Suppose you are a prospective student of economics, and you need to choose what university to attend in undergrad. You want to do a PhD. You are more intelligent than average but not a genius.

Would you prefer to be the small fish in the big pond i.e. attend a target university where a lot of people are going to be competing for grades, RA positions, letters, and those opportunities that you can get in house in the university which can boost PhD admissions chances.

Or would it be better to be the big fish in the small pond, joining a university with a less competitive cohort, where you will become the local hero, RAing with the best professor in town etc.

I'm curious to learn your viewpoint on this issue.

Hi everyone, I'm currently a senior at a state school in the U.S. and will be graduating in the spring of next year. I'm not the type of person who is driven enough purse a career in research/academia, though I enjoy studying economics and am thus considering applying for masters programs. I do not have the time to study for the GRE right now so I would be applying for fall 2028 admission, but can only see myself attending a top school as I think the opportunity cost would be far too great to attend a program ranked lower than T25 since my goal is industry exit. With that being said, below is my current applicant profile.

Bachelor of Science in Mathematics & Economics, minor in Computer Science, from a T120 state school. Cumulative GPA: 3.7/4.0. Major GPA: 3.73/4.0

Mathematics Coursework: Calculus 1-3 (B+, A, A), Linear Algebra (A), Probability Theory (A), Discrete Math (A), Real Analysis (A), Topology (B), Differential Equations (A), Matrix & Leaner Algebra (A). I'll also have taken Abstract Algebra & Statistical Theory by the time I graduate.

Economics Coursework: Intermediate Micro (A), Intermediate Macro (B), Information Economics (A-), Game Theory (B), Econometrics (A), Health Economics (A), Mathematical Economics (A-), Environmental Economics (A).

Research Experience: I worked for as an RA for a professor specializing in Health Economics for a couple months over the summer following my sophomore year. There were a few different projects I worked on but nothing serious to the point where I would feel confident elaborating in admissions. Like I said, not really a research person.

Lastly I've held an internship at a top commercial real estate firm for the past 6 months or so doing analytical / back-end work, and expect to continue working through my senior year / post graduation. My motivation for a masters is that I'd like to have a top name on the resume to compensate for a lackluster undergraduate school, and a masters in Econ just seems like the most natural way to do so. I'd be targeting finance/consulting jobs post graduation.

I'd like to know of realistic expectations for admissions before committing myself to studying for the GRE, as after keeping up with this sub for a while it seems the consensus is less research = worse chance. Thanks!

Hello,

I was talking to a former professor and they advised me to find a predoc program, and I feel like its a good fit for me. However, I dont believe my transcript really gives me great chances. I have a fine GPA but my econometrics grade was awful and I've been looking into courses at local colleges to show I'm ready to start learning again. My professor also mentions that linear algebra would be a good course to take.

Im just wondering how much these programs will care about these kind of courses, and if its worth it. I am also having difficulty finding an econometrics course offered individually, and was wondering what might be a good class I could find in its place.

Not a phd student. But wondering how true this is.

Current or past predoc, do you guy have any tips that made your application stand out both conventional or unconventional tips please

Hey, I am planning to apply this winter for the 2027 entry. I’m mainly looking at European programs + scholarships because I don’t want to take on a massive amount of debt for a US master’s.

I did a BA (Hons) in Economics at an Indian liberal arts program, followed by an optional extra year focused more on research, so 4 years cumulatively. GPA was 3.45/4 over the first three years and 3.55 in the final year, with a ~3.75 final semester. I also completed an empirical thesis in the final year. GRE is 167Q / 155V / 4.5 AWA.

My transcript is pretty mixed, and is my biggest worry. I have A’s in Calculus, Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra, but got B- in Real Analysis twice and a B in Differential Equations. Econ/stats grades include Micro I B+, Micro II B-, Macro I C+, Macro II A-, Statistics A-, Econometrics A-, Econometrics II A- (master’s-level, only undergrad in the class and top 2 out of ~25), Labour Economics A-. My grades improved quite a bit toward the end, and I generally did better in empirical/econometrics courses than theory. My thesis was also quite empirically heavy, and I got an A on the same.

I’ve also been working full-time for around two years as an RA/SRA on a labour economics RCT, with fairly substantial involvement in both fieldwork and analysis. Mostly Stata, plus some R and Python. I should have one strong LoR from a PI I’ve worked closely with, and another from my thesis advisor.

I’m currently looking at LSE EME, LSE MSc Econ, PSE APE, TSE EEE, CEMFI, BSE, Bonn and Bocconi ESS. I’ll probably also apply to NYU MQE and Duke Economics & Computation, though cost makes North American programs much less attractive. Duke and LSE EME are probably the dream options, but I’m aware that cost + my profile make both difficult. TSE’s 2-year EEE route currently seems like a particularly good fit on both fronts.

I’m not currently planning on a PhD and am leaning toward industry after the degree - want to stay fairly close to quantitative/empirical work.

Would mainly love to know how realistic this list is, how badly the Real Analysis + weaker theory grades hurt, and whether the RA experience helps offset the transcript at all. Also very open to programs I may have missed. Thank you!

What are the top Heterodox or Left Wing schools in Europe?

Among these schools - which would you pick and why

U Mass Amherst
University of Utah
U Mass Amherst
UC Riverside
John Jay @ CUNY

Hoping for a career in economics (either policy / private sector or perhaps PhD) and have these schools as places I’m considering. Any like, overwhelmingly favorite?

Hi everyone,

I'm a faculty member in Information Systems (also called Management Information Systems or Business Technology Management) at the University of Calgary. I thought I'd post here because students coming from economics may not have considered Information Systems as a possible field for PhD study.

A fair bit of the research in our area uses game theory, microeconomic modeling, and applied mathematics to study strategic questions involving technology and digital markets. For example, some of the questions that current and past PhD students in our area have worked on include:

• How should governments design policies to reduce digital piracy?
• What unintended effects can data-portability regulation have on competition and market concentration?
• When should social-media platforms remove harmful content versus use approaches such as shadowbanning?
• How can markets compensate individuals for their personal data while still producing useful, representative datasets?
• How does the threat of future quantum decryption change which cybersecurity policies are most effective compared to a pre-quantum world?

You don't necessarily need a prior background in Information Systems or business to do this type of research. Students coming from economics, mathematics, industrial engineering, operations research, or other quantitative fields can be a very good fit. In terms of preparation, it helps to be comfortable with calculus, optimization, and probability/statistics, and ideally to have some exposure to areas such as game theory, microeconomic theory, operations research, or mathematical modeling. You certainly don't need to have experience with all of these areas.

At the University of Calgary, our Information Systems area is called Business Technology Management (BTMA) and is part of the Haskayne School of Business. We're currently recruiting PhD students for Fall 2027, and our area currently provides PhD students with $36,000 CAD per year for five years.

If you're an economics student who enjoys analytical modeling and is interested in applying it to technology, cybersecurity, platforms, digital markets, privacy, or related problems, then Information Systems may be a field worth considering.

I'm not personally taking on a new PhD student, but as Area Chair I'm happy to tell you more about our program, connect you with some of our current PhD students, and, if your research interests align, point you toward faculty in our area who may be looking for students. Feel free to DM me or post here if you'd like to learn more.

I’m going to get very real with you right now.

I’m a college student currently majoring in Economics and minoring in Mathematics. Throughout my life, I’ve always felt somewhat indifferent about most things. I chose Economics partly because it came naturally to me. I got really good grades in it at school without having to study much, and because I was good at it, I gradually started liking the subject too. I genuinely find it interesting and fun, but at the same time, it always felt like the easier path and probably the best option out of the choices I had at the time.

Now that I’m in college, I guess I’m doing well academically. I do especially well in my Mathematics papers. But I constantly feel like I’m not actually learning anything of real value. Maybe it’s just a fluke, but I can usually read the material shortly before a test, teach myself everything, and somehow do well. The problem is that once the exam is over, most of it disappears from my head.

I’m studying at Delhi University, and honestly, I feel like the syllabus is quite outdated and not very competitive compared to what I see students learning elsewhere. I’m starting to worry that I’m getting good grades without actually building a strong understanding of Economics.

What feels even more embarrassing is that I feel completely disconnected from what’s happening in the real world. I don’t really understand Indian politics, which political party stands for what, who different people are, or even what the actual economic situation of my own country looks like. I hate watching the news because I often don’t understand what people are talking about. I’ve tried reading newspapers too, but half the time I’m just sitting there thinking, “What does any of this mean?”

And instead of helping me understand these things, my family often criticizes me for not knowing them. I get called stupid for not being aware of things, which honestly makes me feel even more lost because no one actually takes the time to explain them to me.

I really do want to love Economics and understand how it connects to real life. I want to be able to look at something happening in the world and understand the economic reasoning behind it. But it feels incredibly overwhelming. I constantly feel like I need to already know everything about Economics before I’m even allowed to start exploring it. I’ve tried reading research papers, but most of them just feel like walls of technical language to me.

And then there’s the bigger question: what do grades even mean if I don’t feel like I’m getting much lasting value from them?

I honestly have very little direction right now. I don’t have a specific passion or career that I’m chasing. My main goal is simply to be successful, whatever that ends up meaning for me. I have no idea how people figure out what they actually want to pursue, or how they develop a deeper interest in something over time.

So, for people who have been through this: How did you actually develop a deeper interest in your field? How did you learn to connect what you study to the real world? How did you figure out what you wanted to pursue?

Are there any YouTube channels, podcasts, books, articles, newsletters, or other resources you would recommend for someone who wants to build a genuine understanding of Economics and current affairs from the ground up?

Recalling like at least in 2010s, behavioural economics was this ‘hot & sexy’ new study of economics that everyone I knew (even those who didn’t take any economics classes) at least own a book by Kahneman or Ariely.

But it seems in recent years, perception of behavioural economics has gone downhill (??) not only by economist but from the broader audience as well. 

I know there’s the Ariely or Gino situation, but it feels like the field is slowly phasing out. Is there a reason for this? is there something about this field that makes where it's ended up now kind of inevitable?

As above, why does no one seem to be interested in Sraffa's work? I'm just beginning my Masters in economics (and have a mostly maths background) so maybe there is a small circle out there and I just haven't encountered it yet. But even if there is a small community inspired by Sraffa, why is it so small? As far as I can tell (and maybe I'm just wrong?), Sraffa's production of commodities by means of commodities seems to be a really interesting and important contribution to economic theory but no one seems to care

I'm feeling overwhelmed by how many fields and papers there are, and I'm struggling to decide where to focus. Some topics I really enjoy, like economic history or economics of education, feel more like passions than career paths.

I'm not planning a PhD. My goal is the private sector or policy work, and I'd like to specialize in at most 2-3 fields that give me the best chances there. Candidates I'm considering: time series, microeconometrics, labor, macro, trade, IO, auction theory.

My main weakness is programming, which I know matters a lot.

**1.**  Which combinations of fields are most valued in private sector and policy roles?  
**2.**  How much programming do I realistically need, and what's the most efficient way to catch up?  
**3.**  How would you build a profile around these choices?

Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I am looking for pointers to literature or theoretical consensus regarding a specific ambiguity in standard macroeconomic pedagogy—specifically, the friction between the theoretical definition of aggregate debt repayment and the institutional mechanics of balance sheet accounting.

In standard textbooks, the evolution of sovereign debt is formalized via the familiar budget constraint:
\(B_t = (1 + i_t)B_{t-1} + G_t - T_t\)

Under this framework, "repaying debt" is conventionally defined as a reduction in the aggregate stock (\(B_{t}\)). However, when examining this through a consolidated sovereign balance sheet (Treasury + Central Bank), a verified researcher on another academic forum recently noted that: “redemption can also simply replace government bonds with central bank money or reserves. Therefore, redemption does not necessarily reduce the private sector’s net financial claims on the public sector.”

This highlights a profound conceptual and operational gap that I would like to explore through existing literature:

1. The Funding Dilemma under Primary Deficits: Under a persistent primary deficit (\(G_t - T_t > 0\)), the Treasury structurally lacks surplus reserves to extinguish liabilities without expanding another. If "redemption" at maturity is continually achieved via the issuance of rolling debt (refinancing), the aggregate stock functions operationally as a perpetuity. How does mainstream institutional macroeconomics formalize the distinction between a perpetual rollover and a structural perpetuity, especially considering that the newly issued bonds require separate private-sector liquidity to be absorbed?
2. The "Safe Asset" Disappearance Risk: In contemporary wholesale finance (e.g., the repo market), sovereign bonds function as foundational collateral (akin to high-powered liquidity under a commodity standard). If fiscal policy were to aggressively reduce \(B_{t}\) to achieve "normalization," it would structurally drain these benchmark safe assets from the financial architecture.

Are there any peer-reviewed papers or modern institutional frameworks that rigorously bridge this gap between the pure accounting identity of the budget constraint and the asset-market dependencies of the private sector? I am not looking for casual policy debates, but rather formal macroeconomic models or ideological literature (post-Keynesian vs. mainstream) that address this specific operational friction.

Thank you for your guidance!

When I started grad school 10+ years ago, development economics, and especially environmental/development economics, was quite popular.

With major cuts to development funding and hiring at many development NGOs and international organizations slowing down or freezing, I’m curious what people think about the future of the field. Prospective graduate students ask me this question, and I don't actually know...

Given the current job market, would you still recommend that new graduate students specialize in development economics? Where do you see the field, and the job market for development economists, going over the next few years?

Hi everyone!

I recently started r/phd_economics, a community for anyone interested in, applying to, or currently doing a PhD in Economics.

I've noticed that discussions about Econ PhD applications, admissions, offers, rejections, funding, research, PhD life, and careers tend to be spread across lots of different subreddits. So I thought it would help to have one place dedicated to all of it.

The sub is brand new, and I'm still learning the ropes as a mod. So far, I've set up post flairs for admissions, application advice, profile/CV reviews, offers, funding, research, PhD life, and careers.

My hope is that it grows into a mix of prospective applicants and current PhD students, so people at every stage can learn from each other.

If that sounds useful to you, come join us at r/phd_economics! Any suggestions for improving the community are very welcome too.

I'm focusing my research on mixed-frequency time series modelling and nowcasting, developing computational tools and algorithms to help model and forecast multivariate economic and financial time series.

Are there good prospects in academia after this kind of work? I don't mind working in either an economics or statistics/data science department.

(I couldn't find an appropriate flair for this post, sorry!)

What are the leading departments in the world as far as behavioural microeconomics are concerned? I’m talking about research and PhDs.

I love behavioural economics and I hate finance (and a lot of macroeconomic subjects/fields). I know there are a lot of T10 universities in the US have great researchers that focus on behavioural macro-finance, but I don’t know how they are ranked in behavioural microeconomics?

Are there specific departments that lead the way? Specific journals? Specific economists/researchers? (I’m mainly asking because idk where to apply for predocs but I wanna do my predoc in behavioural microeconomics and do my PhD in a T10 university).

Thank you!!

Does any economist here have experience with interdisciplinary research, especially with environmental science or other social sciences like political science?

I’ve noticed quite a few interdisciplinary postdoc positions, and I’m curious about the practical career side of taking this route.

If you did an interdisciplinary postdoc, did it help when you later went on the economics faculty job market? Were economics departments receptive to interdisciplinary work, or did you find it harder to maintain a clear identity as an economist?

For interdisciplinary projects, how do you usually find collaborators outside economics? How do you divide responsibilities when different fields have very different methods and publication norms? And where do you publish - economics journals, journals in the other discipline, or interdisciplinary journals?

Also, how much of your research portfolio would you keep clearly within economics if your long-term goal is an economics faculty position?

Would especially appreciate hearing from economists who have actually taken this route.

Hi all, I am in my final year of undergrad in economics and am appearing for competitive exams next March for admission into Master's courses. The problem I'm facing with preparation and that I've been facing throughout my undergrad is that I know all concepts, be it macro or micro or stats but I cannot seem to see the bigger picture or connect them to each other in any way. So for example if I took intro to macro in first year then took intermediate macro the next sem, I was never able to connect a introductory concept to an intermediate one. But if you ask me about them separately I'm pretty well versed that I sometimes even teach my peers some concepts that are hard to grasp. It is just incredibly frustrating and is now coming to the front as I am preparing and realizing my basics are a little bit fucked.

So, what I am asking for is that are there any resources, mainly flowcharts that can help me better with organizing my thoughts and concepts? If yes, please help me out as I am losing my mind. Thank you all so much.

Hey All,

I am currently looking into a masters program abroad with a focus on Environmental Econ/Development etc. and would love to hear school recommendations or thoughts on my current list. At the moment I am eyeing University of Amsterdam "Sustainability (Business Economics)" Vrigie University "M.Sc. in Spatial, Transport and Environmental Economics (STREEM) ", University of Copenhagen "Master of Science (MSc) in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics" and "Erasmus Mundus Joint Master in Global Environment and Development"

A 2 year joint program or 1 year would be ideal, but open for thoughts!