Historical experience of battles fought with physically-demanding weapons created a preference for sons over daughters which persists to the present day, according to new research.

India’s population is disproportionately male compared to global norms. A preference for sons over daughters has resulted in some 63 million women “missing” from the population. While Amartya Sen drew attention to these “missing women” in the early 1990s, this deficit was recognized as early as the 1881 census.

While mechanisms such as sex-selective abortion and prioritising male children over female children can explain the imbalance, what is it that creates the preference for male children in the first place?

In a new Warwick Economics Research Papers (WERP) working paper, Conflict and Gender Norms, Mark Dincecco, James Fenske, Bishnupriya Gupta, and Anil Menon investigate whether exposure to conflict in India’s pre-colonial era, when battles were fought with physically demanding weapons such as bows and swords, created a preference for male children which still endures today.

The team geolocated battles and other conflicts between 1000 CE and 1757, when the Battle of Plassey established the dominance of the British East India Company, to create a measure of a location’s exposure to pre-colonial conflict.

This measure was compared to three measures of male-favouring gender norms: the sex ratio of the population; data on the sex of individual births; and the prevalence of crimes against women in early 21^st century.

The analysis found a robust positive relationship between conflict and male-favouring norms: districts that experienced greater exposure to pre-colonial conflict have more male-based sex ratios in the present-day population; and have a greater number of crimes against women.

But how is it possible for experiences from centuries ago to influence attitudes towards women today?

Folk tales and religious traditions can pass on cultural beliefs around gender norms and hand them down through generations. In Uttar Pradesh, researchers have recorded a number of folk songs denigrating the birth of a girl child and the women who birth them, for example:

“She gave birth to a male child – that’s why she is sitting on the bed: she is giving orders to everyone in the house.

If she had given birth to a female child, she would be sitting on the doorsill; she would have fallen from everyone’s eyes.”

Traditional songs in the eastern and southwestern areas of India are much less negative about women.

The researchers found positive relationships between exposure to conflict and folk tales with negative attitudes to women and exposure to conflict and a higher proportion of male temple gods; and exposure to conflict and a greater chance that women leave their home villages after marriage.

To test whether gender norms endure even if people migrate, the authors repeated the analysis using individuals’ mother tongue rather than geographic location, as the major languages of India typically reflect ancestry in specific regions. This analysis showed that male-favouring gender norms persist even after migration to areas that do not have historic exposure to conflict.

Commenting on the findings Professor Gupta said:

“Male-favouring gender norms are prevalent in many parts of the world today. They persist in India despite its recent economic growth, which is generally regarded as something which leads to more positive outcomes for women.

Our study provides new insights into the origins of these attitudes, focusing on the role of inter-state military rivalry and warfare.

The relationship which we have documented between exposure to conflict in pre-colonial times and cultural norms that favour men helps to explain why there is such variation in the proportion of missing women between different parts of India.

The evidence which we have found on the historical persistence of these attitudes also suggests that economic development alone may not resolve India’s gender inequality challenges.”

ENDS

· Mark Dincecco, James Fenske, Bishnupriya Gupta and Anil Menon (2024) Conflict and Gender NormsLink opens in a new window Warwick Economics Research Papers No. 1491

Advice given by Professor Dennis Novy to the London Assembly Economy Committee has been reflected in the Committee’s formal recommendations to Mayor of London Sadiq Khan.

Professor Novy was invited to appear before the Committee on 11 Jan to answer questions and give informed insight into the impact of Brexit on London’s economy.

The Committee held the hearing in order to better understand the impact that leaving the EU has had on London’s economy to date, including asking whether sufficient time has elapsed to understand this impact and whether it is possible to separate the impact of Brexit from other challenges such as the pandemic and Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Among other topics, in his evidence Professor Novy highlighted the risks to businesses of all sizes created by post-Brexit regulatory divergence, and the need to develop a cohesive strategy for trade in services.

In her letter to the Mayor, Committee Chair Marina Ahmad quoted Professor Novy’s remarks on regulatory divergence and uncertainty, saying: “we believe this is a policy area the Mayor should take interest in and work proactively with the Government on. The review of the TCA in 2026 presents an opportunity to do this.”

The letter goes on to make a formal recommendation to the Mayor on this issue.

Recommendation 2: Ahead of the 2026 review of the EU-UK Trade Cooperation Agreement, the Mayor should work with London & Partners to build the evidence base for the effects of regulatory divergence on London-based businesses. He should use this evidence to lobby the Government to ensure that London-based businesses are not negatively impacted by regulatory divergence from the EU.

Professor Novy said: “I am very pleased to see that the evidence session, which was wide-ranging and thorough, has led to specific recommendations to the Mayor of London based on the research evidence which I and the other guests shared with the Committee.

“During my evidence I called on politicians to work in a cross-party way to develop a strategy that reflects the strengths of the UK and the London economy.

“I hope that the Mayor picks up this challenge.”

• Read the letter.

There are substantial psychological gains from having a strong welfare state, finds new research done jointly by the University of Warwick and City University. Social spending acts to reduce citizens’ worries about the future.

The report uses data on 280,000 randomly sampled citizens in Western Europe between the years 2005 and 2022. Approximately 40% of citizens in Western Europe now report high levels of worry, and over time there has been a continuing upward trend in ‘national worry’. The proportion of individuals experiencing extreme worry has increased at an underlying rate of 10 percentage points in the West European population over the last decade.

A rising trend in national worry levels was visible in the data, the researchers show, well before COVID, the invasion of Ukraine, and the conflict in Gaza. “In that sense, we find that something foundational, and currently not understood, appears to be going wrong within western society. It is true even beyond Western Europe.” said Lucia Macchia of City University London, one of the two authors. The authors also examined data on the whole OECD.

Her co-author, Andrew Oswald, professor of economics and behavioural science at the University of Warwick, said “This research, on what determines the level of worry within a society, seems to be the first of its kind. One finding is that social spending by a government apparently acts as a protective mental buffer against worry. Social spending reduces people’s fears. The welfare state appears to have remarkable psychological value -- including for those who do not use it -- in a way that I suspect is not completely understood, although I am prepared to bet that William Beveridge understood it.”

The authors show that of all the OECD nations the United Kingdom had the fastest growth in worry levels between 2010 and 2019 (before the special COVID years in which data comparisons become less reliable). Costa Rica had the next-highest growth in worry.

The UK had the strongest decline in social spending across the European nations studied by the authors, and one of the strongest in the OECD. All social spending levels in the authors’ report were calculated relative to GDP.

• NATIONAL WORRY AND THE PSYCHOLOGICAL VALUE OF THE WELFARE STATE is available as pdf by request and downloadable at www.andrewoswald.com and www.luciamacchia.com

Total capital gains have almost tripled over the last decade, to £65bn by 2019/20. Despite this, most people never receive any capital gains, with less than 3% of adults paying capital gains tax over a ten-year period. In any given year just 0.5% of adults receive any gains, less than the number of additional rate (“45p”) income tax payers.

Instead, capital gains are incredibly concentrated:

· Three in every seven pounds of gains in the UK go to people earning more than £150k. By contrast the same group receives one in every seven pounds in income.

· More than half (52.2%) of all taxable gains in 2020 went to just 5,000 people, who received an average of over £6.8m per person in gains.

· Gains are strongly concentrated in southern England, with more gains in the parliamentary constituency of Kensington than in all of Wales. One neighbourhood of Kensington, comprising just 6400 people, had more gains than three major cities combined: Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle.

· Even within London there are large disparities: someone living in Kensington is more than 50 times as likely to receive gains as someone in Barking.

These findings come from new research which gained unprecedented access to the anonymised tax records of capital gains tax payers. The study, by researchers from the University of Warwick and The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), analysed the anonymised personal tax returns of everyone who received taxable capital gains between 1997 and 2020.

A capital gain is the money received from selling an investment for more than the purchase price. Capital gains face a separate tax regime to income, with rates varying between 10 and 28% depending on the taxpayer’s income level and the type of asset sold. Capital gains tax rates are always lower than income tax rates for the same person, with reliefs in place that allow up to £10million to be received at a 10% tax rate even for the highest rate taxpayers.

These preferential rates benefit few people, who are largely well-off. Just 0.3% of people with income under £50,000 had taxable gains in an average year, but this rises to almost 40% of taxpayers with incomes over £5m receiving some gains. The median gainer in the latter group received £372,000 in gains in an average year, benefiting substantially from the gap between capital gains tax and income tax rates.

Ranking people by gains received, the top 50,000 gainers – who make up about 0.1% of UK adults – received 86.4% of gains, worth £56 billion in total, with each person receiving at least £143,000.

Before reforms in 1998, capital gains tax was progressive: those with the highest gains paid a higher share in capital gains tax. Since the early 2000s, by when the 1998 reforms had fully taken effect, capital gains tax has largely been neutral among top gainers. Under the ‘taper relief’ regime in the 2000s it was in some years regressive.

Arun Advani, Associate Professor at the University of Warwick’s Economics Department and CAGE Research Centre, said: “Capital gains are absurdly concentrated, with half the gains in the entire country going to as many people as could fit in the Albert Hall. Less than one in thirty people have any gains at all over the course of a decade.”

Andrew Lonsdale, Research Officer at LSE’s International Inequalities Institute (III), said: “There are more capital gains in Kensington than the whole of Wales, and more in Hampstead and Kilburn than the North East of England. Continuing to tax these gains at a lower rate than earnings from work is the complete opposite of ‘levelling up’.”

Andy Summers, Associate Professor at LSE Law School and III, said: “Although not common in the wider population, capital gains are a standard way to receive remuneration for the super-rich. This makes the tax break for capital gains particularly regressive.”

ENDS

Notes to editors

1. CAGE Policy Brief Who would be affected by Capital Gains Tax reform by Arun Advani, Andrew Lonsdale, and Andy Summers is available here: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/centres/cage/manage/publications/bn40.2024.pdf
2. A taxpayer realises a capital gain when they sell (or otherwise dispose of) an asset that has increased in value from the price at which they acquired it. Capital Gains Tax typically applies if the assets sold were held for investment.
3. The report used access to anonymised confidential data from the tax records of everyone who received taxable capital gains at any point over the period 1997­–2020, accessed via the HMRC Datalab.
4. Mandatory disclaimer: This work contains statistical data from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) which are Crown Copyright. The research data sets used may not exactly reproduce HMRC aggregates. The use of HMRC statistical data in this work does not imply the endorsement of HMRC in relation to the interpretation or analysis of the information.
5. This research was funded by the Nuffield Foundation 'Reforming Capital Gains Tax' grant (GE/FR-000024377) grant, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the ‘Taxing the Super Rich’ grant (ES/W001683/1) and CAGE Research Centre at Warwick (ES/L011719/1), and by LSE International Inequalities Institute, LSE Law, and Warwick Economics.

Andrew Oswald, Professor of Economics and Behavioural Science in the Department of Economics at the University of Warwick has been appointed Chair of a new Network Advisory Panel of the IZA Institute of Labour Economics.

The new IZA Network Advisory PanelLink opens in a new window, chaired by Professor Oswald, will discuss, and make suggestions for, the future direction of the IZA research institute.

IZA Institute of Labour EconomicsLink opens in a new window, based in Bonn, is a research institute and the leading international network in labour economics, with around 2,000 scholars from over 60 countries. The institute also now covers behavioural economics. IZA members are dedicated to high-quality research on labour markets, inequality, and behaviour. To date, IZA has published over 16,750 discussion papers which are free for anybody in the world to download and read. It also publishes policy papers and has a substantial history of influencing economic policy in Germany and many other nations.

Last week the major newspapers in Germany, including Der Spiegel and Frankfurt Algemeine Zeitung, ran stories on the formation of the new Panel and its members.

IZA Network Advisory Panel:

• Joseph Altonji, Yale University
• Oriana Bandiera, London School of Economics
• Annabelle Kraus-Pilatus, IZA
• Andrew Oswald, University of Warwick
• Aderonke Osikominu, University of Hohenheim
• Daphne Skandalis, University of Copenhagen

Professor Oswald has been an active member of IZA since 1999 when he joined it as a Research Fellow and working as Acting Director of Research at IZA between 2011 and 2012. His research lies at the borders of economics, psychology, epidemiology and medicine and he worked on trade unions, labour contracts, the wage curve, entrepreneurship, job satisfaction, and the economics of happiness and mental health. He has also published papers on climate change and gives regular talks on climate emergency and policy action.

Professor Andrew Oswald said about his appointment:

"IZA is thought to be the largest network of research economists in the world. It seems to me an honour to be asked to chair this kind of distinguished Panel (it wouldn't greatly surprise me if it contains one or two future Nobel prize winners). It would be especially nice to think that the appointment might, in some small way, reflect Warwick's reputation in European and world economics.”

Relevant links

Professor Andrew OswaldLink opens in a new window – staff profile with a link to his personal website.

Professor Dennis Novy has given evidence to members of the London Assembly on the impact of Brexit on the London economy, at the invitation of the Assembly’s Economy CommitteeLink opens in a new window.

He presented data on the economic costs of Brexit and the problems created for businesses of all sizes by customs checks and regulatory divergence.

Responding to members’ questions he reminded the committee that the UK had given up a position of significant influence in shaping EU trade policy, going back to Margaret Thatcher’s premiership and Peter Mandelson’s contribution as EU Trade Commissioner, and also pointed out the “uncomfortable” fact that the UK is not one of the countries which accepts the highest number of immigrants, a fact sometimes overlooked in public debate.

Introducing the data, Professor Novy told the committee: “Brexit has been a very expensive policy adventure for the UK economy. The impact on UK GDP is something in the range of 3 - 4 per cent. Where does that impact come from? The biggest issue is increased costs for consumers - higher prices and inflation."

Responding to an invitation from the Chair to sum up the positives and negatives of Brexit, Professor Novy encouraged policy-makers to focus on “the art of the possible” and to work in a cross-party way to develop a strategy that reflects the strengths of the UK and the London economy, particularly a cohesive strategy for trade in services. He recommended “more predictability, less uncertainty,” and called for action to “tackle regulatory divergence” saying: “I wish politicians strength and courage to do this in a way that takes voters with them.”

• Professor Novy was one of five invited experts giving evidence and taking questions from the members of the Economy Committee in City Hall on 11 January 2024. The meeting was also webcast live.
• Visit the CAGE website for a fuller report.

A seasonal message from our Head of Department.

We are approaching the end of the first term for this academic year. With the festive season upon us, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for all the hard work that you have put in this term, and to wish all of you a relaxing break over the holiday period, spending time with family and friends (where possible).

I hope 2024 will be a great year for all, bringing health and happiness to you and your families.

Several festive events are happening on campus, for details of activities please visit the University's Christmas at Warwick webpage.

Department Closure Dates

The department will be closed over the festive holiday from 5pm on Friday 22nd December 2023 to Tuesday 2nd January 2024.

Best Wishes,

Professor Ben Lockwood

Head of Department - Economics

On Tuesday 28^th November Professor Jonathan Haskel CBE, external member of the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), delivered a speech at Warwick University in an event jointly hosted by the Warwick Finance Societies and the Warwick Economics Society.

Oliver Greenfield, Head of Markets at the Warwick Finance Societies, reports:

"Jonathan Haskel is one of the 9 committee members who sets the UK bank rate whilst also currently being a Professor of Economics at Imperial College Business School. Professor Haskel's research interests of productivity, innovation, intangible investment and growth led him to be a distinguished member on the editorial boards of Economica, Journal of Industrial Economics and Economic Policy.

"In his speech, UK inflation since the pandemic: How did we get here and where are we going? Professor Haskel explored the drivers of the UK inflation experience since 2020 by applying the Bernanke and Blanchard (2023) model. Using this model, he explained how the exogenous shocks which hit the UK economy fed through to result in the elevated inflation figures experienced, dispelling the commonly cited narrative that the Bank of England was wrong to characterise inflation as transitory. After reflecting on his experience on the MPC, Jonathan gave some thoughts on the future of monetary policy and concluded that without a sufficient loosening of labour market conditions inflation would stay elevated and hence interest rates would remain restrictive.

"After the event, Professor Haskel generously stayed behind to answer all of the many questions that students, academics, professors and external attendees wanted to ask. The event provided an invaluable insight for all those who attended and served as a great reminder of the application possible with the economic theory taught at Warwick University."

• The text of Professor Haskel's speech and his slide deck can be found here: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/speech/2023/november/jonathan-haskel-speech-at-warwick-university.

We are pleased to report that this year’s results of two national postgraduate student surveys show high levels of satisfaction amongst our postgraduate student community.

Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey (PTES) 2023

The overall satisfaction with the quality of the course remains high – 91% with 96% of our postgraduate taught students saying that they would recommend the University of Warwick. This was achieved with a response rate of 51.6% of the postgraduate taught cohort.

The top satisfaction scores in PTES were in:

• Teaching: 92% agreed that ‘staff are good at explaining things’ and 91% agreed that ‘the course is intellectually stimulating’.
• Resources: 96% agreed that they ‘have been able to access subject specific resources necessary for their studies when on campus.’
• Dissertation: 97% were ‘happy with the support received for planning their dissertation.’

There were also high scores received in the categories of Skills Development (88%), Organisation (87%) and Support (85%).

Postgraduate Research Experience Survey (PRES) 2023

The overall satisfaction amongst postgraduate research students was 85% with the top scores in:

• Supervision: 89% agreed that their ‘supervisor had the skills and subject knowledge to support their research.’
• Research skills: 91% agreed that their ‘skills in critically analysing and evaluating findings and results have developed during their programme.’
• Professional development: 89% agreed that their ‘ability to communicate information effectively to diverse audiences had developed during their programme.’

Dr Claudia Rei, Deputy Head of Department (Teaching & Learning) said:

“We value student feedback as we want to deliver the best teaching and learning possible. So, we’re very pleased to see such encouraging results. We also want to make further improvements in the future and are already looking at ways to address some of the areas where our scores could have been higher such as Engagement and Assessment in PTES and Support in PRES. We also encourage students to submit their feedback to us throughout the year.”

Further information about the two postgraduate student surveys can be obtained from the University's webpages for PTESLink opens in a new window and PRESLink opens in a new window.

Examples of how we have responded to student recently can be found on our webpage We have acted on your feedback: Postgraduate TaughtLink opens in a new window and Postgraduate ResearchLink opens in a new window.

If you are a student of the Department of Economics, you may submit feedback to us at any point via the Student Feedback FormLink opens in a new window.

End

• The Department is deeply saddened by the passing of Professor Nick Crafts, who died on 6 October 2023 after a long illness.
• Nick was a brilliant economist and one of the world’s leading economic historians, who will leave an enduring legacy. He was also the founding Director of the CAGE Research Centre.
• A book of condolence was opened for any colleagues who wished to share reflections or memories.
• Tributes are shared below, and also here.

Stephen Broadberry, Bishnupriya Gupta, Tim Hatton and Tim Leunig write about their colleague and friend:

Nick Crafts was the most distinguished British economic historian of his generation. He was born in 1949 at Nottingham, England and educated at Trinity College Cambridge, where he graduated as the top student in the Economics Tripos in 1970. After just a year of graduate studies he took a lectureship at Exeter before moving to Warwick in 1972 and then on to University College Oxford in 1977, where he was lecturer and praelector. He became professor of economics at Leeds from 1989 to 1995 and then professor of economic history at the LSE from 1995 to 2005 after which he returned to Warwick until his retirement in 2019.

Nick was an early observer of the Cliometrics Revolution that was sweeping across the United States at the time of his visiting assistant professorship at Berkeley, and he was one of the pioneers in applying the approach in Europe, establishing an annual Quantitative Economic History Conference in Britain. He established a worldwide reputation on the basis of important contributions in many areas of economic history, but perhaps his most important and far-reaching work was his radical reinterpretation of the First Industrial Revolution, which occurred in Britain between the mid-eighteenth and mid-nineteenth centuries and marks the first transition to sustained economic growth. As such, it lies right at the heart of the discipline of economic history.

His path-breaking book, British Economic Growth during the Industrial Revolution , first published in 1985 and reprinted 4 times, presented a radically different view of the Industrial Revolution as a more gradual process than previously believed. This book also set the British experience firmly in a European context, an important methodological contribution, which continues to affect the way that European economic history is written today. Crafts demonstrated convincingly that earlier writers had exaggerated the growth rate of industrial production and hence of total national output during the Industrial Revolution. From this he was able to demonstrate that the British economy must have been richer and more developed in 1700 than previously thought. As well as dramatically changing our view of the Industrial Revolution itself, this view also cast an entirely new light on earlier periods of economic history. If Britain was already quite developed on the eve of the Industrial Revolution, then this opened up the possibility of earlier episodes of growth and development, and encouraged a whole new wave of research on early modern and medieval economic history, the effects of which are still being felt in the discipline to this day.

He later made important contributions to our understanding of the development of the British economy from the late nineteenth century to the end of the twentieth century. Much of this work is summarised in his book Forging Ahead, Falling Behind and Fighting Back British Economic Growth from the Industrial Revolution to the Financial Crisis (CUP 2019). With an endogenous growth framework in the background he stressed that the potential for growth varies widely, both across countries and over time, so that slow growth in in one era may represent better performance, relative to potential than another. Key elements in achieving or falling short of potential are the effects of the institutional environment on incentive structures for innovation and investment.

Within this framework he argued that British growth faltered rather than failed in the late nineteenth century and that growth potential was greater in the United States due to its large market size and a configuration of its factor endowments that favoured directed technological change in progressive sectors. The two World Wars were major setbacks and, although from 1950 to 1973 the British economy grew faster than ever, it fell short of its potential. This was partly a penalty of the early start and partly the result of polices, which from the 1930s onwards, included tariff protection, a complicated tax system with high marginal tax rates, the nationalisation of large swathes of industry and misdirected R&D effort. Although growth subsequently slowed, relative to potential, economic performance improved due to three key elements. One was the reforms undertaken by the Thatcher governments (1979-90) that included tax reform, industrial deregulation and privatisation of state enterprises and the reduction of the power of trade unions. Another was the rapid adoption of ICT. And the third, stressed elsewhere in his work, was the competition-enhancing effect of Britain’s membership of the EU from 1973.

Nick was a masterful lecturer. In his lectures he dissected often conflicting and confusing literatures to provide a clear analytical roadmap for students with limited economics. Unlike many, he wanted to give big first year lectures that most faculty try to avoid. As well as lecturing his own students, Nick gave many other talks, ranging from visiting American students, to public lectures, to groups in the City. No matter the group, he would always describe attendees as "punters". They had paid in time, and sometimes in money, to hear him speak, and as such he always took his responsibilities to them seriously. He set high standards for those attending, as well as for himself. After a lecture on the Gold Standard he remarked "The punters didn't like that one. They never do. But you can't say you have studied economic history if you don't know how the Gold Standard worked." Nick was, as many former students can testify, a Gold Standard lecturer.

Nick was very heavily involved in economic policy throughout his career, and was unrivalled in the way that he used economic history to inform his policy conclusions. He was a Research Fellow at the Centre for Economic Policy Research from 1985, serving as Director of the Human Resources Since 1900 Programme between 1989 and 1991. From 2010 until his retirement in 2019, Nick was the founding Director of CAGE, an ESRC-funded research centre at Warwick. In recognition of his achievements he received many high honours. He was elected to a Fellowship of the British Academy at the young age of 43 and in the Queen’s Birthday Honours of 2014 he was appointed Commander of the British Empire (CBE) for services to economics. He also served as President of the Economic History Society, President of the Royal Economic Society, and was Fellow of the Economic History Association and Fellow of the Cliometric Society.

Nick’s retirement from Warwick in 2019 was marked by a gathering of the great and the good for a two-day soirée that included keynote lectures and research presentations by many of Nick’s former graduate students, now distinguished academics in their own right. After retiring from Warwick Nick moved to a part-time position at Sussex, where he continued to teach and research. Sadly, his retirement was all too brief and he died on 6th October 2023 after a lengthy illness. Over 50 years of energetic teaching and research he reshaped British economic history and hugely influenced generations of economic historians. He will be sadly missed.

Individual tributes follow:-

Professor Bart van Ark, Professor of Productivity Studies at the Alliance Manchester Business School (AMBS) at the University of Manchester, writes:

Nick was a great intellectual, scholar and teacher in economic history. Amongst his many contributions to the profession, Nick has been instrumental in helping the academic and policy communities around the world better understand the importance of productivity for long-term economic growth. His numerous articles, books and contributions to conference, workshops and seminars, on the topic have left a long-lasting mark on work at the Groningen Growth and Development Center, The Productivity Institute and that of many others. Personally, I have much enjoyed co-editing with him the volume on Quantitative Aspects of Post-War European Economic Growth (1996), as part of two-year long project by the CEPR during the 1990s. He will be dearly missed.

Professor Sir Charles Bean, Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, writes:

Nick was an erstwhile colleague at LSE, an occasional co-author, but a long-time friend whose wit and wisdom will be sorely missed by us all. I feel honoured to have known him.

Dr. David Bholat writes:

Professor Crafts was an iconic economic historian. I had the pleasure of making his acquaintance while at the Bank of England. He very kindly accepted an invitation to participate in a seminar on the interwar gold standard. More recently, he participated in another conference on AI. In both instances, these seminar contributions resulted in peer-reviewed publications for which I was the editor. As these examples indicate, Professor Craft's intellectual range was vast. He wrote clearly and persuasively, combining a fine-tuned analytical framework with detailed fidelity to empirical data. He will be missed, but he will continue to powerfully shape generations of scholars to come.

Professor Jutta Bolt, Professor of Global Economic History, University of Groningen, writes:

I'm truly sorry to hear about the passing of Nick Crafts, one of the world's most prominent economic historians. His contributions to our understanding of economic development and history were invaluable. His work will continue to inspire and educate generations to come. My deepest condolences to his family, friends, and colleagues during this difficult time.

Fiona Brown CAGE Research Manager until 2019, writes:

I worked with Nick for 10 years or so on CAGE. They were good times. He was an inspiring director who, together with Sascha, had the foresight to develop CAGE into a leading ESRC research centre. A kind and thoughtful man who always had time to listen and encourage. I am so sorry to hear of his death and send my condolences to Barbara and his family. RIP Nick.

Dame Frances Cairncross, Chair of the CAGE Advisory Board, writes:

Nick Crafts was one of the most thoughtful and innovative economists of the past half century. His work to unite history with economics gave his work a depth and originality that few economists of his generation achieved. Warwick was lucky to have him for as long as it did.

Professor David Chambers, Invesco Professor of Finance at Cambridge Judge Business School, writes:

Nick was inspirational as a teacher, PhD supervisor and co-author. You always knew you had to be on your game when you were interacting with him. He was also incredible good fun away from work - to share a pint with and talk about cricket. I will forever be grateful for the time he invested in me and the encouragement he gave me to pursue my academic career.

Alison Cottrell, CB, writes:

Nick was a great teacher and a great person; he brought economics, past and present, to life, and will be really missed by so many people. Sending thoughts and condolences to all of Nick's family at this very sad time.

Mandy Eaton writes:

Nick was a fantastic colleague who I worked with for many years. My condolences go to Barbara and his family.

Harald Edquist, Master Researcher, Macroeconomics at Ericsson Research, Stockholm, writes:

I was most saddened to hear of Nick Crafts passing. I met Nick Crafts the first time at a conference in Groningen. We shared the interest of understanding how major technologies affect productivity development. It was always interesting to listening to him and he had a great sense of British humour. My deepest sympathy goes to his family.

Professor Peter J Hammond writes:

Nick's extensive publications make him a giant in economic history, with special emphasis on Britain and Europe. But not being a historian myself, I was much less aware of the details than I should have been. Around the time when I arrived at Warwick in 2007, Nick was an Associate Chair of the department. He was also working hard on securing funding for CAGE, as he was about to become its founding director. Like many, perhaps even most members of the department, CAGE has helped finance some of my research. From 2006 to 2009 he chaired Section S2 (Economics and Economic History) of the British Academy which, from my personal experience, he left in very good shape when he stepped down. Of course, I met Nick frequently until he moved to Sussex quite recently. He always greeted me with a broad smile that was usually followed by some light hearted and enjoyable conversation. So, while others will properly recognize the excellent quality and quantity of Nick's academic output, including his prolific lecturing activity, my main awareness of Nick stems from his tremendous contributions as an administrator. There he seemed to achieve some sort of ideal where the important things got done, and done very well, with no doubt a lot of work on his part, but with almost no fuss that was discernible by those not directly involved. Nick, you have finally completed all your administrative burdens; may you rest in peace.

Professor Richard Harris, Professor of Economics, Durham University, writes:

I knew Nick for many years, and especially enjoyed working with him when we were both members of the advisory group for the "Future of Manufacturing" project run by the Government Office for Science/BIS in 2012-13. Not only very knowledgeable but also generous with his time. I am saddened to learn he is no longer with us to collaborate on future work. My condolences to his family and immediate friends; we shall all miss him.

Professor Jonathan Haskel, Professor of Economics at Imperial College Business School, Imperial College, London writes:

Dear Crafts family, I was so sorry to hear of Nick's passing. You will have seen from the messages how much the profession owed him and loved him. He was an inspiration to me and so many others: we shall all miss him very much. I hope you can take some comfort from the memory of such a wonderful man.

Yours, Jonathan

Ben Odams writes:

I met Nick at a fringe event at a party conference a few years ago. His precision and accessible style really hit home on the various topics which were discussed. It inspired me to read more of his work - rediscovering books I had read as undergraduate. He was a classic example of a public intellectual and he will be missed. RIP

Professor Nicole Simpson, W Bradford Wiley Professor of Economics at Colgate University, writes:-

For many decades, Professor Crafts would graciously teach a series of lectures for Colgate University's undergraduate economics students during their study abroad program in London. We were so very fortunate to have a preeminent British economic historian teaching our students each year. He taught generations of our students, often at the very start of their semester in London. We are deeply saddened by his death; his legacy will be long remembered at Colgate.

Dr Christian Soegaard writes:

Dear Nick. It was wonderful to have you as colleague for all these years. Rest in Peace!

Jane Snape CAGE Project Manager, writes:

Nick possessed a remarkable ability to make all team members feel valued. I will miss his knowledge, kindness and sense of humour. My thoughts are with Barbara and family.

Dr Brian Varian, Lecturer in Economics, Newcastle University Business School, writes:

I would like to express my sincere condolence for your loss. I was taught by Professor Crafts when I was a masters student at the London School of Economics. His lectures were as captivating as they were brilliant. As I myself now lecture in economic history, I cannot possibly forget the standard that Professor Crafts set, and I cannot imagine anyone ever really attaining it. When I went on to do my PhD in economic history, Professor Crafts greatly encouraged my research, even when it challenged some of his own—the mark of a real scholar. I am so glad to have known him and to have been in his classroom.

Dr John Geoffrey Walker writes:

I'm so sorry to hear this. He was a lovely man, always pleased to see me, and a great drinking companion. I learned a great deal from him. I've rarely seen him in the last few years but I'll miss him now that I won't see him again.

Related articles

•  Nicholas Crafts@70 – news feature about the 2-day academic conference held in 2019 to celebrate Professor Crafts’ 70^th birthday.
• “Nick Crafts is the most distinguished British economic historian of his generation.” Tim Hatton reviews Forging Ahead, Falling Behind and Fighting Back: British Economic Growth from the Industrial Revolution to the Financial Crisis (Crafts, 2019) for EH.net
• NIESR Tribute - In Memory of Professor Nick Crafts CBE FBA - NIESR