Search

The theoretical construction known as maximum sustained yield (MSY) exists in three realms: as science, as policy, and as a legal concept. Despite substantial criticism by scientists and economists, MSY remains at the heart of fisheries science and fisheries management. This paper suggests that its institutional resilience springs more from its policy and legal roles than from its scientific strength. Maximum sustained yield was adopted as the goal of American fisheries policy in 1949. Between 1949 and 1955, the State Department pushed for its adoption internationally. In this paper, I first look briefly at the relationship between fishing and foreign policy goals during this period. Second, I look at how fishing was understood during 1949, when the American High Seas Fishing Policy was adopted. Third, I look at the actions of the 1955 International Technical Conference on the Conservation of the Living Resources of the Sea and how American actions shaped the development of fisheries science and the modern fishery management process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents various editorial notes from the June 2012 issue. A correction is offered for the March 2012 book review erroneously entitled "Reconceptualizing the Industrial Revolution." A list of people thanked for contributing to the 2011 Economic History Association's meetings is given, including Martha Bailey, Joseph Mason, and Douglas Puffert. A list is also provided of paper titles for the 72nd annual meetings to be held between September 21-23, 2012 in Vancouver, British Columbia.

This article summarizes some of the papers presented at the System Applied Microeconomics Conference organized and hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis on May 5-6, 2011. This annual conference brings together economists from the Federal Reserve District Banks across the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve Board to present their latest economic research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses the reactions to the old and new institutional economists at the June 1989 History of Economics Conference in Toronto, Ontario. Significant issue in the Toronto conference; Information on the papers presented in the conference; Observation on Langlois' admission on old and new institutional economists.

The article discusses some papers presented at a 2014 symposium on pluralism in economics. Topics discussed include the heterodox economists' interest on pluralism economics, Amitava Dutt and David Colanders' papers defending the ideal that pluralism provides and John Davis and Peter Skott's papers focusing on specific aspects of mainstream theory that narrows economics to non-standard thinking.

Information about several papers discussed at the annual meeting of the Ohio Association of Economists and Political Scientists is presented. Topics include the publishing of the "Journal of Economics and Politics," affiliation with the Policy Studies Organization, and all Ohio Association members being provided the "Journal of Economics and Politics."

The article presents information on an unpremeditated symposium on the economic theory of Clarence E. Ayres. The article argues that Ayres and the Tower on the campus of the University of Texas are two of the dominant features of the academic landscape in the Southwest. Both have been centers of controversy, ranging in intensity from mild to boiling. It seems that few who have considered either have escaped partisan reaction for, or against. The article informs that this issue of the "Southwestern Social Science Quarterly" deals with four examinations of Ayresian economic theory, which range from bitter attack to capable defense, with a note of mildness in between. Together, they should give the reader a fairly complete view of this scholar's ideas. These papers were not solicited, and there was no idea of a symposium on Ayresian theory, when the first of the four, that by Jack Robertson was received. This paper was soon followed by that of Manuel Gottlieb. Both were highly recommended for publication by economists respected for their competence in the field.