3000 word economics essay

Essay writing tips Week 9

IP3024

Dr Stefano Sgambati Lecturer, Dept. of International Politics

Email: [email protected]

Office Hours: Wednesdays 14:00-16:00, D503

Formulating the essay question

First, you must choose a topic (e.g., central banking). Second, you must ask a question about the topic at hand (e.g. how has central banking changed since the last crisis).

Thinking about topic & question

The topic:

• It must be related to at least one of the lecture topics for each week.

The question:

• It cannot be a theoretical (conceptual, philosophical, ethical) puzzle (e.g. should central banks bail out banks? Should governments spend more?).

• Instead, it must be a practical (historical, empirical) puzzle (e.g. why has the Fed carried out QE? Why have European governments enforced balanced budgeting since the 1990s?).

The essay structure

Three core elements, besides introduction and conclusion:

Literature review

Analysis

Discussion

1. Literature Review

The literature review is meant to present the state of art on the topic, hence introduce the reader to some of the main perspectives and ideas about the issue at hand.

❖ Core readings are a necessary component of a literature review of one of the lecture’s topics.

❖ However, they are not a sufficient component. You should also consult some of the additional readings (especially the ones marked by an asterisk * on the syllabus).

The Literature Review is key

• Besides clarifying (to yourself and to the reader) the state of art on the topic, the literature review helps you identifying gaps and contradictions in the field which altogether feed into and shape your research question.

• An excellent literature review offers a reasoned discussion of contending views and gives you a solid ground for formulating working hypotheses on how to address an otherwise vague, blurred, unfocused essay question.

• An OK literature review does not identify gaps and contradictions but at least offers a coherent theoretical framework for making sense of the topic at hand.

2. Analysis

• Once you have set the ground by presenting different views or theories, you can move onto producing your own analysis.

• The analysis is when you tell your story. This story cannot be general, abstract, speculative. While the literature review deals with theories, the analysis deals with facts (unless you are analysing theories with the purpose of producing a critique of the latter).

• Remember, you are a political economist. Your analysis must meet the following criteria: 1) it must be grounded on a clear socio-historical context; 2) it must rely on solid empirical evidence; 3) it must demonstrate a sensitivity to the power dimension, not simply to the economic one.

3. Discussion

• Literature review deals with theories, analysis deals with facts. The discussion deals with both!

• The purpose of the discussion is to test your hypotheses on the basis of your empirical-historical findings. Alternatively, the discussion should offer a reflection on the significance of your findings and a look at the bigger picture.

• What have you learned from your analysis? This is the moment you make your voice heard. You are now in the position to give more than a simple opinion: you can finally formulate a scholarly argument.

Two types of discussions

1. One way of discussing your findings is to reflect on the broader socio-economic implications of your analysis. For instance, if with your analysis of central bank monetary governance you have succeeded with demonstrating that central banks are not “market-neutrals”, you can then discuss what this means for the economy, the financial system and/or society at large.

2. Alternatively, you can discuss the conceptual-theoretical implications of your analysis. Again, if you have shown that central banks are not market-neutral regulators, then you can speak back to the literature on central banking, position yourself in (partial) agreement or disagreement with existing theories of central banking, fill gaps and resolve contradictions that have emerged from the literature review.

Remember:

While your argument/analysis does not need to be original in itself, your thinking/discussion should.

Show the reader your creative ability to combine diverse materials and critically engage with different texts to provide a coherent story about one of the lecture’s topics.

Last but not least

Conclusion:

The conclusion is a summary of your discussion, stressing how your overall argument is important and why it makes sense.

Introduction:

Write the introduction at the very end. The introduction is very important. It consists of two fundamental components:

1. A captivating presentation of your topic/puzzle (that shows its importance and sparks curiosity in the reader).

2. A clear, concise exposition of your main thesis/argument as well as a brief summary of the essay’s structure.