From undergraduate, to post-graduate research and practice, the discipline of economics is an outlier in its lack of diversity. Discussing findings from a recent Royal Economics Society report, ‘Who Studies Economics’, Stefania Paredes Fuentes and Tim Burnett argue that lack of diversity in economics across several dimensions continues to limit the variety and relevance economic ideas and research.

Economics is a discipline with significant influence in shaping policy decisions that impact society, with graduates working in government and central banks and academic economists conducting research that informs policy. However, it is well recognised that economics lacks diversity. Lack of gender diversity has been well reported in recent years; however, it is important to look at other dimensions of diversity if we want the discipline to reflect society.

In our recent report, Who Studies Economics?*, we highlight the elitist nature of the subject. Students from lower socio-economic backgrounds are less likely to study economics at university. In fact, across all disciplines, economics has the lowest proportion of students from low participation neighbourhoods (areas with relatively few people attending university, often due to socio-economic challenges), with only 5% of economics students coming from such areas compared to 12% of the overall student population. Instead, 53% of UK economics students are from higher socio-economic statuses and 20% studied in private schools, even if less than 8% of students attend privately schools in the UK (compared to 42% and 9% for the overall student population, respectively).

Some of the same structures and cultural barriers that have affected the inclusion of women in the profession may be affecting the marginalisation of those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. But, there are other factors at play. Economics is offered in all 24 Russell Group universities, but only 67 out of 148 non-Russell Group universities offer a single honours degree in economics. This translates into the Russell Group universities attracting 50% of economics students.

Looking at the intersection of socio-economic background, gender, and ethnicity, we find that white male students from higher socio-economic backgrounds constitute the dominant group among economics students. In Russell Group universities, they represent 33 out of 100 students and a slightly lower but still significant proportion in non-Russell Group universities (Fig.1). Students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, of any gender or ethnicity are only 6 out 100 in Russell Group universities.

The limited availability of economics degrees outside Russell Group institutions exacerbates some of the issues with diversity in economics. Students from lower socio-economic backgrounds are more likely to attend local universities, closer to home. In fact, we observe that representation from lower socio-economic backgrounds to be higher in post-92 universities.

However, simply attracting more students from under-represented groups into economics may not be enough. Universities must also ensure that these students are given adequate support to fulfil their potential and succeed. Unfortunately, students from lower socio-economic backgrounds and ethnic minority groups are more likely to drop out of university, and less likely to be awarded an upper second-class degree or higher in economics, even when they have a similar educational background to their more well-off, White counterparts. This has direct impact on the diversity of professional and academic economists, and limits the range of perspectives and experiences that economists can bring to their research and the policy-making process.

Diversity among economists is crucial for policy-making as it enables the inclusion of a wide range of perspectives and experiences, leading to more informed and effective decision-making. Lack of diversity can lead to groups adopting common and often suboptimal decisions, incomplete analysis of alternatives, and lack of consideration of consequences. This is known in social psychology as “groupthink” and it is more likely to occur in non-diverse groups. Groupthink has been used to explain why investment risks were underestimated by so many before the 2008 financial crisis.

In more recent times, policy makers such as the Government Economic Service, the Bank of England, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) have made diversity and inclusion a key strategic priority. However, the representation of women, ethnic minority groups, and individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds remains low. In 2021 only around 13% of FTSE350 CEOs were women, with even a lower representation from other under-represented groups.

Although there is limited data on the socio-economic background of economists, it is clear that the UK’s elite group tends to come from privileged backgrounds and graduate from top-tier universities (see “Elitist Britain” study by the Sutton Trust). This is likely to be reflected among senior economists in various professional roles within policy-making. This not only damages economics diversity and its pipeline, but it may also affect UK social mobility. Particularly, as a very high percentage of economics graduates find employment in graduate positions (compared to other disciplines). Economics also does well on promoting social mobility among its graduates.

Lack of diversity and groupthink also affect economics research. What is a ‘worthy’ research question will be influenced by the researcher’s personal experience, and current trends in publishing, heavily influenced by the composition of the economics researchers actively publishing in highly ranked journals. Economists from ethnic minority groups are under-represented in academia and less likely to publish in top journals. Economics is less likely to research race and ethnicity related issues compared to other social sciences, despite the relevance of racial inequality on economic outcomes. Beyond thematic preferences, lack of diversity increases discrimination and negatively affect economists from under-represented groups. Female-authored papers in economics are less likely to be accepted to conferences and manuscripts from female academic economists are held to higher standards than male counterparts, which impact the number of papers published by women. More in general, ill-considered organisational choices can exclude some groups from conferences and workshops hindering their opportunities to create networks and disseminate their work.

Ultimately, this is also a matter of social justice: any systemic barriers which prevent some groups from studying economics or working in some jobs based on characteristics out of an individual’s control should be unacceptable, and we should do more to break these barriers.

*The Who Studies Economics? report was co-authored with Prof. Gabriella Cagliesi. Prof. Parama Chaudhury, and Prof. Denise Hawkes.

The content generated on this blog is for information purposes only. This Article gives the views and opinions of the authors and does not reflect the views and opinions of the Impact of Social Science blog (the blog), nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science. Please review our comments policy if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Image Credit: ThisisEngineering RAEng via Unsplash.