drawback, we are likely to see the work of economic historians increasingly being integrated beyond the confines of academic research.

The recognition of economic history outside of the discipline is also being facilitated by the establishment of the Centre for Economics, Policy, and History (CEPH). ⁹ Based at Queen's University Belfast and Trinity College Dublin, but with research affiliates across a range of institutions, the Centre aims to develop Ireland as a leading force in producing policy-relevant historical research. A question often posed to economic historians is whether their work can have relevance for modern-day economics. Traditionally, many outside the field have failed to see how studies of nineteenth and twentieth century events can be useful in the twenty-first century, where context and living standards are vastly different. While it might be true that history does not repeat itself, as Mark Twain was alleged to have said, it does often rhyme. Many of the challenges economies have faced in recent years have parallels throughout history. The most notable is the Financial Crisis in 2009 and the Great Depression in the 1930s. We can also see parallels between the house price bubble and other asset bubbles in history, recent waves of globalisation and the first wave of globalisation, developments in technology which are taking us into the Fourth Industrial Revolution which parallels with the First Industrial Revolution, and of course the COVID-19 pandemic and the many pandemics which came beforehand. The work of CEPH and its associates is helping more people realise the relevance of economic history research for the wider economic discipline. Already a number of events have been carried out to increase engagement with both policy makers and the general public to make them more aware of firstly the existence of economic history, and secondly the insights it offers. As this work continues, economic historians should find themselves with many more opportunities to engage with those outside the discipline, opening avenues for future research.

The experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has also been somewhat beneficial for economic history. During the pandemic many did turn to history and the experience of historical pandemics, in particular the Spanish Influenza, for lessons and insights on how to deal with the events that were unfolding in 2020 and beyond. In the ongoing UK inquiry into their handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, David Cameron acknowledged that the government had looked to history, although not necessarily the right part of history. With climate change meaning that we face a heightened risk of pandemics in the coming years, history could be increasingly looked to. Barry Eichengreen argues that in order to learn from the past we must first reach a consensus on what these lessons are. ¹⁰ Economic historians have studied many events in history and therefore are well placed to offer consensus on the lessons they offer. The experience of the COVID-19 pandemic and the attention this brought to economic history may therefore help to facilitate further links between economic history, other disciplines, and policy makers going forward. One potentially significant policy impact which economic historians may have made for pandemic research and policy going forward comes from work by Colvin and McLaughlin. Their work, which focuses on Ireland's experience during the 1918 Influenza pandemic, highlights the need for age-adjusted mortality estimates. ¹¹ While the differing vulnerability of different age cohorts to different pandemics has long been established, theirs is the first paper which shows adjusting mortality estimates for underlying demographics can alter the perceptions of impact. Applying this lesson to the 1918 pandemic in other countries, and to other pandemics, may change our understanding of how countries fared and may offer the better policy insights. As engagement between economic history and other disciplines continues into the future, the scope for economic historians to impact policy will increase.

Economic history may also offer some guidance for the new challenges the world faces in the twenty-first century. While climate change and artificial intelligence in their current format are not challenges we have encountered before, they are not without precedent. Climate change brings with it the threat of extreme weather, floods, droughts, food shortages, displacement of people and many other risks. These risks are not new. We faced many of these throughout history. So, while climate change itself may be new, economic history can offer us insight on how to adapt, and potentially mitigate, the risks it brings with it. Similarly, while artificial intelligence is a new phenomenon, it is not the first-time advancements in technology have posed challenges such as labour replacement. Again, history can offer us some insight on how to face these challenges. Lessons from the past may become increasingly important for the future.

Another potential benefit of this broader awareness of economic history and the insights it can offer may be to strengthen the links between economic and social history, which in recent years have weakened with the two now very much seen as separate disciplines. If policymakers and other groups start to more frequently turn to historical events for insights, the context of these events will be increasingly important and therefore understanding the history will be key. This therefore may foster growing collaboration between economic and social historians going forward, which can only be a beneficial outcome. As the data availability improvements discussed earlier continue and new avenues of research are opened, this also offers new opportunities for greater collaboration between both groups of historians. History is an interdisciplinary subject, therefore an interdisciplinary approach is key. The Economic and Social History Society of Ireland and events like its annual conference are key in maintaining these links between economic and social historians and ensuring both disciplines exist together.

The growth of economic history can also be seen in its increasing presence in undergraduate economics teaching. More universities are now offering dedicated economic history modules or are integrating economic history research into their general economics teaching. This has been in part facilitated by both the Economist's Guide to Economic History ¹² and the Core Project. ¹³ As more students have an awareness of the economic history it again facilitates the links between economic history and other sub disciplines of economics. It also means that we will have a growing crop of economics graduates who bring the skills and expertise of economic history into their careers, be that inside or outside of academia. Those who move outside of academia will be particularly helpful in increasing awareness of the subject.

For economic historians to make the impacts discussed above, such as engaging with policymakers and other disciplines, we need to think about how we communicate our work. While the econometric analysis and techniques already discussed are central to the field and improved both the quality and insights of our work, they are not always accessible to wider audiences. We therefore need to think about how we create impact beyond the traditional avenue of research articles. While these are, and will continue to be, key sources of research output, we need to consider additional sources as well. For example, engaging with events such as the ESRC Festival of Social Sciences or European Researchers Night are a useful way to reach audiences outside of the discipline. ¹⁴ This could be researchers in other disciplines, those from industry, and the general public. Based on experience of taking part in such events, they can help foster connections which facilitate both research and impact.

Another means of communicating our work more widely is through writing pieces for sites such as RTÉ Brainstorm ¹⁵ and the Economics Observatory. ¹⁶ While useful for a number of groups, they can be particularly so for putting economic history on the radar of students across subject areas. As they are short pieces written for non-expert audiences, they are much more accessible than traditional journal articles for students in the early stages of their degrees or for those outside of economics. They also often draw on work which forms the basis of a research article so can act as an introduction to journal pieces. Similar to this, there has been a growth in the popularity of podcasts in recent years. This is another way of communicating research more widely. This could be through making other economic historians more aware of Irish economic history through podcasts such as the Economic History Podcast or the CEPH's Everything Economic History podcast, or other non-specialist podcasts which may capture a broader audience.

In the world of academia, the expectation to generate impact from research is increasingly important. This is a task which has sometimes been viewed as harder to do in disciplines such as economic history. However, the points discussed throughout this article suggest that there are many avenues available for this. As the opportunities for impact grow and become more accessible, this will help sustain the future of economic history. An issue which has traditionally faced both economic and social historians has been precarious employment opportunities, with many finding themselves in fixed term positions, with career uncertainty often driving people out of the field. As the links between history and policy are strengthened, the precarity of employment may be reduced. This will entice more individuals into the field and make choosing a career in economic history a more viable option, therefore helping to sustain its future going forward. Overall, the future outlook for economic history looks bright. The 50^th anniversary of the society comes at what looks like the beginning of a real period of growth for the discipline. While there may be fewer stand-alone economic history departments than there were fifty years ago, and economic and social history may have drifted apart, there are many causes for optimism. Economic history is becoming increasingly integrated into economics teaching, receiving greater attention from policy makers, and being opened up to new avenues for research. All of these developments will help to ensure it continues to thrive in the coming years.