Joseph Schumpeter summarizes the three main fields of economics as follows: "History, statistics, and theory ‘make up what we shall call Economic Analysis. Of these three fundamental fields, economic history -- which issues into and includes present day facts -- is by far the most important. I wish to state right now that if, starting my work in economics afresh, I were told that I could study only one of the three but have my choice, it would economic history that I would choose."
Besides these three fields, may I add field research as the fourth method that can be helpful to the study of real-world economics? In June, my friends and I were attending a conference in Honolulu. After the conference, we sat together at an ice-cream shop near the beach. The ice-cream shop did not turn on its air-conditioner. The hot temperature made us wonder why air-conditioner was switched off and why customers did not complain. I proposed multiple hypotheses, whereas my friend who had rich experience in field research suggested:"Why don't we simply ask the shop keeper?" So he went directly to the shop keeper. My first reaction was that people might not speak of the truth and it might not be polite to ask such question. My friend said it wouldn't hurt to ask. Often times the most direct way and the least costly way to get the answer is to ask people involved to explain it.
Since that moment, I began to realize that field research, interviews and survey make an important component of economics research. This method is not emphasized by American economists, perhaps except those who run field experiment. But among the circle of Chinese economists, field research is quite popular. Many universities have arranged large-scale field research and survey projects. These projects are related to policy-making.
I think field research is more popular in China because of the following reasons: First, Americans are sensitive about private issues. Age, wage, ethnicity issues, and a lot of information are viewed as privacy. But such information is less sensitive in China. Chinese people are more straightforward about these issues and willing to share their opinions. Second, there are many regulations regarding the methodology of doing field research in the U.S.. Experiments involving human subjects need to follow strict instructions. In China, there are fewer regulations. Chinese economists have more freedom to do field research. Third, wholesale markets and manufacturing industries in China are larger and concentrated geographically. For economists, perhaps the best place to study industrial organization are industrial parks and large wholesale markets? By contrast, in the U.S., most retail markets are limited in shopping malls. There is less chance to observe variation in industrial organizational forms directly.
Field research allows us to put aside the presumptions we obtained from books and papers and to observe the world with fresh eyes. The most important innovations in intellectual history usually come from direct observations rather than from books. A Chinese proverb says: "In order to attain wisdom, it is not enough merely to read books, you must be well travelled as well." I think this is also a lesson from Goethe's Faust.