Economist

Last updated

An economist is a professional and practitioner in the social science discipline of economics.

Contents

The individual may also study, develop, and apply theories and concepts from economics and write about economic policy. Within this field there are many sub-fields, ranging from the broad philosophical theories to the focused study of minutiae within specific markets, macroeconomic analysis, microeconomic analysis or financial statement analysis, involving analytical methods and tools such as econometrics, statistics, economics computational models, financial economics, regulatory impact analysis and mathematical economics.

History of the profession

Although economists are now recognized as specialists in a distinct profession, the earliest contributors to economic thought were polymath philosophers. Some of the earliest economic writings date to antiquity, notably Aristotle’s Oeconomica and Xenophon’s Oeconomicus. These works addressed, in rudimentary form, themes such as the division of labour.

In the seventeenth century, as early modern economic thought began to take shape, its leading writers were typically broad-ranging scholars who wrote on economics alongside philosophy and law. This was true of Richard Cantillon, who described what later came to be known as the Cantillon effect, and of David Hume, who anticipated the quantity theory of money.

Adam Smith, in An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, wrote one of the first major works devoted entirely to economics, helping to establish economics as a distinct field within the social sciences. His seminal work gave rise to several intellectual traditions, including the classical school (notably David Ricardo and Jean-Baptiste Say) and, in reaction, Marxism, following the writings of Karl Marx

Economics became increasingly professionalized over the course of the nineteenth century. Jean-Baptiste Say held France’s first chair in economics at the Conservatoire national des arts et métiers in the early part of the century [1] . By the end of the century, most economists associated with the neoclassical school were academics, often trained in mathematics. The figure of the economist thus shifted from that of the polymath [2] scholar to that of a specialized intellectual.

Over the course of the twentieth century, advances in economic theory associated with John Maynard Keynes, Paul Samuelson, and Milton Friedman contributed to the emergence of several major schools of thought: Keynesian economics, soon integrated through Samuelson’s neoclassical synthesis, and then Friedman’s monetarism, which in turn influenced the development of new classical economics. [3]

The 2008 financial crisis led to the Great Recession. This prompted some macroeconomists and Financial Economists to question the current orthodoxy. [4] [5] One response was the Keynesian resurgence. This emerged as a consensus among some policy makers and economists for Keynesian solutions.

Professions

Education and training

A professional working inside of one of many fields of economics or having an academic degree in this subject is often considered to be an economist; [6] In the U.S. Government, on the other hand, a person can be hired as an economist provided that they have a degree that included or was supplemented by 21 semester hours in economics and three hours in statistics, accounting, or calculus. [7] see Bachelor of Economics and Master of Economics.

Employment and roles

Economists work in many fields including [6] [8] [9] academia, government and in the private sector, where they may also "study data and statistics in order to spot trends in economic activity, economic confidence levels, and consumer attitudes. They assess this information using advanced methods in statistical analysis, mathematics, computer programming [and] they make recommendations about ways to improve the efficiency of a system or take advantage of trends as they begin." [10] In addition to government and academia, economists are also employed in banking, finance, accountancy, commerce, marketing, business administration, lobbying and non- or not-for profit organizations. [11]

In many organizations, an "Economic Analyst" is a formalized role. [12] Professionals here are employed (or engaged as consultants [13] ) to conduct research, prepare reports, or formulate plans and strategies to address economic problems. Here, as outlined, the analyst provides forecasts, analysis and advice, based upon observed trends and economic principles; this entails also collecting and processing economic and statistical data using econometric methods and statistical techniques.

Academia and research

Former chair of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, who obtained his Ph.D. in economics from New York University, testifies before the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services. Mvc-017x.jpg
Former chair of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, who obtained his Ph.D. in economics from New York University, testifies before the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services.

In academia, most economists have a Ph.D. degree in Economics. [9]

Private sector

Economic analysts employed in financial institutions [14] and in other large corporates, [15] provide the (long term) economic forecasts used within their organizations. Relatedly, they consult to fund managers, risk managers, and corporate analysts regarding their investment strategy / capital budgeting decisions. Particularly in the tech sector, [16] the focus may be microeconomic, addressing pricing, competition, and customer behavior. In either case, (chief) economists are also often included [17] in strategy formulation.

Government and public policy
Former chair of the Federal Reserve Janet Yellen speaks with IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, 2014. Chair Yellen and IMF Managing Director Lagarde 140702 (cropped).jpg
Former chair of the Federal Reserve Janet Yellen speaks with IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde, 2014.

In the public sector, [18] analysts advise legislators and executives on economic policy, public works, and related; politicians often consult economists before enacting economic policy; and many statesmen have academic degrees in economics. A Federal Government Economic Analyst [19] conducts economic analysis of issues directly related to the function of their federal government agency.

Regulation and qualifications

In contrast to regulated professions such as engineering, law or medicine, there is not a legally required educational requirement or license for economists.

By country

Economics graduates are employable in varying degrees depending on the regional economic scenario and labour market conditions at the time for a given country. Apart from the specific understanding of the subject, employers value the skills of numeracy and analysis, the ability to communicate and the capacity to grasp broad issues which the graduates acquire at the university or college. Whilst only a few[ quantify ] economics graduates may be expected to become professional economists,[ citation needed ] many find it a base for entry into a career in finance – including accounting, insurance, tax and banking, or management.[ citation needed ]

A number of economics graduates from around the world have been successful in obtaining employment in a variety of major national and international firms in the financial and commercial sectors, and in manufacturing, retailing and IT, as well as in the public sector – for example, in the health and education sectors, or in government and politics. Some graduates go on to undertake postgraduate studies, either in economics, research, teacher training or further qualifications in specialist areas.

Brazil

Unlike most nations, the economist profession in Brazil is regulated by law; specifically, Law No. 1,411, of August 13, 1951. The professional designation of an economist, according to said law, is exclusive to those who graduated with a Bachelor of Economics degree in Brazil. [20]

United States

According to the United States Department of Labor, there were about 15,000 non-academic economists in the United States in 2008, with a median salary of roughly $83,000, and the top ten percent earning more than $147,040 annually. [21] Nearly 135 colleges and universities [22] [ verification needed ] grant around 900 new Ph.D.s every year. Incomes are highest for those in the private sector, followed by the federal government, with academia paying the lowest incomes. As of January 2013, PayScale.com showed Ph.D. economists' salary ranges as follows: all Ph.D. economists, $61,000 to $160,000; Ph.D. corporate economists, $71,000 to $207,000; economics full professors, $89,000 to $137,000; economics associate professors, $59,000 to $156,000, and economics assistant professors, $72,000 to $100,000. [23]

United Kingdom

The largest single professional grouping of economists in the UK are the more than 3500 members of the Government Economic Service. [24]

Analysis of destination surveys for economics graduates from a number of selected top schools of economics in the United Kingdom (ranging from Newcastle University to the London School of Economics), shows nearly 80 percent in employment six months after graduation – with a wide range of roles and employers, including regional, national and international organisations, across many sectors.[ citation needed ]

Sociology and public perception

Status among the social sciences  

Boundaries and insularity

Some authors argue that economics occupies a distinctive and often dominant position among the social sciences, often perceived (both inside and outside the discipline) as more scientific and formalized than its sister disciplines. [25] This perceived superiority is visible inside the profession itself [26] , but is also reinforced from the outside: economists earn significantly higher salaries than other social scientists, both in academia and on the wider labour market. [27] They also have their own major prize: the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel (often referred to as the “Nobel Prize in Economics”), and they occupy a role in the making of public policy that no other social science enjoys. These features are contributing to disciplinary “insularity” and to a self-reinforcing dynamic of confidence and perceived legitimacy [25] .

One explanation for this insularity, would be the path economics took after the Second World War: it largely set aside its moral and discursive dimensions and moved closer to the formalism of natural sciences such as physics, grounding itself in mathematics and abstract models [25] . This formalist trajectory set economics apart from other social sciences at both epistemological and methodological levels, as economists seek to derive behaviour from theory through such models [25] .

At the end of the twentieth century, an “empirical revolution” pushed economists to work on topics traditionally associated with sociology, without substantially reducing their insularity: Economists continue to cite each other overwhelmingly, whereas other social sciences cite one another more frequently and also cite economists. [28] Moreover, disciplinary boundaries also reflect status relations: since economists tend to view their own discipline as more scientific than other social sciences, they may be less inclined to rely on those fields. In a Bourdieusian perspective, they describe economists as a dominant group and argue that interdisciplinary work is often not regarded as particularly valuable within the discipline. [25]

Internal hierarchy and journals

Another distinctive feature of the field, which reinforces its special status, is an internal hierarchy that adds itself to this external one. [25] Economics is structured around a set of methods and tools largely defined as the right ones by the top of the discipline [29] and then diffused to the rest of the field. This hierarchy can hide or marginalize internal controversies and contribute to economists speaking with one voice, reinforcing their insularity, credibility and legitimacy in the public arena. This structure can be described as overseen by a disciplinary elite made up of prestigious departments, leading journals, and the scholars who move from the former to publish in the latter. The resulting hierarchy sets norms and standards that extend to hiring and the job market, one of the most organized and standardized in the social sciences. [25]

A Post-war shifts can be observed in leading economics journals: a phase of intense mathematization and reliance on statistics, alongside sharply declining citation links to sociology, political science and law. From the 1980s to the 2000s, a further shift in this landscape can be observed: mathematics, which provided a methodological anchor, retreated as the main external point of reference, and finance journal citations rose in prominence in citation patterns, becoming one of the principal branches of reference within the discipline. [25]

Economists in public policy and technocracy

Finance and professional orientation

The growing centrality of finance goes hand in hand with the rise of business schools, which employ an increasingly large share of economists and occupy a growing place in top journals, while authors affiliated with public institutions become less common. [25] Symbolically, this shifts the intellectual and political centre of gravity of the profession towards the world of business, with greater support for the private sector, deregulation, and limits on public intervention, and it fuels the idea of a partial convergence between the interests of the profession and those of finance, which may help explain changes in economists’ political stances. [30] In this context, scholars also describe a “fix-it” culture among economists: a strong confidence in their ability to propose solutions and correct malfunctions, relying on tools they regard as effective and scientific. [31] This suggests that this influence can reinforce the higher status often accorded to economists, while also leaving them particularly exposed in the public arena: in times of crisis, they are among the first to be questioned and blamed. [25]

Influence in the state

Some authors report a paradox in this diagnosis of the “superiority” of economists. [32] From the outside, as mentioned, economists appear as the most powerful social science within the state: decision-makers have grown accustomed to turning to their expertise, and economists occupy key positions in central banks, ministries of finance, international organisations and advisory councils. [25] They are widely perceived as the experts who “really understand” the economy, including by the general public. But from the inside, many economists feel that their influence is not so substantial and appears to them to be highly constrained: in high-stakes policy debates (the euro crisis, climate policy, welfare state reform), partisan conflicts and institutional interests often prevail over expert advice, even when economists broadly agree among themselves. [32] Symbolic and material supremacy can translate into policy influence through three main channels: the high level of professional authority economics enjoys, which makes it a natural point of reference when “the economy” is at stake; economists occupying strategic positions inside the state and international organisations, so that in some domains they are not just advisers but direct decision-makers; and economics shaping the cognitive infrastructure of policymaking, as economic modes of reasoning (incentives, efficiency, growth, cost–benefit trade-offs) and technical tools (indicators, models, evaluation procedures) diffuse beyond the profession and structure how non-economist officials see and frame problems. [32]

Scientization of policy advice

The rising influence of economists in decision-making spheres goes hand in hand with a broader trend: the “scientization” of policy advice. This is described as the third major trend, adding to externalization (the increasing reliance on actors outside the traditional civil service) and politicization (stronger partisan control over advice and greater use of political advisers). [33] In this context, it refers to the growing dependence of decision-makers on academic experts and on arguments explicitly presented as scientific. In the field of economic policy, this means that governments turn more systematically to academic economists and that commission reports are increasingly grounded in economic research, rather than solely in bureaucratic experience or stakeholder input. [33]

Within this broader trend, economics has been especially well positioned. [33] First, its abstract, mathematical formalism, which brings it closer to a hard science, gives it a rational, scientific and objective appeal. Second, in the post-war period, economics presents itself as a general technique of government, not only competent in the realm of “pure” economics, but also as a producer of tools that can be transposed to a wide range of public policy domains, from labour markets to pensions, and from climate regulation to healthcare. Finally, the strong internal hierarchy of the profession provides its own clearly identified instances of validation (top departments and journals) [25] , which serves to legitimize and boost the credibility of economics, giving its policy recommendations the appearance of a scientific consensus. For these reasons, decision-makers tend to turn to economists when they seek “scientific” justifications for their policies. [33]

However, public policy advice should not be reduced to academic economics alone. A citation analysis shows that commission reports continue to draw on a mixed knowledge base: alongside articles in international journals, they frequently cite national policy documents, studies produced by central banks and statistical offices, as well as applied research carried out by public agencies. Scientization thus adds an academic layer rather than replacing other forms of knowledge. It has also been shown that scientization can fulfil both an instrumental and a legitimating function. [33]

Technocracy and limits

As a performative field, much of economists’ political influence is indirect. Economists rarely “impose” policies on elected officials. They design concepts, metrics and decision tools, what authors call the cognitive and technical infrastructure of policy [32] , that become embedded in bureaucratic routines. Devices such as GDP, unemployment rates, cost–benefit analysis, or auction rules narrow the range of options that appear reasonable and make some trade-offs visible while hiding others. This contributes to a form of economic technocracy: many key choices are framed as technical and delegated to experts, even though the underlying assumptions are normative and contestable. On the limits of this technocracy: economists are most influential in ill-defined or technical issues and in the early stages of agenda-setting, and much less so when conflicts become highly politicised. [32]

A clear illustration of how neoliberal reform can extend beyond macroeconomic policy and into institutional design can be observed in Chile under Pinochet. Reforms associated with the “Chicago Boys” (economists trained in the Chicago tradition who advised the regime) also reshaped higher education through market viability. The rapid expansion of private schools, the concentration of programs in commercially valued fields (law, engineering, accountancy, commerce, management,...), and the marginalization of humanities illustrate how reforms framed as technical and modernizing can embed market principles into public infrastructures, reshaping both educational supply and who gains access. [34]

It is important to note that economic expertise can never be entirely “technical” or “neutral”: because it intervenes at the very heart of collective decision-making, it remains a kind of moral science. Economists’ strong confidence in their models and recommendations is both what makes their interventions so influential, and what makes them particularly vulnerable in the public arena, especially in times of crisis. [25]

Social composition, values and public image

Economics as a discipline is heavily male-dominated, compared with many other social sciences, and its practitioners also tend to come from relatively higher social strata. [25]

Economists form a professional group with a distinctive profile, whether in their behaviour, their political views, their social position, or their relationship to power. [25] Like much of the academic world, they tend to place themselves somewhat to the left of centre, but on average they are less interventionist than their colleagues and appear to have a particular relationship to individual self-interest. [35] It is difficult, however, to determine whether this relationship is produced by economic training itself, or whether individuals already more oriented towards self-interest are simply more likely to choose economics in the first place. [36]

Their views are often out of step with those of the general public, for example in their support for market-based mechanisms to address social issues (such as paying organ donors, or using carbon taxes). Their relative material comfort tends to widen the social distance that separates them from other groups, which raises questions given that economists occupy important positions at the heart of decision-making structures, and that their discipline is closely linked to public administrations and large organizations. [25]

Notable economists

Some current well-known economists include:

See also

References

Citations

  1. ↑ Reybaud, Louis (1864). "Les Chaires d'Économie politique en France". Revue des Deux Mondes (54).
  2. ↑ Boyer, Robert (2021). Une discipline sans réflexivité peut-elle être une science ? épistémologie de l'économie. Libres cours. Paris: Éditions de la Sorbonne. ISBN   979-10-351-0658-4.
  3. ↑ Collectif (2015-05-13). À quoi servent les économistes s'ils disent tous la même chose ?: Manifeste pour une économie pluraliste (in French). les liens qui libèrent. ISBN   979-10-209-0303-7.
  4. ↑ Dobson, Wendy (2009-01-31), "7. International Business Global Lessons from the 2008 Financial Crisis", The Finance Crisis and Rescue, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, retrieved 2025-12-12
  5. ↑ Mandilaras, Alexandros (2017-09-12). "Six charts that show how much the world has changed since the 2007-08 financial crisis". doi.org. Retrieved 2025-12-12.
  6. 1 2 "Economists". U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics . Retrieved 2017-02-02.
  7. ↑ "Economist Series, 0110: U.S. Office of Personnel Management".
  8. ↑ Careers in Economics, American Economic Association
  9. 1 2 Economics Profession, American Economic Association
  10. ↑ "Economist", Princeton Review.
  11. ↑ "Economics Jobs and Economist Jobs". Econ-Jobs.com.
  12. ↑ "Economist or Economic Analyst", Bureau of Labor Statistics.
  13. ↑ Economic Consulting, American Economic Association
  14. ↑ "What Is an Economist? Role, Duties, and Influence", Investopedia
  15. ↑ Careers in Economics, National Association for Business Economics
  16. ↑ "Why Tech Companies Hire So Many Economists", Harvard Business Review
  17. ↑ "What an Economist Brings to a Business Strategy", Harvard Business Review.
  18. ↑ Central Banks, Government, and Not-for-Profits, American Economic Association
  19. ↑ "Federal Government Economic Analyst", University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
  20. ↑ Lei № 1.411, de 13 de agosto de 1951 [Law № 1,411, of August 13, 1951](PDF) (in Portuguese). Retrieved May 10, 2024.
  21. ↑ US Bureau of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook Archived April 30, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
  22. ↑ "Subscription Application".
  23. ↑ "Pay Scale, US income of Economists" . Retrieved 2013-01-14.
  24. ↑ "About Us". Gov.uk. Open Government Licence. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  25. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Fourcade, Marion; Ollion, Etienne; Algan, Yann (2015-02-01). "The Superiority of Economists". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 29 (1): 89–114. doi:10.1257/jep.29.1.89. ISSN   0895-3309.
  26. ↑ Colander, David (2005-02-01). "The Making of an Economist Redux". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 19 (1): 175–198. doi:10.1257/0895330053147976. ISSN   0895-3309.
  27. ↑ Freeman, Richard B (1999-08-01). "It's Better Being an Economist (But Don't Tell Anyone)". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 13 (3): 139–146. doi:10.1257/jep.13.3.139. ISSN   0895-3309.
  28. ↑ Jacobs, Jerry A. (2014). In Defense of Disciplines. University of Chicago Press. ISBN   978-0-226-06932-6.
  29. ↑ Hansen, W. Lee (September 1971). "Prediction of Graduate Performance in Economics". The Journal of Economic Education. 3 (1): 49–53. doi:10.1080/00220485.1971.10845341. ISSN   0022-0485.
  30. ↑ Blyth, Mark (2002-09-16). Great Transformations. Cambridge University Press. ISBN   978-0-521-01052-8.
  31. ↑ Callon, Michel (May 1998). "Introduction: The Embeddedness of Economic Markets in Economics". The Sociological Review. 46 (1_suppl): 1–57. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954x.1998.tb03468.x. ISSN   0038-0261.
  32. 1 2 3 4 5 Hirschman, D.; Berman, E. P. (2014-10-01). "Do economists make policies? On the political effects of economics". Socio-Economic Review. 12 (4): 779–811. doi:10.1093/ser/mwu017. ISSN   1475-1461.
  33. 1 2 3 4 5 Christensen, Johan (2018-09-01). "Economic knowledge and the scientization of policy advice". Policy Sciences. 51 (3): 291–311. doi:10.1007/s11077-018-9316-6. ISSN   1573-0891. PMC   6428222 . PMID   30956358.
  34. ↑ Austin, Robert (1997). "Armed Forces, Market Forces: Intellectuals and Higher Education in Chile, 1973-1993". Latin American Perspectives. 24 (5): 26–58. ISSN   0094-582X.
  35. ↑ Gross, Neil (2013-04-09). Why Are Professors Liberal and Why Do Conservatives Care?. Harvard University Press. ISBN   978-0-674-07448-4.
  36. ↑ Frey, Bruno S.; Meier, Stephan (2003). "Selfish and Indoctrinated Economists?". SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.301868. ISSN   1556-5068.

Sources

Wiktionary-logo-en-v2.svg The dictionary definition of economist at Wiktionary

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.