The main argument is that the two literatures crossed in the night of the Cold War. It examines some of the tensions associated with the attempt to blend Walrasian economics and Soviet planning. This paper extends various arguments in the recent historical literature on Soviet mathematical economics during the Cold War.
Drawing on archival and oral sources, we demonstrate how Kantorovich, throughout his career, negotiated the relations between mathematics and economics, reinterpreted political and ideological frames, and reshaped the balance of power in the Soviet academic landscape. Confronting the class of orthodox economists, many factors were at work, including Kantorovich's cautious character and his allies in the Academy of Sciences. Rather than thinking of his work in terms of success or failure, we propose to see his career as exemplifying a distinct form of scholarship, as a partisan technocrat, characteristic of the Soviet system of knowledge production. The mathematician Leonid Kantorovich (1912–1986) was a key activist in academic politics that led to the increasing acceptance of what emerged as a new scientific persona in the Soviet Union. In the wake of Stalin's death, many Soviet scientists saw the opportunity to promote their methods as tools for the engineering of economic prosperity in the socialist state. At the same time, they offer insights for scholars regarding struggles over scientific research priority and the potential for convergence between capitalism and socialism during the Cold War era. Their scientific connections reflect the broader experiences of East-West scientific collaboration during the Cold War. These two men jointly won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science in 1975. Kantorovich, a Russian scientist living in the Soviet Union. Koopmans, a Dutch economist living in the United States as a result of World War II, and Leonid V. To understand the rise and fall of this cooperation and convergence, we examine the case of the connection between Tjalling C. The Cold War excitement about mathematical economics and the East-West cooperation it allowed, however, dwindled with the end of détente, the global shift in economic science away from mathematical economics, and the end of state socialism in the East Bloc. Mathematical economics came to bridge the divide between East and West even though the meetings and collaborations between American and Soviet colleagues were fraught with tension and misunderstanding. After the Stalinist years in which they could communicate very little, they found that they had much to learn from each other. During the Cold War, economists utilizing mathematical methods in both the Soviet Union and the United States found they shared a common research project.
0 kommentar(er)
