From statistics to development: the Historical School of Economics and the International Statistical Institute

ABSTRACT

When the International Statistical Institute (ISI) was founded in London in 1885, it assembled statisticians and demographers, as well as engineers and even entrepreneurs. Most of all, however, it brought together economists, which quickly made the ISI the most important international forum for the discipline. Based on intensive study of official ISI publications as well as the correspondence and writings of its members, the article first describes the foundation of the ISI from the perspective of the growing discipline of economics, and with a particular eye on followers of the younger German Historical School of Economics. Focusing on labour statistics, it then delves into one field of activity of this group of Institute members more thoroughly in order to reflect their contribution to the concept of economic development, whose origins are usually located in the context of ninetenth-century colonialism. Ultimately, the article makes the case for attributing to the International Statistical Institute its due place and significance in the intellectual history of development thinking.

KEYWORDS:

• International Statistical Institute
• German Historical School Of Economics
• development
• intellectual history
• political economy
• Gustav Schmoller

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Sibylle Röth, Pascale Siegrist, Sina Steglich, two anonymous readers for the ERH and its editorial committee for comments on earlier drafts of this article. Special thanks go to Martin Bemmann who not only initiated this special issue, but also gave helpful feedback in several stages of the working process.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. von Schlözer, Theorie der Statistik, 86. (‘History is continuing statistics; and statistics is frozen History’).

2. Robert Giffen in his toast at the jubilee dinner of the Royal Statistical Society 1885; see Statistical Society of London, “The Jubilee Dinner Speeches,” 276.

3. Rinne, “Ernst Louis Etienne Laspeyres.”

4. Laspeyres, Kathedersozialisten.

5. Grimmer-Solem and Romani, “The Historical School, 1870–1900,” 276, 286; see also the take of Roman Köster, who not only defends the idea of ‘School,’ but also sticks to Grimmer-Solem and Romani’s assumption that the focus on statistics was one of its unique features: Köster, Die Wissenschaft der Außenseiter, 32–6.

6. On this congress, see Randeraad, States and Statistics, 174–8; however, despite the participation of Laspeyres and several renowned German economists, including Georg Friedrich Knapp, Bruno Hildebrand, Wilhelm Roscher and Adolph Wagner, official statisticians remained by far in the majority within the German congress delegation: see Keleti, Commission permanente, 1–22. Nonetheless, Randeraad also identifies a decline of statistics to an auxiliary science beginning with the end of the congresses and Quetelet’s death, albeit without referring to economics as one crucial discipline to take the lead; see Randeraad, States and Statistics, 182–3.

7. Cf. Gagnon, “Les réseaux,” 206–7; Horstmann, Halbamtliche Wissenschaft, 150; the strong presence of economists at the early ISI has been largely overlooked by historians of economic thought as well; see, e.g. Tribe, who in his otherwise excellent account on the emergence and development of economic science makes no mention of it; see Tribe, Constructing Economic Science.

8. Laspeyres, Kathedersozialisten, 41.

9. Randeraad, States and Statistics, 1.

10. On this intransitive understanding of ‘progress’ and ‘development,’ see Cowen and Shenton, “The Invention of Development”; Wieland, “Entwicklung, Evolution.”

11. Grimmer-Solem and Romani, “Empirical Reality,” 34–42.

12. Arndt, Economic Development, 22–9; Rist, The History of Development, 47–68; and Unger, International Development, 34–43.

13. Wieland, “Entwicklung, Evolution.”

14. Cowen and Shenton, “The Invention of Development.”

15. Alacevich and Boianovsky, “Writing the History,” 14; on Sun Yat-sen, see Helleiner, “Pioneer”; and on Indian economists, see Hatekar, “Empire and the Economist.”

16. The linkages between the Historical School and the idea of development have been discussed so far only once, very briefly, and without any mentioning of the ISI by the Norwegian economist Erik S. Reinert; see Reinert, “German Economics,” 61–4.

17. Nixon, History; Zahn, L’Institut.

18. Randeraad, States and Statistics, 178.

19. See the list of members mentioned in a report on the last meeting in Paris in 1878: Statistical Society of London, “The Permanent Commission,” 549–50.

20. Keleti, Commission permanente, 40–1; Nixon, History, 9.

21. Cf. Horstmann, Halbamtliche Wissenschaft, 142–5; Nixon, History, 9.

22. Horvath, “Le concept,” 289–90.

23. On this conflict, see Schneider, Wissensproduktion im Staat, 157–82; and Engel was dismissed in 1882.

24. Randeraad, States and Statistics, 170. Spain and Sweden declined the invitation; Russia and England did not even respond to it; see Nixon, History, 9.

25. Neumann-Spallart, “L’Institut international de statistique,” 8.

26. Royal Statistical Society, “Sir Rawson W. Rawson,” 677–9.

27. Otruba, “Neumann von Spallart, Franz Xaver.”

28. Royal Statistical Society, “Dr. F. X. von Neumann-Spallart,” 343–6; Bemmann, “Weltwirtschaftsstatistik,” 67; and Slobodian, “World Economy,” 309–13.

29. Clerc, “Émil Levasseur,” 79–92; Boureille and Commerçon, “Émil Levasseur,” 139–53.

30. Levasseur, Depuis la conquête; Levasseur, Depuis 1789.

31. de Foville, “Notice historique,” 30–2.

32. This is at least what German press coverage suggests; see Statistical Society of London, “Foreign Press Notices,” 343. The literature on the ISI does not discuss the reasons for the German absence: see Nixon, History, 12.

33. Statistical Society of London, “The Jubilee Dinner Speeches,” 276, 279.

34. On the global reputation of German academia in the nineteenth century, see Osterhammel, Transformation, 804–8.

35. Statistical Society of London, “Proposed Members”; Institut international de statistique, “Liste des membres”; and Nixon, History, 149.

36. Esenwein-Roche, Wilhelm Lexis; Lexis, “Systematisierung, Richtungen und Methoden der Volkswirtschaftslehre.” Bücher was elected in 1897, Zahn and Philippovich in 1901; see Stemerdink, Members, 20, 78, 82.

37. Frie, “Verein für Socialpolitik”; and vom Bruch, “Bürgerliche Sozialreform.”

38. Falkner, “The International Statistical Institute,” 361; on the context, see Rothschild, “Political Economy,” 762–3. On Japan, see Schwentker, “Fremde Gelehrte”; and following Balabkins, it was also Conrad who urged his American students to set up an equivalent to the Verein in the United States, see Balabkins, Economics, 98–9.

39. Grimmer-Solem, Learning Empire, 7–8.

40. Stemerdink, Members, 53, 67.

41. Marshall to Schmoller, May 9, 1890, GSta Pk VI. HA Nl Schmoller no. 15, vol. 1, pp. 586–7; Schmoller to Marshall, August 6, 1890, in Whitaker, Climbing, no. 318, 335–6. For further correspondence, see, e.g. Marshall to Gustav Schmoller, December 9, 1894, GSta Pk VI. HA Nl Schmoller no. 153, p. 52; Schmoller to Marshall, November 10, 1893, in Whitaker, Summit, no. 438, 102–3.

42. Cowen and Shenton, “The Invention of Development,” 28–9.

43. Royal Statistical Society, “Miscellanea,” 596.

44. See the overview in Zahn, L’Institut, 27–8.

45. Wieland, “Entwicklung, Evolution,” 199–201, 222–4.

46. Lexis, Allgemeine Volkswirtschaftslehre, 21–3, 26–7, quotes 22.

47. Craigie, “Subjects,” 741–6. On the context, see also D’Onofrio, Observing Agriculture.

48. American Academy of Political and Social Science, “International Statistical Institute,” 109.

49. Goldberg and Moye, The First Hundred Years, 7.

50. Wright, “The Courses of Wages.”

51. Ibid., 110.

52. Wright, “Discours.”

53. Stapleford, The Cost of Living, 32.

54. Ibid., 49–50.

55. Ibid., 46.

56. Wright, “Science and Economics,” 902–4.

57. Rieter, “Gustav von Schmollers Erinnerungen”; and the (incomplete) Schmoller Papers in Berlin contain two voluminous folders on the institute; see GSta Pk VI. HA Nl Schmoller no. 15, two vols.

58. Schmoller, “Die Einkommensverteilung,” 9.

59. Schmoller, “Die historische Lohnbewegung,” 236–9, quote 239.

60. Internationales Statistisches Institut, Resolutionen zur Statistik der Arbeitslöhne, o.D. [1891], GSta Pk VI. HA Nl Schmoller no. 15, vol. 1, p. 490; Institut International de Statistique, “Comité du travail.”

61. Votum des preußischen Handelsministers Hans Freiherr von Berlepsch für das Staatsministerium, 5. Dezember 1891, in Ayass, Quellensammlung, 252–3. On the actual establishment of the commission and its tasks, see Richter, “Arbeitsstatistik und arbeitsstatistische Ämter,” 1149–62.

62. Gould, “The Social Condition of Labor,” 6.

63. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings; see also Schäfer, American Progressives; and Ross, Origins, 98–122.

64. See also the attempt by Joseph M. Hodge to integrate both European and colonial contexts, Hodge, “Beyond Dependency,” 622–3; and with regard to colonialism, a similar argument was made by Sebastian Conrad; see Conrad, Globalization.

65. Unger, International Development, 16.

66. Büschel, Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe, 116–78.

67. Alacevich, “Theory and Practice,” 270.

68. Against this backdrop, it is no coincidence that when it comes to the trajectory of the development idea during the twentieth century, the role of international organizations claims prime attention, see e.g. Speich Chassé, Die Erfindung des Bruttosozialprodukts; Alacevich, “The World Bank”; Toye and Toye, The UN; Rempe, Entwicklung im Konflikt.

69. Speich Chassé, Die Erfindung des Bruttosozialprodukts, 162–4, quote 162.

70. See the instructive retrospective by Albert O. Hirschman on the emergence of his discipline in Adelman, The Essential Hirschman, 50–73.

71. Zahn, L’Institut, 109–10.

Additional information

Funding

Research on this article was funded by the Heisenberg Programme of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. The German Historical Institute, Paris, lent further support by granting a Karl-Ferdinand-Werner Fellowship.

Notes on contributors

Martin Rempe

Martin Rempe is a historian of modern European and global history at the University of Konstanz and currently fellow of the DFG Heisenberg Programme. He specializes in the history of development, the social history of music and cultural work, as well as the history of European–African relations. Rempe is author of Entwicklung im Konflikt: Die EWG und der Senegal, 1957–1975 (Cologne: Böhlau, 2012) and of Kunst, Spiel, Arbeit: Musikerleben in Deutschland, 1850 bis 1960 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht 2020), which will appear in English soon (Leiden: Brill, 2023). Research articles have been published in Itinerario, Humanity, Geschichte und Gesellschaft and other journals. Rempe is also co-editor of the handbook Musicking in Twentieth Century Europe (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2021).