W.W. Leontief and the Repressions of the 1920s: an Interview

Kaliadina, Svetlana A.; Babaskina, Tatiana; Shikalova, Maria; Wittich, Claus

doi:10.1080/09535310601020884

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After earning his doctorate in economics in Munich, Leontief fled rising anti-Semitism in Germany to take a position with the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research in 1931. From 1932 through 1975, Leontief also held a faculty appointment at Harvard, where he taught input-output analysis to successive generations of economists (Kaliadina, 2006; Kaliadina & Pavlova, 2006). Carl Christ (1955) was one of Leontief’s early acolytes, publishing an influential paper on input-output analysis in 1955 and becoming a colleague of Coleman at Johns Hopkins in 1959.…”

Section: Historical Background On Research Into School Resources and mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Question of School Resources and Student Achievement

Hedges¹,

Pigott

Polanin

et al. 2016

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One question posed continually over the past century of education research is to what extent school resources affect student outcomes. From the turn of the century to the present, a diverse set of actors, including politicians, physicians, and researchers from a number of disciplines, have studied whether and how money that is provided for schools translates into increased student achievement. The authors discuss the historical origins of the question of whether school resources relate to student achievement, and report the results of a meta-analysis of studies examining that relationship. They find that policymakers, researchers, and other stakeholders have addressed this question using diverse strategies. The way the question is asked, and the methods used to answer it, is shaped by history, as well by the scholarly, social, and political concerns of any given time. The diversity of methods has resulted in a body of literature too diverse and too inconsistent to yield reliable inferences through meta-analysis. The authors suggest that a collaborative approach addressing the question from a variety of disciplinary and practice perspectives may lead to more effective interventions to meet the needs of all students.

show abstract

Section: Historical Background On Research Into School Resources and mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Question of School Resources and Student Achievement

Hedges¹,

Pigott

Polanin

et al. 2016

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This error is even engraved on Leontief's tombstone in Connecticut (see Bjerkholt and Kurz, 2006, p. 332). On the history of the Leontief family, see Leontief (1987), Kaliadina and Pavlova (2006), and Kaliadina (2006).…”

Section: Leontief's "German" Biographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There he also mentions as his main teachers in St. Petersburg Iossif Kulischer, 9 Sergei Platonov, 10 Sergei Solntsev 11 and Evgeny Tarle. 12 Kaliadina (2006) mentions a report Leontief delivered on the "Analysis of 9 Iossif Michailowitch Kulischer was among the few prerevolutionary professors who remained active after 1917 and became influential in the history of Russian economic thought in that period. Like Kulischer he belonged to the prerevolutionary group of economists who pursued a midway approach between Marxism and the Historical School.…”

Section: Leontief's "German" Biographymentioning

confidence: 99%

Leontief and his German period

Hagemann¹

2021

RUJEC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wassily Leontief jun. (1905–1999) moved to Berlin in April 1925 after getting his first academic degree from the University of Leningrad. In Berlin he mainly studied with Werner Sombart and Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz who were the referees of his Ph.D. thesis “The economy as a circular flow” (1928). From spring 1927 until April 1931 Leontief was a member of the research staff at the Kiel Institute of World Economics, interrupted by the period from April 1929 to March 1930 when he was an advisor to the Chinese Ministry of Railroads. In the journal of the Kiel Institute, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Leontief had already published his first article “Die Bilanz der russischen Volkswirtschaft. Eine methodologische Untersuchung” [The balance of the Russian economy. A methodological investigation] in 1925. In Kiel Leontief primarily worked on the statistical analysis of supply and demand curves. Leontief’s method triggered a fierce critique by Ragnar Frisch, which launched a heavy debate on “pitfalls” in the construction of supply and demand curves. The debate started in Germany but was continued in the USA where Leontief became a researcher at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) in summer 1931. The Leontief–Frisch controversy culminated in the Quarterly Journal of Economics (1934), published by Harvard University, where Leontief made his subsequent career from 1932–1975. His later analysis of the employment consequences of technological change in the 1980s had some roots in his Kiel period.

show abstract

“…6,7 In their works both Remak and Leontief adopted a concept of value referring to the exchange relations deduced from the relation of production (having nothing to do with consumer's judgements and tastes) and in their description of the economic process both authors used the classical idea of circular flow. There were numerous sources of this idea: reading of the classics -Leontief remembers that, when he was a student, he read the works of economists of the 17 th and 18 th centuries, François Quesnay included (Kaliadina, 2006); the German debate on classics, Marx and Walras in which Bortkiewicz was involved; last but not least also the debate of the 1920s on planning in the USSR. In fact, at the beginning of the 1920s, the Soviet planners P. I. Popov and L. N. Litosenko referred to both Quesnay's Tableau and Marx's schemas of reproduction in their development of a sort of primitive input-output matrix of the Soviet economy as a whole.…”

Section: The Classical Perspective Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

Between Berlin and Cambridge: classical conceptions of the general economic equilibrium in the late 1920s

Marchionatti

2019

Cambridge Journal of Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with some contributions to the debate on General Economic Equilibrium between the two world wars. Originating in Cambridge and Berlin, they differed from the Viennese contributions of the Walrasian perspective traditionally considered by the literature. They can be defined to represent the classical approach to general equilibrium. The authors considered are the Italian-born economist Piero Sraffa, the German mathematician Robert Remak and the Russian-born economist Wassily Leontief. The paper focuses in particular on the intellectual origins of their contributions in the Russian-German theoretical debate of the period 1890–1910 involving classical economists, Marx and Walras: these connections emerge clearly in the contributions of the German-Russian Mathematical School between the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries.

show abstract

W.W. Leontief and the Repressions of the 1920s: an Interview

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

The Question of School Resources and Student Achievement

The Question of School Resources and Student Achievement

Leontief and his German period

Between Berlin and Cambridge: classical conceptions of the general economic equilibrium in the late 1920s

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About