Announcements

The Duke International Travel Policy is now available online.

The Travel Policy is in effect as of January 22, 2008.

https://eruditio.aas.duke.edu/international/

News and Events

View the latest International News and Events on the Duke International homepage

Duke International Faculty Database

Explore the range of faculty engagement with world regions and global issues by browsing the Faculty Database System or by searching for particular keywords (major world area, country, research topic, etc).

While the Duke International website strives to provide a comprehensive listing of Duke faculty with international research interests, you may also find additional information by exploring school-specific faculty listings


Publications of Neil de Marchi    :chronological  alphabetical  combined listing:

%% Books   
@book{fds318155,
   Author = {Bianchi, M and De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Introduction},
   Volume = {48},
   Pages = {1-15},
   Publisher = {Duke University Press},
   Editor = {de Marchi, N and Bianchi, M},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {0822363895},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-3619214},
   Doi = {10.1215/00182702-3619214},
   Key = {fds318155}
}


%% Journal Articles   
@article{fds346458,
   Author = {Boumans, M and De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Models, measurement, and “universal patterns”: Jan
             tinbergen and development planning without
             theory},
   Journal = {History of Political Economy},
   Volume = {50},
   Number = {S1},
   Pages = {231-248},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-7033956},
   Abstract = {Development economics in the 1950s and 1960s, as Jan
             Tinbergen and Irma Adelman saw it, was a “groping in the
             dark.” Besides the limited knowledge of dynamic
             mechanisms, the lack of data was a severe problem for any
             attempt at modeling, whether macroeconomic, input-output, or
             in the tradition of national income accounting. As concerns
             the three main figures of this article—the empirical
             researchers Tinbergen, Hollis Chenery, and Adelman—each
             developed his or her own approach to modeling: modeling in
             stages, modeling to capture universal patterns, and factor
             analysis, respectively. Tinbergen, Chenery, and Adelman
             shared a common inductive methodology, which might rightly
             be called “measurement without theory,” in the sense
             that there was no economic theory that could help them in
             organizing the available messy and often unreliable data.
             Chenery saw a role for abstract mathematical models as
             helping inquirers to rise above such impediments, even if
             only temporarily, or to gain focus, as was the case with his
             making technical progress an exogenous variable.
             Tinbergen’s models of the “first stage” were also
             intended to make planning for development tractable, but
             without mixing planning with such focusing devices. Adelman,
             for her part, preferred to search for and identify factors
             of development.},
   Doi = {10.1215/00182702-7033956},
   Key = {fds346458}
}

@article{fds325682,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Psychology fails to trump the multiyear, structural
             development plan: Albert Hirschman’s largely frustrated
             efforts to place the “ability to make and carry out
             development decisions” at the center of the development
             economics of the late 1950s and the 1960s},
   Journal = {History of Political Economy},
   Volume = {48},
   Number = {suppl 1},
   Pages = {226-238},
   Publisher = {Duke University Press},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-3619286},
   Abstract = {Economists in the 1950s differed on “backwardness” and
             how best to intervene. World Bank economists favored
             planning, but one dissenter, Albert Hirschman, held the
             conviction that the basis for success lay in a desire for
             change and the will to face down difficulties. In 1959
             Hirschman’s approach was rejected as more psychology than
             economics by a leading representative of detailed plans and
             removing “obstacles” such as short-ages of foreign
             exchange and domestic savings. Ironically, RAND
             psychologists had just shown that team training with
             simulations plus daily debriefings that encouraged team
             input, improved performance under stress, roughly in line
             with Hirschman’s “psychological attitudes” and
             willingness to face down difficulties.},
   Doi = {10.1215/00182702-3619286},
   Key = {fds325682}
}

@article{fds238090,
   Author = {De Marchi and N and Van Miegroet and HJ},
   Title = {Chapter 3 The History of Art Markets},
   Journal = {Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture},
   Volume = {1},
   Pages = {69-122},
   Publisher = {Elsevier},
   Year = {2006},
   Month = {December},
   ISSN = {1574-0676},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0676(06)01003-9},
   Abstract = {Treating markets as arenas where relative advantage is
             contested, this entry explores the emergence and evolution
             of Western markets for paintings, 1450-1750, in terms of the
             players, their creative moves to secure gain, and the rules
             they devised to maintain order. Primary markets for
             paintings arose as a derivative of the commission market for
             one-off, mainly religious paintings in places such as
             Florence and Bruges, in the second half of the 15th century.
             Demand from foreign merchants eager to obtain works in the
             new medium, oil, gave Bruges an edge. So did a demand for
             easel paintings on thin linen, and even in oil on panel, as
             cheap substitutes for tapestries. Variety and cost also
             played a role. Emulation among differently-trained artists
             generated novel products plus extraordinary cost reductions,
             and painters discovered a latent demand among the less
             wealthy. Some novel products were exported, as were new
             techniques. The retail market in Florence was limited in
             size and largely confined to serving a need for cheaper
             versions of unique, public commissions. A mass demand for
             paintings across the social spectrum occurred principally in
             Northern cities: e.g., Antwerp, and later Amsterdam, though
             also in Spain. Resale markets followed retail with a lag,
             recycled paintings being handled by second-hand clothes
             dealers. This sequence - commission nexus, cost-reduction
             and novel sorts of paintings, mass retail, then resale
             markets - occurred in cities across Europe. As mass markets
             emerged, so too did specialist dealers. A large part of the
             entry is devoted to detailing their creative marketing
             moves. There were tensions as to whether only artists might
             sell, but demand mostly overrode guild reluctance to
             relinquish control of distribution. Widespread distribution
             came to require efficient sales mechanisms, hence public
             sales and auctions. The entry explores auction rules and
             techniques within the broader sequence identified above. ©
             2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/S1574-0676(06)01003-9},
   Key = {fds238090}
}

@article{fds238089,
   Author = {De Marchi and N and Greene, JA},
   Title = {Adam Smith and private provision of the arts},
   Journal = {History of Political Economy},
   Volume = {37},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {431-454},
   Publisher = {Duke University Press},
   Year = {2005},
   Month = {September},
   ISSN = {0018-2702},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-37-3-431},
   Doi = {10.1215/00182702-37-3-431},
   Key = {fds238089}
}

@article{fds238092,
   Author = {de Marchi, N and Goodwin, C and Weintraub, ER},
   Title = {History of economics for the nonhistorian: A collection of
             papers},
   Journal = {History of Political Economy},
   Volume = {36},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {587-588},
   Publisher = {Duke University Press},
   Year = {2004},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-36-4-587},
   Doi = {10.1215/00182702-36-4-587},
   Key = {fds238092}
}

@article{fds238091,
   Author = {De Marchi and N and Weintraub, ER},
   Title = {Visualizing the gains from trade, mid-1870s to
             1962},
   Journal = {The European Journal of the History of Economic
             Thought},
   Volume = {10},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {551-572},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {2003},
   Month = {December},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0967256032000137711},
   Abstract = {Visualization in economics was common, and in trade theory
             almost a primary mode of analysis and demonstration from the
             late 19th century until the 1960s. Why? This paper presents
             two versions of the gains from trade notion that have come
             to us in visual form, one due to Marshall, the other to
             Viner and Samuelson. The two are very different, a fact
             better understood against a backdrop of recent neurological
             research on visualization. A key finding of that work is
             that our ability to conceive and recognize forms depends on
             forms previously seen and stored in the brain. Early
             exposure and nurturing matter greatly. The research also
             stresses that there is no basis for distinguishing between
             seeing and understanding. A satisfactory answer to the
             'Why?' question thus requires that we attend to audiences
             and their capabilities, some hints concerning which are
             offered here.},
   Doi = {10.1080/0967256032000137711},
   Key = {fds238091}
}

@article{fds238088,
   Author = {De Marchi and N and Van Miegroet and HJ},
   Title = {Ingenuity, preference, and the pricing of pictures: The
             Smith-Reynolds connection},
   Journal = {History of Political Economy},
   Volume = {31},
   Number = {SUPPL. 1},
   Pages = {379-412},
   Year = {1999},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00182702-31-Supplement-379},
   Doi = {10.1215/00182702-31-Supplement-379},
   Key = {fds238088}
}

@article{fds322187,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Comment on Niehans, Multiple discoveries’},
   Journal = {The European Journal of the History of Economic
             Thought},
   Volume = {2},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {275-279},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {1995},
   Month = {September},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09672569508538568},
   Doi = {10.1080/09672569508538568},
   Key = {fds322187}
}

@article{fds238086,
   Author = {Kim, J and De Marchi and N and Morgan, MS},
   Title = {Empirical model particularities and belief in the natural
             rate hypothesis},
   Journal = {Journal of Econometrics},
   Volume = {67},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {81-102},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {1995},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0304-4076},
   url = {http://hdl.handle.net/10161/1909 Duke open
             access},
   Abstract = {Economists test to strengthen conviction, though mostly
             without disclosing how this can occur. There is a clear line
             of logical implication from theory to model; but in the
             process there may be a narrowing and specialization of the
             hypothesis so that it is not clear what weight should be
             placed upon the result of a test on the model. Empirical
             models and tests may be narrowed down so far that they
             involve certain nonunique characteristics of the original
             theories. Even when a hypothesis is confirmed, no reverse
             inference back to theory can be made from such tests. We
             illustrate how a number of such 'characteristics tests'
             worked, drawing on American economists' tests of the natural
             rate hypothesis in the 1970s. © 1995.},
   Doi = {10.1016/0304-4076(94)01628-D},
   Key = {fds238086}
}

@article{fds238087,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {The role of Dutch auctions and lotteries in shaping the art
             market(s) of 17th century Holland},
   Journal = {Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization},
   Volume = {28},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {203-221},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {1995},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0167-2681},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(95)00032-1},
   Abstract = {This article examines institution-formation in the nascent
             art markets of 17th century Amsterdam and Haarlem in
             response to external and internal pressures on artists'
             guilds. In Amsterdam, poor quality imports, often copies,
             were touted as originals and sold in clandestine Dutch
             auctions. The deliberate confusion about quality imparted to
             the market features similar to those of Akerlof's "lemons"
             model, and a need for quality guarantees gave occasion to
             dealers. In Haarlem and other towns, demand was viewed as
             fixed and guilds toughened restrictions on the supply side.
             Dissenters successfully used lotteries to show that demand
             can be engendered. Promotion was to become a key feature of
             later art markets. © 1995.},
   Doi = {10.1016/0167-2681(95)00032-1},
   Key = {fds238087}
}

@article{fds322188,
   Author = {De Marchi and N and Van Miegroet and HJ},
   Title = {Art, Value, and Market Practices in the Netherlands in the
             Seventeenth Century},
   Journal = {Art Bulletin},
   Volume = {76},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {451-464},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {1994},
   Month = {September},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00043079.1994.10786597},
   Doi = {10.1080/00043079.1994.10786597},
   Key = {fds322188}
}

@article{fds322189,
   Author = {Hirsch, A and de Marchi, N},
   Title = {Making a case when theory is unfalsifiable: Friedman’s
             monetary history},
   Journal = {Economics and Philosophy},
   Volume = {2},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {1-21},
   Publisher = {Cambridge University Press (CUP)},
   Year = {1986},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266267100000778},
   Doi = {10.1017/S0266267100000778},
   Key = {fds322189}
}

@article{fds238085,
   Author = {De Marchi and NB},
   Title = {On the early dangers of being too political an economist:
             Thorold rogers and the 1868 election to the drummond
             professorship},
   Journal = {Oxford Economic Papers},
   Volume = {28},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {364-380},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press (OUP)},
   Year = {1976},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0030-7653},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041349},
   Doi = {10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041349},
   Key = {fds238085}
}


%% Chapters in Books   
@misc{fds345869,
   Author = {De Marchi and N and Van Miegroet and HJ and Raiff, ME},
   Title = {Dealer-Dealer pricing in the mid seventeenth-century Antwerp
             to Paris art trade},
   Pages = {113-130},
   Booktitle = {Art Markets in Europe, 1400-1800},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {December},
   ISBN = {9781840146301},
   Key = {fds345869}
}

@misc{fds322184,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Models and misperceptions: Chenery, hirschman and tinbergen
             on development planning},
   Journal = {Research in the History of Economic Thought and
             Methodology},
   Volume = {34B},
   Pages = {91-99},
   Publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S0743-41542016000034B004},
   Abstract = {In the 1950s, when development as a subject for study was as
             yet poorly defined, misunderstandings were not uncommon. The
             grounds were often methodological, but substantive
             analytical differences were also involved. I focus on an
             unusual context, the invitation given to one economist,
             Hollis B. Chenery, who promoted the neo-classical approach
             to growth, to review two works stemming from very different
             perspectives. One of these was The Design of Development by
             econometrician Jan Tinbergen; the other was The Strategy of
             Economic Development by the highly original thinker Albert
             O. Hirschman. Chenery found himself baffled by Hirschman's
             stress on the capacity to make quick and strong decisions in
             favor of development, if backwardness was to be overcome.
             But he was equally drawn to Tinbergen's advocacy of detailed
             development plans. I argue that Chenery was wrong on both
             counts. He failed to understand Hirschman's argument, which
             admittedly was novel, and misperceived Tinbergen's approach
             as of a piece with his own convictions. The episode is
             instructive chiefly in opening up to reconsideration the
             ideas and misperceptions of three pioneers of development
             economics.},
   Doi = {10.1108/S0743-41542016000034B004},
   Key = {fds322184}
}

@misc{fds238082,
   Author = {Goodwin, CD},
   Title = {Economics meets esthetics in the bloomsbury
             group},
   Pages = {137-151},
   Booktitle = {Sublime Economy: On the Intersection of Art and
             Economics},
   Publisher = {Routledge},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {November},
   ISBN = {0203890574},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203890578},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203890578},
   Key = {fds238082}
}

@misc{fds322185,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Reluctant partners: Aesthetic and market value,
             1708-1871},
   Pages = {95-111},
   Booktitle = {Sublime Economy: On the Intersection of Art and
             Economics},
   Publisher = {Routledge},
   Address = {London},
   Editor = {Jack Amariglio and Steve Cullenberg and Joseph
             Childers},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {November},
   ISBN = {0203890574},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203890578},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203890578},
   Key = {fds322185}
}

@misc{fds322186,
   Author = {Michaels, R and Jansen, N},
   Title = {Introduction},
   Pages = {1-12},
   Booktitle = {Beyond the State: Rethinking Private Law},
   Publisher = {Mohr Siebeck},
   Editor = {Jeremy Warren and Adriana Turpin},
   Year = {2008},
   Key = {fds322186}
}

@misc{fds238084,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Confluences of value: Three historical moments},
   Pages = {200-219},
   Booktitle = {Beyond Price, Value in Culture, Economics, and the
             Arts},
   Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
   Address = {Cambridge},
   Editor = {Michael Hutter and David Throsby},
   Year = {2007},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780521862233},
   url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000299343000012&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
   Abstract = {Introduction Can artistic, cultural, and economic valuations
             ever be determined on common ground? The economist is
             inclined to say yes, in principle; as in an hedonic
             regression, artistic and cultural worth may be thought of as
             factors that help to explain variations in market price.
             However, this presupposes not only that artistic and
             cultural value can be scaled suitably, but that economic
             value somehow encompasses the other two sorts. Focusing
             solely on the latter point, the inclination of art theorists
             and cultural anthropologists is to assert that just the
             opposite is the case. Philosophers of aesthetics contend
             that artistic value is intrinsic, bound up in the experience
             of art, and is not reducible to some external use- or
             pleasure-value. Cultural anthropologists for their part
             argue that cultural value turns on meanings, whose
             implications extend to personal and group identities, which
             in turn are simply incommensurable with price. Moreover,
             identities are often threatened by markets, which
             arbitrarily alter and displace them without being able to
             substitute for the losses. Despite such difficulties,
             conversations about artistic worth, cultural meaning, and
             market value take place, as they must, in any context where
             limited financial resources are allocated to the support of
             art or culture. And, whether we like it or not, in those
             conversations tacit agreements are reached about relative
             values in each sphere.},
   Doi = {10.1017/CBO9780511793820.013},
   Key = {fds238084}
}

@misc{fds238083,
   Author = {De Marchi and N},
   Title = {Smith on ingenuity, pleasure, and the imitative
             arts},
   Pages = {136-157},
   Booktitle = {The Cambridge Companion to Adam Smith},
   Publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
   Editor = {Knud Haakonssen},
   Year = {2006},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {0521770599},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521770599.006},
   Abstract = {SMITH'S PREOCCUPATION WITH THE IMITATIVE ARTS After Smith
             returned to Kirkaldy from London in June 1777, one of
             “Several Works” that occupied him was an essay on the
             imitative arts (Corr., no. 208). Progress was interrupted,
             as he feared it would be, by his duties, from January 1778,
             as a Commissioner of His Majesty's Customs for Scotland.
             Nonetheless, he returned to this particular essay as time
             allowed, maintaining his interest in the subject right up to
             his last days. Twice in the 1780s that we know of, Smith
             laid out his ideas before competent audiences on what it is
             about imitation in the arts that gives pleasure. In the
             summer of 1782, at a meeting in London of the Johnson
             literary club, he conversed on this theme. The painter Sir
             Joshua Reynolds was present, told Smith afterward that he
             perfectly agreed with his notions, and subsequently wrote to
             his friend Bennet Langton that the subject was clearly one
             Smith had “considered with attention.” Then, in December
             1788, when Smith was in Glasgow for his investiture as
             Rector of the University, he addressed the Literary Society
             there, reading a paper of two hours length, on the same
             subject. The essay remained incomplete at that late date,
             and it is doubtful whether Smith was able to add much to it
             before he died. Nonetheless, that he considered his ideas
             worth preserving may be inferred from the fact that he
             spared this essay, along with the “History of
             Astronomy,” and several others, from the destruction he
             ordered of his lecture notes and other manuscript materials
             a week or so before his death.},
   Doi = {10.1017/CCOL0521770599.006},
   Key = {fds238083}
}