Chances at PhD in economics (already in other PhD program)

[FermentedFish]

Hi everyone,

I'm writing this post since I am in dire need of advice in making a very important decision. Currently, I am enrolled in an engineering PhD program at a decent school. However, I am not satisfied with my current situation and am pondering the alternatives. I am interested in exploring the option of applying to a PhD program in economics. This is a field that intrigues me and I believe I could be good at. 

Schools I am considering applying to: College Park (UMaryland), Hopkins, Georgetown, GW, American University, and George Mason.

I have the prereqs when it comes to math and economic classes (calculus, linear algebra, multivariable calculus, optimization theory, and several advanced economics courses). These classes come from my previous European university and I have a BS/MS degree in engineering. 

GREs I have taken with both Q and V in the lower sixties. I believe I could raise the Q-part significantly if I retook the test, which I wonder if it would be worthwhile?

Since I am currently in a PhD program I do have research experience, have presented at several conferences, and I am at the moment preparing two manuscripts for publication. I'm also sure I would be able to get 3 good LORs. 

Regarding GPA, I currently have a 4.00 from my current program. However, my previous grades from the BS/MS program are not as stellar. The average is around 3.75, but I have Bs in some of the harder math and econ classes, which I am worried might cause problems with the application. The positive part of it is that the trend has been constantly upward. 

I really needed to write this to summarize my thoughts. I would very much appreciate any comments on my chances or other application related advice. 

I also apologize in advance for any irritation these posts might cause (I did see the pinned post...), but I'm sure someone here has a better idea than I do, because I really don't know what my chances are, especially considering I am currently enrolled in a PhD program.

Thanks and the best to all of you,

A confused student

[ExponentialDecay]

go to urch.com

 

None of the economists hang out here

[juilletmercredi]

Personal opinion, but I think it's going to be a hard sell. Not impossible, but you have to tread carefully and build a case. Paramount is building a really compelling narrative about why you decided to switch from a research career in engineering to a research career in economics. It needs to come across as a considered, reasoned decision that you've put a lot of thought and effort into. Right now it just sounds like you are sort of exploring or more idly turning it over in your brain - which is ok, but I think that means you're not yet ready to apply to PhD programs in this field.

Honestly, I think the fact that you are currently in a PhD program in a completely different field might not matter that much, unless you are intending to blend your research in engineering with research in economics (like financial engineering or something...I don't know). You may have research experience, but you have engineering research experience, which is not directly applicable to economics. The methods, theories, and procedures are very different across those fields. I'm not sure whether a program in econ would want a letter of rec from your current PI: on the one hand, PhD programs like to know that you're not an ax murderer who left the department because you pissed off every single professor in the department, but on the other hand, an engineering professor can't really effectively speak to your potential for success in economics. (Still leaning towards yes - your PI's letter is probably essential but you will probably need 2-3 letters from economists).

There are other considerations: whether you have any experience in economics research methods, how long it's been since you've been in an undergrad econ class (this may be more plausible if you graduated undergrad 2 years ago than if you graduated 10 years ago), whether there's anything else on your CV that indicates an interest in academic economics or econ in general (like work experience or something).

A couple of Bs aren't going to tank you, so don't worry about that. A 3.75 is absolutely fine.

I think it's really impossible to evaluate your chances. I think it's always difficult, but this really is a kind of special case. I think the best thing in this case is to contact an economics professor that you know and trust - possibly one of the professors who taught one of those advanced econ classes you took in undergrad - and pitch this to them, asking explicitly for their advice about how to explain your change of career/field and what you need to do in the interim to increase those chances.

Might be easier to go to an MA in economics and then transition into a PhD.

[ExponentialDecay]

Economics PhDs, at least in the US, screen for mathematical ability first and foremost, so I suspect that his engineering work will indeed speak to his ability as an economist. This is becoming less common at top programs, but it's actually not necessary for OP to have ever been in an undergraduate econ class (except to make sure that he actually likes econ, but that's more for his own benefit) to get accepted into a program. In contrast, the equivalent of a math major is quite necessary. Research experience that uses mathematical methods is necessary. The Quant score needs to be 165+.

B grades, if they are in mathematics or core subjects like macro and micro, may tank him at top programs. Economics is extremely competitive and most programs don't give people much leeway to make up for bad grades in core subjects by other means (except good grades in more advanced versions of the same subjects). A 3.75 is absolutely fine. I don't think an MA is necessary if OP is content going to a good program, and if OP will only be content with Princeton, well, an MA is not at all guaranteed to help.

I hope that OP is on urch by now though. The wealth of experience there is staggering.

[FermentedFish]

Thanks a bunch for your thoughtful replies. This is indeed something I need to ponder more on. I guess the annoying thing is that had I started off with an economics PhD in mind from the get go, I wouldn't be having these issues. The reason behind me considering the PhD program in economics is largely based on what I have been exposed to in my current research, where a lot of engineering work often boils down to the economic viability of a solution. I have thoroughly enjoyed the later economics classes I have taken and I like the mathematical problem solving it is prone to present. Also, it has been around 2-3 years since I took most of the math intensive classes. I have, however, taken some solid mechanics and automatic control that surely demanded mathematical ability, but were not at all related to the kind of math you would need for the economics PhD.

Without being too detailed, I have done some research in the economic feasibility of certain types of renewable energy, including optimization. To research something like this from a macro as well as micro perspective, I believe, would be very interesting. However, I may not need a PhD in economics to do so, but I just feel like I would like to work my way from the bottom and up to really develop a thorough understanding of the problems. I suppose the chances of me being accepted would be larger at a program where there is a faculty member doing research in energy of environmental economics. I also briefly pondered what a future at somewhere like the IMF might look like, perhaps helping developing countries with energy/environmental strategies. I've seen that American University, not very highly ranked, has a large number of graduates moving on to the IMF. 

However, like juilletmercredi pointed out, I may not be ready for this transition yet. The MA would probably help, but I think doing that as well may be too time consuming for me.

ExponentialDecay, sure, Princeton would be terrific, but to aim for it in my situation is indeed a little too optimistic for my taste! If I decide to go for this, I will definitely re-take the GREs and make sure to score high enough on the Q.

Thanks again for the great replies. I will surely spend some more time considering this and move on with my thoughts on urch.

 

[ExponentialDecay]

Ah, environmental economics! I know something about that!

By "economic feasibility" do you mean how much it would cost to implement a certain type of energy considering the constraints, etc etc? That's not really what economists do. Economists are concerned with cost as a more comprehensive concept - cost to society, cost to the environment, etc. Economic valuation (look up hedonic analysis or shadow pricing) is indeed a fascinating field, as is various types of resource economics, but I'm not sure if that's what you're looking for. 

I think it's best to look at the PhD as a professional degree (which it is). You do need a PhD in economics to work at the IMF, or to be a professor, or to work in one of the many other areas where academic economists are recruited. If so, go ahead and apply (try to get research experience beforehand - if you are familiar with statistical packages, that shouldn't be hard). Keep in mind that the young professional programs at the IMF and WB cap at 32. The IMF is a great place to work at, but they're going through major budget cuts right now, and in general, the future of global ventures like that is unclear.

[juilletmercredi]

Economics PhDs, at least in the US, screen for mathematical ability first and foremost, so I suspect that his engineering work will indeed speak to his ability as an economist. This is becoming less common at top programs, but it's actually not necessary for OP to have ever been in an undergraduate econ class (except to make sure that he actually likes econ, but that's more for his own benefit) to get accepted into a program. In contrast, the equivalent of a math major is quite necessary. Research experience that uses mathematical methods is necessary. The Quant score needs to be 165+.

Yeah, I had heard/seen that - which I think is absolutely batty* but - not my field!  That said, I was more referring to the research methods than the content coursework. OP already said he took some advanced econ classes in undergrad, so I think he's got that covered.

There's an article floating around on the Internet somewhere written by a recent economics PhD who explained why rankings in economics don't matter as much as in other fields. Because economists have high-demand skills - quantitative knowledge, financial/economics knowledge, research skills - I think they have more options outside of academia, so there aren't a glut of PhDs lined up to do the jobs that require a PhD in economics. As a result, according to him, it's easier for graduates even of mid-tier programs to get placed into positions. American U is also right there in DC, so that may explain what you saw wrt that program.

*Of course I understand that advanced mathematical facility is required to do modern economics well. I'm talking about the econ part - that a PhD admit to a top econ program may never have had to take an undergrad econ class. Far as I know, economics is still a social science with theories and principles, and I think it's kind of weird that a social science wouldn't care whether or not a student had any coursework in that area - and thus a grasp of the basic theorists and principles. Like wouldn't they want folks to have a basic understanding of micro and macro, or know who Keynes is? But again...not my field.

[ExponentialDecay]

I mean, it depends on where one wants to be placed. American is not Princeton, but it's not the worst program out there. Besides, in the broad terms of job opportunities for PhD economists, the WB and IMF are... not great, and they're going downhill. Compensation is relatively small and there's a lot of bureaucratic bullshit. Somewhere like Cornerstone or some quant finance firm will pay far better, have actual bonuses, and opportunities to exit into an R1 professorship some kind of fund where you basically sit around for the next 10 years before retirement and watch money trickle in. Economists who end up in academia, in fact (especially at prestigious liberal arts colleges and the other places that people in the humanities consider to be the holy grail), are either looking to semi-retire or stay home with the kids more, or they really love teaching. 

At the really strong programs, students need significant research experience and ideally something published, and at that point coursework becomes kind of obsolete. The weaker programs don't have the pick of the cream of the crop, and one gets all sorts of backgrounds (including, anecdotally, someone who hadn't taken a single math class in college and went on to a decent econ PhD, but I don't believe it). The reason coursework in economics is not necessary is the same reason that economists make bank in industry and the rest of y'all social scientists don't - the entire discipline is neatly described in mathematical language which is immediately apparent to anybody who understands mathematics. The whole point of economic thinking is the mathematics, which is why competent mathematical skills are immediately necessary, whilst economic skills can be learned by osmosis.