nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2019‒07‒15
three papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström
Axventure AB

  1. Publication, Compensation, and the Public Affairs Discount: Does Gender Play a Role? By Lori L. Taylor; Kalena E. Cortes; Travis C. Hearn
  2. Pay and Job Rank Amongst Academic Economists in the UK: Is Gender Relevant? By Mumford, Karen A.; Sechel, Cristina
  3. Exploring the trade narrative in top economics journals By Matthias Aistleitner; Stephan Puehringer

  1. By: Lori L. Taylor; Kalena E. Cortes; Travis C. Hearn
    Abstract: This paper presents on three new styled facts: first, schools of public affairs hire many economists; second, those economists are disproportionately female; and third, salaries in schools of public affairs are, on average, lower than salaries in mainline departments of economics. We seek to understand the linkage, if any, among these facts. We assembled a unique database of over 2,150 faculty salary profiles from the top 50 Schools of Public Affairs in the United States as well as the corresponding Economics and Political Science departments. For each faculty member we obtained salary data to analyze the relationship between scholarly discipline, department placement, gender, and annual salary compensation. We found substantial pay differences based on departmental affiliation, significant differences in citation records between male and female faculty in schools of public affairs, and no evidence that the public affairs discount could be explained by compositional differences with respect to gender, experience or scholarly citations.
    JEL: J01 J16 J30 J31
    Date: 2019–06
  2. By: Mumford, Karen A. (University of York); Sechel, Cristina (University of Sheffield)
    Abstract: This article presents and explores a rich new data source to analyse the determinants of pay and job rank amongst academic Economists in the UK. Characteristics associated with individual productivity and workplace features are found to be important determinants of the relative wage and promotion structure in this sector. However, there is also a substantial unexplained gender pay gap. Men are considerably more likely to work in higher paid job ranks where there are also substantial within-rank gender pay gaps. We show that the nature of the gender pay gap has changed over the last two decades; but its size has not, suggesting a role for suitable policy intervention.
    Keywords: economist, academia, pay-gap, gender
    JEL: A1 A11 A2 I3 J01 J31 J7
    Date: 2019–06
  3. By: Matthias Aistleitner (Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria); Stephan Puehringer (Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria)
    Abstract: In the aftermath of recent populist upheavals in Europe, the U.S., the UK and other areas around the world, nationalist economic policies challenge the overly positive view on economic integration and the reduction of trade barriers established by standard economic theory. For quite a long time the great majority of economists supported trade liberalization policies, at least those, who were actively engaged in policy advice or public debates. Yet it was hardly investigated whether this general support emerges from a consensus view among economists on this issue or whether only a partisan interpretation of economic expertise is used to serve a distinct political purpose. Against this background, in this paper we examine the elite economics discourse on trade and trade policies by applying a multilevel mixedmethod approach. In doing so we combine quantitative methods with a discourse analytical approach in order to examine dominant narratives and imaginaries present in high impact papers dealing with trade, globalization and related policy issues. Our analysis yields the following results: First, the hierarchical structure of economics is also present in the economic debate on trade. Second, the top economic discourse on trade is predominantly characterized by a normative bias in favor of trade liberalization policies leading to a systematically underestimation of negative effects of free trade policies. Third, we found that other-thaneconomic impacts and implications (political, social and cultural as well as environmental issues) of trade policies either remain unmentioned or are rationalized by means of pure economic criteria. To sum up, we conclude that the narrow perspective present in top economics discourse on trade prevents a more comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted gains and challenges related to the issue of international integration.
    Keywords: trade narratives, discourse analysis, sociology of economics, bibliometric analysis, top economic journals
    Date: 2019–07

This nep-sog issue is ©2019 by Jonas Holmström. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.