dFragment-->
加州大学圣地亚哥分校全球政策与战略学院的贾瑞雪教授分享她于2016年发表在经济学顶级期刊 Econometrica 上关于科举与政治稳定的文章。
以下是贾瑞雪教授分享的 Elite Recruitment and Political Stability: The Impact of the Abolition of China's Civil Service Exam 这篇文章的创作历程。
#本期访谈主要问题
1. 如何想到这个研究问题并呈现为一个经济学问题的？
2. 有关中国的研究经常会在外部有效性或者重要性上遭受质疑，您是如何把这个研究变成一个大家都感兴趣的研究的？
3. 这篇文章具有如此重大影响力的主要原因是什么？
4. 这篇文章写作与修改过程中最大的挑战是什么?
5. 内生性处理和工具变量选择上有遇到什么问题吗？
6. 在修改环节有没有遇到特别麻烦的审稿人的质疑？
7. 给对经济史感兴趣的年轻学者的一些建议，他们在开始经济史研究前要做好什么功课？
8. 系统性接触经济史的相关读物推荐
Q1：这篇文章的想法非常有趣、非常酷，您是如何想到这个研究问题并呈现为一个经济学问题的？
Q1: The idea is super interesting and cool, how did you identify this question and frame it into a general economic question?
秦：我们先从第一个问题开始。您是如何想到这个研究问题的？因为这是一个特别有意思、特别酷的想法。我很好奇您是怎么找到一个经济学的视角来研究这个问题的？我虽然不太了解历史的文献，但是我猜历史学家也有一些人讨论过这个话题。你们是如何想到去做这样的一个研究，然后把它表达成一个经济学问题的？
Qin: Let’s begin with the first question. The research question itself is super interesting and cool. It’s a question that has been studied by historians, right? So how did you identify this question and frame it into a general economic question?
贾：好的，我就大概说一下整个过程。我一直都对社会运动以及政治运动的兴起和传播非常感兴趣。你可以想象，历史的前进通常是由这些运动推动的。什么样的人组织了这些运动、大家为什么要参与，一直是我很感兴趣的问题。因为对这些感兴趣，所以我在学生时期研究了一下农民起义。当时就觉得，如果有一些个人层面的研究会更有意思。个人到底受到什么样的影响？答案肯定是非常复杂的：有一些是出于个人的利益；有一些是随波逐流，还有一些是其他各种各样的原因。当时研究农民起义的时候，觉得可能有意思的一个事情是废除科举之后大家的选择，隐约有了这个想法。有一次和施新政师兄聊天，我告诉他我这个想法，然后他告诉我白营师兄已经收集了科举的数据。我就写邮件问了问白营，了解到他当时收集科举数据是想研究这个制度对人力资本的影响，我就提议可以从这个政治经济的角度思考一下。当时就觉得这个问题和经济学的文献的联系也非常之紧密。学生时代学过Benabou & Ok的一篇有趣的论文，讲社会流动性对再分配需求的影响。文章说的是在一个社会，如果个人觉得自己的后代更有流动性的机会，那也许他们这个通过税收的重新分配要求反而偏低。它是一篇理论的文章，当时学的时候就觉得，在中国这种社会，因为没有投票机制，很难研究对再分配的需求。同时，这种需求可能会反映到其它的层面上，包括在极端的情况下可能会有一些革命，斗争，或者抗议。当时想到这个题目的时候就很容易想到经济学里面的文献。总的来说，可能没有什么很直接的过程。其中也有一些偶然的因素，比如说我为什么会知道白营收集科举的数据，完全是因为和另外一个同行聊天的时候说起来。后来就因为这个文章，又渐渐地和白营有了一些其他的合作。因为比较合得来，就继续一起写了其他的文章。
Jia: I have always been interested in social and political movements and their spread. The progress of history is usually driven by these movements. It is always my interest to understand who organized these movements and why people participated in them. When I was a graduate student, I did some research on peasant uprisings. At that time, I thought that it would be more interesting if I could do some research at the individual level. It must be a complicated issue: some joined for individual interest; some followed others. I had a vague idea about the choices of individuals after the abolition of Keju, China’s Civil Service Exam. When I told Xinzheng Shi about this idea, he told me that Ying Bai had collected the data on Keju. I emailed Ying Bai and proposed to study this question together. I knew that this question is closely related to economic literature. For instance, in Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution, Benabou & Ok point out that voters might be less likely to demand high tax rates if their children are more likely to become rich. It is not easy to study the demand for redistribution in a society like China, due to the absence of voting. Nevertheless, the demand might be reflected in other aspects, including revolutions and rebellions in extreme circumstances. In short, the production of a paper may not be a linear process, and there can be some accidental factors. When working on this project, Ying Bai and I got along well, and we have become close collaborators ever since.
Q2：有关中国的研究经常会在外部有效性或者重要性上遭受质疑，您是如何把这个研究变成一个大家都感兴趣的研究的？
Q2: China research is often challenged on its external validity or significance. How did you frame it into research of general interest?
贾：对，我没有特别准备，你也可以继续在这个问题上提问。
Jia: I didn’t prepare any specific answers, so you can go ahead and ask more if you like.
秦：对，我还想继续提问。因为很多时候我们做这个中国的研究, 大家可能会比较质疑你的一些外部有效性的问题，或者说为什么这个东西很重要。你们在文章写作的过程里有没有提前想一下怎么把它变成一个大家都感兴趣的研究？
Qin: Sure, I do want to continue. I wonder if you had thought about how to frame it into research of general interest in the process of writing, because you might know that for China research, reviewers are likely to challenge you on some problems, like external validity, or on its significance.
贾：是。一旦这个和流动性联系起来，我觉得这个文章是比较容易让大家感兴趣的。不是所有的文章都这样，包括我和白营后来写的文章，其实也不一定会这么容易。这个相对是一个比较容易的题目，因为它比较清晰。而且大家在别的社会、在别的运动当中也会发现有类似的现象。有时候我看到别人引用这个文章讨论的社会问题，我自己也都没有想到。比如说我看到好像Foreign Policy还是哪一个期刊还引用了我们的文章反思美国现在的精英选拔体制。我自己都没有想说一定要对现代有多大的影响。这也是后面可能要讨论的给年轻人的建议：有的问题你可以有直觉这是否很具有一般性。如果是的时候，这个文章相对比较容易写作和发表。但不是所有的文章都如此，我们俩其他的文章其实也会更纠结一些。
Jia: Because the question is closely related to social mobility, it is fairly easy to motivate. This is not true for all of our papers ���. This article is relatively easier to motivate, since the story is clear, and readers often find similar situations in other contexts. Sometimes I came across references to this paper in contexts that I have never thought of before, such as the reflection on meritocracy in the U.S. nowadays. In general, you have an intuition about whether your question is of general interest. When it is, the paper is usually relatively easy to write (and to get published). Not all our papers are so smooth though, some are a little bit rougher.
Q3：这篇文章具有如此重大影响力的主要原因是什么？
Q3: From your perspective, what are the main reasons that make this paper a high impact research?
秦：明白，好的。对，这篇文章我觉得社会影响力非常大，光香樟好像就推送了很多次你们文章的介绍，还有各种媒体的介绍。Google Scholar上的引用也非常的高，虽然你们的文章才发表5年，但是现在已经将近200次引用了吧。您之后有没有总结过为什么这篇文章会得到那么大的关注，为什么它会成为高影响力的研究？
Qin: Well. In my point of view, this paper is highly impactful, being published on CEC blog and other media for many times. Its number of citation at Google Scholar is great for a 5-year-published paper, nearly 200 now. Therefore, from your perspective, what are the main reasons that make this paper a high impact research?
贾：我倒没有总结，但我比较容易想到的一个原因是，这个现象本身比较具有一般性。可能别人研究其他的社会运动或者政治参与的时候都会有一些类似的发现。比如讨论法国大革命的时候也会提到说，很多律师，专业精英在当时比较失意。虽然每个运动都很复杂，但这个故事、这个逻辑在很多运动中都存在。另外，对于关心中国的读者来说，科举是一个非常重要的制度。可能也许也有一些年轻人读了会觉得，我也可以研究一下科举制度，或者其它重要的制度，也许这篇文章给了他们一点启发。我觉得它为什么对中国读者比较有吸引力，是让大家觉得，原来还有这么多数据，我也可以研究辛亥革命，也可以研究科举。我比较开心的就是可以让年轻人稍微觉得说其实我也想过类似的东西，但是不知道有这些数据，现在发现其实是可以去研究。
Jia: I didn’t think about it before, but what comes to my mind first is that this logic is relatively general and relevant to other social and political movements, though every movement itself is indeed complicated. For example, during the French Revolution, lawyers, professionals, and other new economic elites were frustrated about their prospects in society. For readers interested in China, they know that Keju is a very important institution worth studying. For junior scholars who want to study China who read my paper, they might feel encouraged that there is a way to conduct research on Keju, the Revolution of 1911, or other important historical events in their minds. I would be extremely happy if the paper has encouraged some young scholars to work on economic history in China.
秦：嗯，就是开辟了一个新的大坑，然后吸引了更多的研究。
Qin: You make a new gap and attract more research.
贾：对，是这样。
Jia: Exactly.
Q4：这篇文章写作与修改过程中最大的挑战是什么?
Q4: In your opinion, what was the greatest challenge during the writing and revision of this paper?
秦：然后下一个问题是想问一下你们在写作的过程中，包括投稿、修改这些，有没有您觉得特别困难的，或者说你们当时费了很多周折才想到解决方案的一些难点？
Qin: The next question is: What was the greatest challenge during the writing and revision of this paper?
贾：嗯，我觉得这个文章的挑战和我们其他文章的挑战是类似的。一个是写作的过程。这个事情确实比较复杂，当时有各种革命组织，大家参与的目的也不是统一的，所以读书的时候也会自我怀疑。有的人说这个很重要，有的人说不重要。科举在晚清的时候有多重要也有不同的说法。所以在这个过程中就会有很多自我怀疑。这个故事真的很重要吗？有没有可能其他的原因？能不能检验？先说服自己是一个一般的过程。因为你要研究的历史的事情通常都是比较复杂的。虽然我们并不是想说这是唯一的一个因素，但是经济学的风格是说你把一个故事讲清楚。我们在这个过程中也发现，当时去日本留学，还有当时各地的社会结构都有些作用。所以就想说把这些我们能考虑的东西考虑进去，我们的故事还在不在。这个基本上是历史的文章都会遇到的挑战。在写作的过程中的挑战主要是说怎么把这个纷繁复杂的故事写清楚。一方面就不能无视历史，另一方面怎么能够把它简要地写清楚，这一直都是一个挑战。反正就写的时候就写了很多遍……所有文章都是要写很多遍嘛。
Jia: The challenges of this paper are similar to those of other papers. One is that history is complicated. There were various revolutionary groups, and individuals’ motivation to join these group must be varied. There are also various opinions on the significance of Keju in the late Qing period. Therefore, there’s a lot of self-doubt in this process: Does our story really matter? What if it was driven by other factors? Can we test alternative channels? We have been always discussing these issues. We do not want to say that the prospect of moving upward is the only factor, but in economic research, we need to show one mechanism clearly. In fact, we also found that there were other factors that mattered: modern human capital in the form of those studying in Japan also contributed to the revolution and that social capital strengthened the effect of the abolition. It is always a challenge how to write this complicated story clearly and briefly. As always, we had to rewrite the paper many times.
秦：嗯，对，就是有的时候您想把其它的可能性都排除掉，但又不想搞得特别面面俱到的，然后让大家感觉这个事情好像极其复杂，从而失去阅读兴趣。
Qin: So in other words, you want to rule out all the other possibilities without making yourself captious and dulling the readers, right?
贾：对，特别对经济学的读者来说。但是你心里也是知道这里面其实就是很复杂的，这里有很多其他的因素，通常交互影响。
Jia: Exactly, especially for readers in economics. You know that it's really complicated: many factors worked together in most cases.
Q5：内生性处理和工具变量选择上有遇到什么问题吗？
Q5: What were challenges when you dealed with endogeneity and chose instrument variables?
秦：嗯。在内生性处理上面你们当时有遇到比较复杂的一些问题吗？因为你们当时用的工具变量是小河的数量，这个工具变量对我来说可能不是一个特别明显的的选择，所以我好奇你们当时在选择工具变量的时候有没有一些纠结，或者一些比较复杂的过程？
Qin: Did you have some challenges when you dealed with endogeneity? You used the number of small rivers as an instrument variable (IV), which is not such an obvious choice for me.
贾：嗯，是有的，当时我们甚至还用了两个工具变量。但实际上最初就是觉得因为我们是用府的配额 -- 这个府的配额是每个县加总起来的，每个县有自己很严格的规定。我们想看同样的府由于不同县的数目导致的不同，自然地就想到了这个方法。这个工具变量是文献中有的，只是说它和我们的机制不一样。在中国的情况下，县不是以河流作为边界，而是通常包含河流。虽然是同样一个工具变量，但是背后有不同的机制。我倒是觉得这个文章被接受和这个工具变量本身没有特别大的关系。这个研究使用的是一个相对比较干净的面板数据，工具变量更多是一个稳健性检验。因为是一个有趣的工具变量，可能使得文章读起来有意思，但没有特别影响整个文章。
Jia: Sure, we had. In fact, we even used 2 IVs. Initially, we used the quota value for each prefecture as an IV, which is the sum of the quota for each county in a prefecture. Because the county-level quota followed strict roles, the number of counties in each prefecture creates useful variation. Naturally, we thought of the number of small rivers to instrument for the number of counties. This IV was used in other studies before, by assuming that rivers serve as county borders. In China, however, rivers are contained in counties instead of serving as borders. Thus, although IVs are the same, they work through different mechanisms. I doubt that the acceptance of this paper has much to do with the IV. The main finding based on standard panel datasets is clean enough, and the IV results are useful robustness checks. Of course, an interesting IV may make the paper slightly more interesting to read.
秦：嗯，明白，其实还是你们DID的那个设定是最主要的。
Qin: I see, it’s DID setting that plays the most important role.
贾：对。
Jia: Yeah.
Q6：在修改环节有没有遇到特别麻烦的审稿人的质疑？
Q6: In your memory, did your reviewers give you some tough challenges in the process of revision?
秦：你们在整个修改过程里面有遇到过来自审稿人的一些特别麻烦的质疑吗？
Qin: Did you have any tough challenges from your reviewers?
贾：可能因为每篇文章都很被质疑，我也说不上来这个有特别多的质疑。我们当时已经想了很多很多可能性，但是审稿人总是会提到有没有其他的可能性。因为关于这个时代的研究中，的确有一支文献认为科举不重要了，因为有卖官鬻爵。我们以前也就读过类似的说法，在自我质疑的过程也考虑了一下，后来又读了读，看了一些数据，觉得应该还可以。还有其他一些因素，包括日俄战争，到底是不是可能影响到我们的故事。整个的感觉是审稿人提到的问题和我们之前担心的问题是相似的，只是我们可能以前并没有那么深入地去讨论其它的影响途径，比如1905年附近到底发生了哪些事。后来修改的时候就尽可能地写清楚。我觉得这是好事，本来怕文章写得太长，后来可以借修改把它写得更清楚一点。
Jia: Hard to tell. Every paper faces challenges, and this one is no exception. Although we had thought about various alternative channels, the referees still offered some other possibilities. For example, there is indeed an argument that the Keju system was not so important as we suppose today because of office selling. We knew it before actually, but still re-considered it with some data in our revisions. In addition, the Russo-Japanese War is another factor we did not consider in our earlier version. Overall, I feel that the referee’s questions were similar to those we were worried about before, but we might not have discussed other channels in that much depth, such as what happened around 1905. We made it as explicit as possible in the revisions. I believe the challenge itself is constructive. We were worried whether our paper is too long and were happy to get more space to explain ourselves more clearly.
秦：所以最大的难点还是说排除各种其它历史事件的干扰。
Qin: Ruling out the intervention from other historic events was still the greatest challenge.
贾：对，对。
Jia: You’re right.
Q7：给对经济史感兴趣的年轻学者的一些建议，他们在开始经济史研究前要做好什么功课？
Q7: Do you have any advice for junior scholars who are interested in economic history? What should be the "to-do" list if a junior scholar would like to seriously start doing research in economic history?
秦：好的。然后关于这篇文章，我没有更多的问题了，我觉得您已经回答得特别的深入了。最后一个问题是关于您对年轻学者的建议，尤其是对经济史感兴趣的这些年轻学者。您觉得如果他们想要入门的话，或者开始他们第一个经济史的项目，在此之前需要做的功课有哪些？因为我最近经常听到我周围的一些人说可能等拿到终身职位之后才开始去做感兴趣的事情，然后他们很多人都喜欢研究一些经济史的东西。我心想大家为什么要把这件事情放在拿到终身职位了以后做呢，有可能是觉得这个事情实际上入门挺难的，毕竟历史上有那么多的数据，然后你需要去读很多历史上的文献。您可不可以给这些人提一些建议，然后可能让他们在拿到终身职位之前就比较顺利地去开展他们感兴趣的项目。
Qin: Okay, thank you for your in-depth answers, I have no more questions for this article. The last question is that do you have any advice for junior scholars who are interested in economic history? What should be the "to-do" list if a junior scholar would like to seriously start doing research in economic history? I hear a lot from people I know recently that they might not start to do something interesting, many of which are about economic history, until getting tenured. Personally, I think the reason why people are likely to do this research after being tenured is that this is an area which is extremely interesting but with very high entry costs (e.g. data collection/extensive readings on literature by historians etc.). I wonder if you could give some advice to these people and make it easier for them to embark on projects they are interested in before being tenured.
贾：这个答案取决于不同的研究阶段。首先，如果是第一篇文章的话，就做吧。第一篇文章不需要想太多，就是有一个感兴趣的问题，去做。不要怕去收集数据。我觉得有时候说我等到拿到终身职位之后做，其实是说让学生帮我收集数据是吗 ���，这种就失去了它最初的乐趣啦。最初其实自己去收集数据本身是一个有趣的事情，你能在这个过程中学到很多东西，知道很多资料。我不确定说等你拿到了终身教职，把工作全部委托给别人做是一件好事。然后，要小心选题。现在经济学鼓励研究自然实验，中国的历史这么长，可能有非常多的自然实验。但是年轻人有时候可能只是突然发现某个数据，就去收集。其实研究问题本身没有想的特别清楚。有时候你要问一下自己，我一定要用历史的数据来研究这个问题吗？我们毕竟不是历史学家，还是想研究一些经济学的问题对吧？这样的话其实很多问题依赖现代数据，可能更容易研究，不一定非得要用历史的数据。有时候可能要问一下自己，为什么一定要用历史的数据？有时候和一些年轻人聊起来，会觉得你如果花这么多功夫，最后研究的问题可能真的只是对历史掌故有兴趣的人感兴趣的话，会觉得花了那么多精力有点可惜。我们不是历史学家，这是一方面。但另外一方面，你如果又坚持做经济史，还是要多读一点东西，不能说我看了一本书就提出一个假说，然后就收集一个数据去检验某个历史学家说过的一句话。我觉得那样也是有点危险。反正就是两方面衡量吧，一方面，研究的还是经济学的问题，但另一方面又的确意识到自己毕竟不是历史学家，所以真的要多读一点。很有可能很多事情是历史上的一个争论。我觉得这是好事，也是为什么去研究可能会有意义，能有一点点自己的见解。
Jia: It depends on your research stage. First, if this is your first paper, just do it. You don’t need to think too much, just work on it if it’s an interesting question for you. Don’t be intimated by data collection. Some might think they can ask students to help collect data after being tenured, but in my opinion, it loses the original pleasure of doing economic history research. The process of collecting data is interesting itself, in which you will learn a lot and you know how to do research. I am not sure whether it is a good idea to delegate everything to others. Secondly, be picky in research topics. We are the generation of “natural experiments” in our training, and there might be countless natural experiments in the long history of China. Some junior scholars might come across some data and start research on a whim, without considering the question thoroughly. Sometimes you should ask yourself: is it necessary to use historical data? After all, we are not historians, and we do economics research. If using rich contemporary data can answer your research question, you should ask yourself why you have to use historical data. I feel sad to observe that some junior scholars spend much time and effort but end up researching a topic in which only fans of historical stories would be interested in. Third, I suggest reading as much as possible. It’s risky to generate a hypothesis and collect data to test a statement of someone hastily by reading one mere book. In short, on the one hand, we are doing research in economics; on the other hand, because we are not professional historians, we need to read and learn more.
Q8：系统性接触经济史的相关读物推荐
Q8: Do you have any suggestions about what should we read if we want to approach economic history systematically?
秦：您既然提到说不能够说读一本书就去检验一个假说，那您有没有一些建议，如果要系统性地接触经济史的话，应该去读哪些读物？
Qin: Now that you mention that testing one hypothesis by reading one mere book is not recommended, I wonder if you have any suggestions about what we should read if we want to approach economic history systematically?
贾：我自己的话倒没有什么常规的推荐。你可以读一些好玩的、综合的、简介的文本，比如剑桥中国史之类的。但是通常情况下是你对一个主题感兴趣，比如说太平天国，那你就把太平天国相关的书都读一遍。当然有的读得细，有的读得没那么细致。尽可能地能找到的文献都了解一下，可能有几本特别经典的就会仔细读一下。
Jia: I don’t have very general suggestions. You can certainly read some general and introductory texts, such as the Cambridge History of China. Usually, once I become interested in one specific topic, I try to go through all books I can find. Of course, I read some more carefully than others.
秦：您会去看历史学家发表的学术论文吗？
Qin: Do you read academic articles published by historians?
贾：还是取决于主题。有的主题是有一些研究的，比如说我和白营最近写的关于湘军的文章，就有历史学家写了一些文章。能找到的我基本都会看一下，不管是书也好，文章也好，中文的、英文的，都会看一下。
Jia: Still depends on the topic. For example, Ying Bai and I have completed a paper on the Hunan Army. On this topic, we came across related articles written by historians. In general, I will read almost all of the texts I can find, no matter books or articles, in Chinese or in English.
秦：好的好的，您还有其它的建议吗？
Qin: Do you have any other advice?
贾：关于选题这个问题，应该多和不同的人聊一聊。可能有一个人，比如你的老师可能说这个问题很有意思，或者没有意思，但是有时候要多和别人聊一聊。不同的人会有不同的见解。
Jia: Coming back to choosing topics, you should talk with different people about your research question because different people have different views. Your supervisor might think it is interesting, or might not, but taking to more people is often very helpful.
秦：嗯，好的好的，非常感谢。
Qin: Thank you very much for your sharing today.
学者简介：
贾瑞雪教授现为加州大学圣地亚哥分校全球政策与战略学院副教授，同时也是伦敦政治经济学院客座高级研究员、中国数据实验室联席主任。她2004年本科毕业于中国青年政治学院，2007年于北京大学取得硕士学位，2013年在瑞典斯德哥尔摩大学取得经济学博士学位。贾瑞雪教授目前的研究领域包括政治经济学、发展经济学及经济史。
参考文献：
Bai, Ying, and Ruixue Jia. "Elite Recruitment and Political Stability: The Impact of the Abolition of China's Civil Service Exam." Econometrica 84.2 (2016): 677-733.
Benabou, Roland, and Efe A. Ok. "Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The Poum Hypothesis." The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116.2 (2001): 447-487.
*文转：Impactful Research微信公众号
本文转载自微信公众号“当代经济学基金会”。
转自：“刘西川阅读写作课”微信公众号
如有侵权，请联系本站删除！
