the economist essay competition 2022

Harvard International Economics

Essay contest (hieec).

HIEEC provides students the opportunity to demonstrate an accomplished level of writing and understanding of economic theory. Through the contest, students hone their academic and professional skills and exhibit their knowledge. 

HIEE C 202 3 -2024

Hieec 2023-2024 is now closed. .

The 2023-2024  Harvard International Economics Essay Contest is sponsored by the Harvard Undergraduate Economics Association (HUEA). This essay competition is open to high school studen ts of any year and is a fantastic opportunity to demonstrat e an accom plished level of writing and understanding of economic the ory. T hrough the contest, student competitors hone their academic and professional skills and exhibit their knowledge to future employers and academic programs. 

Competitors must construct a convincing argument using economic theory and real-world examples. Winning essays will be published on our website  and will be available for the greater Harvard community to read. Essays should focus on argumentation supported with facts and references, although data-based support is also welcome.

Yiheng Lyu​

Audrey Ku k​

Hyoungjin Jin

Juyoung Chun

Kevin Zhang

Matthew Choi

Mikayil Sadikhov

Raunak Agarwal

Vallabh Himakunthala

Highly Commended

Aronima Biswas

Aryan Nangia

Kridaya Gupta

Leonardo Jia

Rohan Mathur

Anagha Chakravarti

Amberlynn Gong

Neha Shanavas

Donghyeon Oh

2023-2024  Essay Questions

Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have the potential to affect growth, inequality, productivity, innovation, and employment. OpenAI’s ChatGPT, in particular, has greatly increased public awareness about the significance of AI and its implications for the future. What impact will the development of AI have on economic inequality, the composition of the workforce, and economic output as a whole? How can nations prepare for the micro and macroeconomic changes brought about by AI?

Measuring national and global economic activity allows us to understand how economies change in size and structure—how they grow and contract. In addition to Gross Domestic Product (GDP), government budgets, and the money supply, alternatives like the Human Development Index (HDI) and Gross National Income (GNI) are used to assess economic progress. What are the advantages of our current economic indices, including GDP, HDI, GNI, government budgets, and the money supply, and in what areas are they lacking? Which of these indices do you find most helpful, and how can we enhance or combine them to improve our understanding of economic measurement?

Proponents of income redistribution support the idea that redistribution policies will increase economic stability and give more opportunities to the less wealthy. Others, however, are more skeptical and believe it could have negative consequences for economic growth. Current methods of redistribution include taxation, welfare, public services, and other monetary policies. What strategies for income redistribution should the U.S. adopt from other countries? What economic impacts could a wealth tax or super millionaire tax have? What type of redistribution is most effective and feasible? What would be the impacts of the U.S. enacting universal basic income? Discuss the implications of any of these issues and feel free to expand on other areas of economic redistribution.

As the United States weighs the impacts of China’s rise to global prominence, economics and national security have become increasingly intertwined. As a result, the United States government has imposed both tariffs and investment restrictions on China to limit the nation’s access to both US markets and intellectual property (specifically in sensitive industries such as semiconductors). What are the economic implications of these policies for United States firms, consumers, and workers? Discuss the most important perspectives of the US-China trade war and provide suggestions on how both countries can manage the prospect of a changing economic order.

2nd November 2023 – Essay titles released

11:59pm EST 5th January 2024  – Essay submission deadline

Late February 2024*  – Highly Commended and Finalists notified

Early March 2024 * – Winners notified, results published on the website

*We received a high volume of submissions, therefore we anticipate  that it will take us a couple m ore w eeks to release the results. 

Entrants must choose one of the four prompts and write a response to it with a strict limit of 1500 words. Submission must be via the HUEA website and entrants are limited to submitting one essay with only the first submission being considered. Each essay submission will have a $20 reading fee which should be paid upon submission of the essay. If this fee will impose a significant financial burden on your family, please email us. The deadline for submitting the essay is 11:59pm EST January 5th, 2024. ​

Please submit essay submissions via this form.

If the above link does not work, use:  https://forms.gle/9NVDu9WVbU71iPpq6

*Be sure to read all the details in the submission form carefully before submitting, as failure to complete any of the steps correctly may result in your submission not being considered.

The essays will be judged by the board of the HUEA, with the top 10 submissions being adjudicated by the esteemed Harvard professor and 2016 Economics Nobel Prize winner Oliver Hart.

The top three winning essays will be published ( with the author’s permission) on our website. A finalist s list of the top  submissions will be published online and adjudicated by 2016 Economics Nobel Prize Winner Oliver Hart. A list of names that will receive the "Highly Commended" distinction will also be published online​. The judges' decisions are final.

Terms and Conditions

The word limit of 1500 must be strictly adhered to. Any words past the limit will be truncated. This limit excludes references, footnotes, titles, headers and footers.

Essays must be written only by the entrant. Any outside assistance must be declared in the beginning or end of the essay.

Only your first submission will be accepted. Any further submissions will not be read.

References must be included, and any plagiarism will lead to disqualification.

References must be in Chicago or APA format. 

The only accepted document formatting is PDF. Any other format will not be accepted, nor will refunds be given to those who do not follow this rule.

No refunds are granted.

Grades 9-12 are permitted.

The essay must not be entered in any other competition nor be published elsewhere.

No individual feedback of essays will be granted.

The decisions made by HUEA by the final round of adjudication are final.

All winners agree to their names being published on the HUEA website.

Past Winners

2022  prompts an d winners.

In recent years and decades, many countries have seen fertility rates drop, potentially leading to falling populations. Currently, China has a fertility rate of 1.3, one of the lowest in the world. However, in 2021, China experienced GDP growth of 8% with output totaling $17.7 trillion. Will this lowered fertility rate (with potential to fall further) affect China’s economic growth and policy? How so? What, if anything, can the Chinese government do to limit the risk of falling fertility rates?

U.S. mortgage rates recently passed 7%, making the purchase of a new home increasingly unaffordable. Meanwhile, the United States has suffered from a chronic shortage of available housing for decades, particularly in urban areas, leading to what many scholars and advocates call an affordability crisis. Why is housing so unaffordable in the U.S.? What can (or should) be done by private actors, state and local governments, and the federal government to alleviate the affordability crisis?

It is often suggested that a tradeoff exists between economic growth and the health of the environment, especially now as the threat of climate change becomes more dire. What economic risks does a changing climate pose? Can economic growth be consistent with a healthy environment? What policies, either market-based or otherwise, should governments enact to protect the environment while posing the least danger to economic efficiency? 

Central banks such as the Federal Reserve in the U.S. and the Bank of England in the UK manage their nation’s macroeconomies with the goal of ensuring price stability and maximum employment. Globally, inflation rates are rising to levels not seen since the 1980s, particularly in the U.S. and European countries. To what extent should the monetary policies of central banks in various Western countries differ or resemble one another as a reaction to the specific causes of inflation facing their economies?

​ Click below to view each winner's essay

Ashwin t elang  *   nanxi jiang   *   duncan wong, 2019 wi n ner.

https://www.economicsreview.org/post/when-is-one-choice-one-t oo-many

2020 Winners

https://www.economicsreview.org/post/covid-19-and-the-market

https://www.economicsreview.org/post/automation-and-jobs-this-time-is-different

https://www.economicsreview.org/post/making-rational-decisions

YES Essay Contest

The winners of the 2022 Young Economists' Society Essay Contest.

Winner : Hin Tak Ben Law - Eton College, United Kingdom

Special mention : Nori Law - King George V School, Hong Kong

Special mention : Eva Solway - Kellett School, Hong Kong

Essay title : Inflation in the United Kingdom rose to its highest level in almost 30 years in January 2022. Discuss the economic effects of such high rates of inflation.

Feedback from the judges:

Essays were well written with insightful analysis of the effects of high inflation in the UK. In most essays a range of reliable sources were used to support this analysis. In the best essays there was clear and nuanced evaluation of the effects of high inflation. To improve, some answers would benefit from:

Focusing on the question - the effects of inflation not why inflation is occurring.

Expanding a point fully before moving on to the next point.

Using reliable sources to support all points.

Evaluating points rather than focusing on only the positives and negatives.

Essay Competition

 “the ideas of economists… both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood… indeed the world is ruled by little else” ,     j. m. keynes (general theory, 1936), essay competition 2023.

We received over 750 eligible submissions this year, with each one being hand-read and marked by our panellists at the University of Cambridge. Overall, we were thoroughly impressed by the quality of the responses to some of the most challenging questions in the competition’s history. We would like to thank every student that submitted an essay this year, and extend our warmest congratulations to the winners and shortlisted essays named below.

We are delighted to announce that the winner of the 2023 Marshall Society Essay Competition is David Lu of Raffles Institution, Singapore. David’s essay in response to Question 4 deftly balanced advanced economic theories with real-world data, clear explanations, and rhetorical flair, and was a pleasure to read. We look forward to publishing it in the forthcoming issue of The Dismal Scientist , the magazine of the Marshall Society, and awarding our top prize of £50.

In 2nd place is You Peng of Shenzhen College of International Education, China. Peng’s essay in response to Question 2 was theoretically advanced and well structured, and we would’ve liked to see even more real-world application. It will likewise be published and receive a finalist prize of £25.

In 3rd place is Hanyun Qian of Suzhou Foreign Language School, China. Hanyun’s essay in response to Question 5 was extremely original, insightful, and entertaining to read, and we would’ve liked to see an even tighter focus on the question set. It will likewise be published and receive a finalist prize of £25.

Our shortlisted essays, in no particular order, were as follows:

To everyone that took part in the competition, thank you for the time and care spent in preparing your essay, and all the best for your future studies. We hope you’re looking forward to the 2024 edition of the essay competition.

A reminder of the essay questions set this year is as follows:

• In what ways could Artificial Intelligence reshape the labour market? Will it usher in Keynes’ ‘age of leisure’?
• ‘Policymakers can’t exploit the Phillips curve to reduce unemployment due to the Lucas critique.’ Evaluate this statement.
• The US Federal Child Tax Credit is scheduled to revert from $2,000 to $1,000 by 2025. Is this policy a mistake?
• Tensions between the US and China have been steadily increasing. Is it in the US’ interest to decouple from China economically?
• ‘There were no meaningful long-run changes in living standards until the Industrial Revolution.’ Discuss.
• Has Economics run out of big new ideas? If so, what are the implications? If not, justify with an example.

• Work & Careers
• Life & Arts

FT Schools competition: Young Economist of the Year

• FT Schools competition: Young Economist of the Year on x (opens in a new window)
• FT Schools competition: Young Economist of the Year on facebook (opens in a new window)
• FT Schools competition: Young Economist of the Year on linkedin (opens in a new window)
• FT Schools competition: Young Economist of the Year on whatsapp (opens in a new window)

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

This article is part of the Financial Times free schools access programme. Details/registration  here .

School students across the UK in years 12 and 13 are invited to enter the Young Economist of the Year competition run by the Royal Economic Society in association with the Financial Times.

Applicants — who need not be studying economics — have until July 10 to write up to 1,000 words on one of the five questions picked for this year.

The winning article will be published in the Financial Times and on the RES website and the author will receive £1,000, with £200 for each of the runners up.

Entries will be judged on originality, quality of writing, economic content and quality of the economic argument. They should answer a question on one of the following topics, described in detail on the competition website along with further guidance:

Regional inequality and “levelling up”

The UK’s “cost of living crisis”

The value of a university degree

Cryptocurrency and financial stability

The competition is part of the  FT’s schools programme , which provides free access to the FT for students aged 16-19, their teachers and schools around the world.

Supporting ideas and data for entrants can be found in the FT. Full details and information on submission are available on the  RES competition website .

Promoted Content

Follow the topics in this article.

• FT Schools Add to myFT

International Edition

Submissions for Equilibrium are now open! The Semester 2 regular deadline is May 12th, 2024.

Harker Oeconomia

Harvard international economics essay competition, description.

The 2023 Harvard International Economics Essay Contest is sponsored by the Harvard Undergraduate Economics Association (HUEA) in conjunction with the Harvard College Economics Review (HCER). This essay competition is open to high school students of any year and is a fantastic opportunity to demonstrate an accomplished level of writing and understanding of economic theory. Through the contest, student competitors hone their academic and professional skills and exhibit their knowledge to future employers and academic programs.  Competitors must construct a convincing argument using economic theory and real-world examples.  Winning essays will be published in the Harvard Economics Review and will be available for the greater Harvard community to read. Essays should focus on argumentation supported with facts and references, although data-based support is also welcome.

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION

Home   |  About WTO   |  News & events   |  Trade topics   |  WTO membership   |  Documents & resources   |  External relations

Contact us   |  Site map   |  A-Z   |  Search

español   français

ESSAY AWARD FOR YOUNG ECONOMISTS

The Selection Panel also gave an honourable mention to Torsten Søchting Jaccard of the University of Toronto for his paper entitled “Who Pays for Protectionism? The Welfare and Substitution Effects of Tariffs”.

Winning essay

Mathilde Muñoz's paper explores the implications of “job postings” on labour market outcomes and welfare. Job posting is an increasingly important offshoring transaction falling under so-called mode 4 services trade, whereby workers move temporarily to a foreign country to perform the contracted task (e.g. plumbing services) but remain employed and paid by the foreign firm. Basing her work on evidence in the European Union, Ms Muñoz shows that the use of job postings has triggered large economic gains in low-wage countries sending employees but it hurts low-paid workers in high-wage countries where the tasks are undertaken.

“The paper brings out very interesting information that can help policymakers look at what is really happening in trade in services within the EU and draw appropriate conclusions, and I think the work can be extended even further in ways that can benefit developing countries,” Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala said in a meeting with Ms Muñoz in Geneva. “I think the future of trade is services, is green, is digital, and this work focuses on one particular area which I think is the future. I'm very proud that the WTO has this prize and sets out to look for young people who are doing exciting, cutting-edge work.”

In the view of the Selection Panel, Ms Muñoz's essay is a novel, technically outstanding, impressive and creative paper that addresses an issue of great relevance to world trade and the WTO. It is also an area that has been largely neglected by existing literature.

Mathilde Muñoz is a French national. She received her Ph.D. from Paris School of Economics in 2022. She is currently a post-doctoral fellow at James M. and Cathleen D. Stone Center on Wealth and Income Inequality at the University of California, Berkeley and will join the faculty of University of California, Berkeley in July 2023 as an Assistant Professor of Economics.

“I'm incredibly honoured to win this award. I think it's incredibly useful for economists and young researchers to meet policymakers and to talk about these very important issues, to connect research to people who try to implement trade policy and understand what are the actual problems and what the negotiations are about. I would encourage all young economists, in particular women and people from underdeveloped countries, to apply to this award,” Ms Muñoz said.

Honourable mention

Torsten Søchting Jaccard's paper studies the distributional costs to US consumers of country-specific tariffs. It shows that US tariffs imposed on imports from low-income countries pose a bigger burden on poorer households, with a negative impact on rural communities, while US tariffs imposed on imports from high-income countries pose a bigger burden on richer households, with a negative impact on urban communities. It shows that the urban/rural disparity in exposure to tariff policy is driven by the extent to which purchasing habits differ across urban and rural counties in the United States and by the alternatives available on the domestic market to consumers.

In the judgement of the Selection Panel, Mr Jaccard's essay is a fascinating paper that provides novel insights into the distributional costs of tariffs to consumers, highlighting the link between household characteristics, their consumption tendencies and domestic alternatives available to consumers to assess the impact on consumer welfare.

Torsten Søchting Jaccard is a Canadian and Danish national. He is a fifth year Ph.D. Candidate at the University of Toronto. He will spend the 2022-23 academic year as International Economics Postdoctoral Fellow at Dartmouth College, United States, and will join the Vancouver School of Economics at University of British Columbia, Canada, in 2023 as an Assistant Professor.

Selection panel

The Selection Panel comprised Beata Javorcik (Professor of Economics, University of Oxford), Robert Koopman (Director, Economic Research and Statistics Division, WTO), Robert Staiger (Professor of Economics, Dartmouth University) and Alberto Trejos (Professor of Economics, INCAE Business School). Roberta Piermartini (Chief of Section, Economic Research and Statistics Division, WTO) coordinated the work of the Selection Panel.

DG Okonjo-Iweala with the Essay Award Winner Mathilde Muñoz.

Roberta Piermartini (Chief of Section, Economic Research and Statistics Division, WTO) with the Essay Award Winner Mathilde Muñoz.

Problems viewing this page? If so, please contact [email protected] giving details of the operating system and web browser you are using.

• Executive Team
• Academic Advisory Board
• Foundation Board
• Annual Reports
• Collaborative Fellowships
• Early Career Fellowships
• First Book Grants
• Independent Scholar Fellowships
• Mid-Career Fellowships
• Political Economy Fellowships
• Small Group Projects
• Other Projects & Partnerships
• Associated Academics
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Assessment Procedure
• CfP: Migration & Democracy in a Time of Climate Crisis
• 24th May: The End of Empires and a World Remade
• Season IV: 2023-24
• Season III: 2022-23
• Season II: 2021-22
• Season I: 2020-21
• 1st ISRF Lecture Series: Migration
• Other Events
• Issue 28: Learning Machines
• Print Archive
• Mailing List

2022 Essay Prize in Economics

What Contribution can Heterodox Economics Make to Addressing the Climate Emergency?

The Independent Social Research Foundation (ISRF) and the Cambridge Journal of Economics (CJE) intend to award a prize of EUR 7,000 for the best essay on the theme, ‘What contribution can heterodox economics make to addressing the climate emergency?’ Authors are free to choose their topic and title within this wider theme.

Please read these details carefully before contacting the ISRF or the CJE with a query or submitting your essay for consideration .

Essays are invited which explore the potential contribution of any aspect(s) of heterodox economics, broadly construed, to addressing the climate emergency. Possible sub-topics include:

• Ends. What should be the objectives of climate policy, and action more generally by states, institutions and individuals, in addressing the climate emergency? How should the values at stake be conceptualised? 
• Means. Assuming some clear goals or objectives, how should these be pursued? How should we act in the face of economic, scientific, and political uncertainties?
• Discourses and strategies. In addressing the climate emergency, how are our means and ends best described and framed? Are there tensions between well-justified ends which might emerge from ethical, political economic and scientific analysis, and the means available to us?

Essays could discuss theoretical issues in general terms, or focus on specific problems or practical strategies. 

If the scientific consensus is correct, we only have a few years before serious climate damage becomes irreversible. Therefore contributors who focus on long-term structural transformations of the economy, society, or economics, may also wish to discuss how to think and act given the urgency of the situation. 

The winning essay will be selected from submissions received in the submission window commencing 1st September 2021, closing at midnight on 30th September 2021.

The essay will be judged on its originality and independence of thought, its scholarly quality, its potential to challenge received ideas, and the success with which it matches the criteria of the ISRF and the CJE. The successful essay will be intellectually radical, orthogonal to existing debates, and articulate a strong internal critique across the fields of economic research. Its challenge to received ideas will have the potential to provoke a re-thinking of the topic.

The ISRF is interested in original research ideas that take new approaches and suggest new solutions to real world social problems. The full statement of the ISRF’s criteria and goals may be viewed  here .

The CJE provides a forum for theoretical, applied, interdisciplinary, history of thought and methodological work, with strong emphasis on realistic analysis, the development of critical perspectives, the provision and use of empirical evidence, and the construction of policy. More detail about the Journal can be found on the Journal’s website .

The 2015 ISRF Essay Prize in Economics was awarded to Julie Nelson for her essay Husbandry: a (feminist) reclamation of masculine responsibility for care .

The submitted essays will be judged by an academic panel (the ISRF Essay Prize Committee) and the winner will be decided by unanimous vote. The panel’s decision will be final, and no assessments or comments will be made available. The result will be notified to applicants by email by the end of July 2022 and will then be announced by posting on the websites of  the ISRF and of the CJE. The ISRF and the CJE reserve the right not to award the prize, and no award will be made if the submitted essays are of insufficient merit.

Submissions should be made – within the submission window only – online at: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cje Queries: Telephone +44 (0) 20 7262 0196 or email [email protected]

The Nottingham-World Bank Economics Essay Competition

Winning article.

• The Nottingham-World Bank Economics Essay Competition 2021 asked, “What would be the economic consequences for Malaysia if technology replaces 50% of current jobs in the country? Who would benefit, and who would lose? Would we be better off ultimately?”
• The Competition is open to all pre-university in Malaysia.
• Published below is the Grand Prize written by Gwendolyn Chan Hui Pei from SMK Batu Lintang, Kuching.

Technology: Killer or Saviour? By Gwendolyn Chan Hui Pei, SMK Batu Lintang, Kuching

Kiva robots. That’s the name of Amazon’s “holiday workers” in a warehouse located in Tracy, California. Kiva robots are like orange suitcases on wheels that makes the shelves in warehouses come to you. More than 3000 of these robots cruise Amazon’s warehouse floors in California, helping employees complete millions of orders. Before Kiva robots, Amazon workers had to comb through warehouse aisles just to find certain products to complete shipments. Now, workers just stay on platforms while the robots bring the shelves with the items directly to them. These 320-pound robots can lift up to more than 2 times their weight, has motion sensors to detect objects in their way and can travel at 3-4 miles per hour. The robot’s small footprint allows it to fit up to 50% more inventory in the warehouses while simultaneously increasing efficiency up to 20%, filling orders in 15 instead of 90 minutes. Many worry about the jobs taken away from them by these robots, however this was not Amazon’s intention. But still, can we deny the number of workers these robots have replaced?

Applied technology can be evidently traced back to as early as the pre-16th century. In ancient Greece and Rome, many free workers became jobless due to simple ancient Greek technology in that period such as gears, screws, rotaries and mills. To overcome this, leaders in that era launched many public works such as infrastructure projects and recreational projects financed by the government to create jobs for the people. Some rulers go to the extent of refusing or banning new inventions and innovations to save labour costs. Emperor Vespasian, a Roman emperor rejected a new method of cost-effective transportation of heavy merchandise saying: "You must allow my poor hauliers to earn their bread." In the medieval and renaissance period, European authorities often sided with “guilds” or the majority of the working population and proceeded to refuse or ban new technologies. The constant dilemma of whether to adopt new technology can be seen in the 16th-18th century in Great Britain. The effect of innovation on employment became a concern which can be evidently seen when Queen Elizabeth I declined to issue a patent for a knitting machine invented by an English clergyman called William Lee on the account that it might cause the layoff of textile workers.

In the 19th century, many controversies and debates over technological unemployment arose. David Ricardo, a British political economist voiced his opinion on the implementation of technology and believing that it is often very injurious and harmful for workers when people substitute machine for human jobs. While many other economists supported his stand, a French economist named Jean Baptiste Say was the first to respond to Ricardo’s argument saying that machinery does not compete with labour, and society would be better off because of the increased productivity. Say mentioned that a new machine supersedes a portion of labour of a human worker, but does not reduce the amount of product, saying that it would be absurd to adopt it if it did. At that time, water carriers were relieved of duty due to the introduction of the hydraulic engine. Say could not deny the problem and recognised that the water carriers were still unemployed. Therefore, he believed that 3 factors would considerably alleviate the detrimental effects of unemployment:

• New machines are gradually created and still more gradually brought into use, giving those who are affected time to adjust.
• Machines cannot be created without the input of considerable human labour, which can create jobs for some workers even as machinery may put others out of work.
• The circumstances of consumers, including workers affected by the replacement with machinery, is improved by the lower prices of consumer products. [Adapted and paraphrased from Bruce Bartlett (1984) Cato Journal, vol. 4(2), pages 625-650]

How would replacing 50% of the current jobs with technology look like for Malaysia, a developing country? Firstly, the controversial problem still remains - workers in Malaysia would be susceptible to technological unemployment or tech layoff. Figure 1 below depicts Malaysian jobs at risk of automation. With AI (Artificial intelligence) on the rise, and automation replacing jobs, semi-skilled and low skilled workers are at a high risk of losing their jobs. 90% of semi- skilled jobs such as support workers and salespeople consist of Malaysians and 4 out of 5 jobs at high risk of displacement are semi-skilled jobs as compared to low-skilled jobs. Although Malaysia heavily depends on low-skill foreign labour especially in manufacturing and industrial sectors and there is a possibility of the replacement with technology reducing our reliance on it, the probability of Malaysians being put out of their jobs is higher, leaving a large figure of Malaysian workers unemployed. This is because most blue-collared jobs are highly susceptible to automation and ironically, a large portion of those positions are held by Malaysians. This might cause Malaysians to switch to lower pay jobs or not being employed at all. The sosio-economy of Malaysians would be under immense pressure. Unemployed Malaysian workers would have to suffer a lower standard of life. Occupations that are routine based and have many manual tasks are more susceptible to replacement by technology as compared to jobs that are non-routined and require high cognitive skills. At the end of the day, although our economy may be growing due to rise in productivity and lower price in the long term, the wellness of our own Malaysian citizens may be neglected in the short term.

Source: Methodology adapted from Frey and Osborne (2013) and ILO (2016) data from ILOSTAT and DOSM, author’s calculation [Adapted from The Times They Are A-Changin’: Technology, Employment, and the Malaysian Economy by Allen Ng, Khazanah Research Institute ]

Not only are the welfare of Malaysians put at risk, but also the scale of the economic equality in Malaysia will be tipped. With the replacement of workers with technology, companies that adopt labour-saving technologies will monopoly the industries. Some firms have exclusive rights to methods of manufacturing products causing smaller firms to lose out in competitiveness because of higher cost-per-unit. This will cause a great difference in terms of income among high skilled workers and technology owners versus semi-skilled and low skilled workers. A greater inequality of wages within occupations will arise as only certain workers have the skills needed for certain jobs. Skills that are hard to acquire in the technological field also can cause wages to be unequal. On top of that, income inequality may result in a higher rate of health problems and social problems.

On another note, replacement of human labour with technology will cause Malaysia to face a massive restructuring in different sectors in the economy. As higher productivity with new technology lowers prices of goods and opens new sectors to be explored, new labour demand will be created in certain sectors. The demand for jobs will switch from manufacturing sectors to services in the future, just like how the demand for jobs switched from agricultural sectors to manufacturing sectors in the late 90s in Malaysia. The chart below depicts the change in share of jobs by sector, recording the construction with the highest share and the manufacturing sector a negative figure. An increasing proportion of jobs require at least a college level certificate if not advanced degrees. This proves the need for Malaysians to upgrade their skill levels to be qualified and to keep up with the times.

Figure 2: Change in share of jobs by sector

Source: ONET, BLS, EIU, HIS, Oxford Economics, McKinsey Global Institute analysis [Adapted from Automation and adaptability: How Malaysia can navigate the future of work (2020) ]

In conjunction with creating new demand in the labour force across different sectors in Malaysia, the substitution of jobs with technology can possibly add more value to occupations with the human element, making jobs that require human interaction more valuable. For example, when Automated Teller Machines were first created to automate simple tasks such as simple transactions and deposits, the remaining tasks that cannot be automated became more valuable. Bank tellers became people who form personal relationships with the customers and can sell them financial services at a high margin.

On the flip side, wealth distribution becomes an uprising problem as not everyone is given a fair share even with increased productivity and lower cost. Advancement in various sectors may result in a digital divide between different regions and demographics. Urban areas may continue to advance whereas rural areas which are neglected continue to deteriorate in terms of technological advancements because of the failure of implementation of technology as a whole. Areas that have limited access lack the resources to advance in technology. This may possibly create a wider gap between regions and races socially and in terms of progress and cause an increase in poverty among different races in Malaysia.

However, we cannot deny the possibility of Malaysia flourishing with the implementation of technology. In the 1990s the Malaysian government has always put a priority in making Malaysia an industrialized country with the 7th prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad launching Wawasan 2020. Since then, many efforts have been made in increasing Malaysia’s use of technology in different sectors. Though the replacement of jobs with technology might upset the labour force and possibly obsolete the field of manual labour in certain sectors in the short term, the demand for labour force in other trades will significantly increase in the long term. Increased production would increase supply, lowering the general cost of items, increasing the national dividend thus increasing our competitiveness in the global market. With time, a new demand of labour will be created placing new, skilled workers in those fields. Economic growth as a whole can be accelerated.

Technology replacing 50% of jobs also create high income jobs or increases the wages of existing workers that are involved in the field of technology but also widen existing income inequality at the same time. According to a study by Justin Lim, Kevin Wong, Rosaida Mohd Rasep and Sonia Kumari Selvarajan (2018), wages per worker in the ICT industry has risen proportionately from RM38,274 per annum to RM53097 per annum in 2015 whereas wages of workers in the non-ICT industry only rose by RM6150 in the course of 5 years. Because workers in the ICT industry comprise of a small share of the total labour force and small employment growth, the wage disparity between non-ICT workers and ICT workers has been widening and would likely continue to widen even more over time.

Figure 3: Wage per worker of ICT vs non-ICT Industry

Source: DOSM ICT Satellite Account, GDP by Income Approach, authors calculations [Adapted from Wage premiums in the digital economy: Evidence from Malaysia (2018) ]

With new technology being constructed, Malaysia can explore the possibility of taxing new technology or “robot taxes”. According to The Telegraph, Bill Gates even voiced out the opinion that robots that take away jobs from humans should be taxed, which can make up for income taxes from workers that lost jobs. This could slow down the speed of automation and its negative effects on the labour force. In August 2017, South Korea became the first to introduce the world’s first tax on robots by cutting tax incentives for investments to boost productivity. If 50% of jobs were to be replaced, taxes on technology could increase the country’s income and improve the citizen’s standard of life by giving back to the people, increasing economic development through new infrastructure digitally and physically.

In general, technology replacing 50% of jobs in Malaysia benefits most of the stakeholders in the long run and has the potential to generate economic wealth for Malaysia. New innovations and technology are churned out on a daily basis due to globalization. To be able to compete in the global market, Malaysia has to keep up with the times and take bold steps in adopting new technology in various sectors. Though there is a possibility of technology replacing human jobs, nothing beats the value of a human’s touch. To dampen the adverse side effects of replacing human workers with technology, policy makers need to create new alternatives in helping displaced workers readjust to new sectors and work environments. As for Malaysian citizens, we must not stand by the side lines idly, but instead hop on the wagon of change. Being active players in the labour force, we must not take the importance of education (especially in the field of technology) lightly and sharpen our sword of education thus increasing our skills. Only with technological intelligence can we as Malaysians stand out in the global market as drivers of change, standing out amongst nations that are technologically advanced.

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

LSESU Economics Society

DEADLINE PASSED: 2022 LSESU Economics Essay Competition

Thank you for searching for our Economics Essay Competition; this page is from last year, and the deadline has passed. We will be announcing soon the 2023 Essay Competition. Please do not email asking for updates as the competition for 2023 is still under development. Feel free to follow @lsesueconsoc on Instagram for the most frequent updates; otherwise, please wait until our 2023 Essay Competition is posted.

Thank you for your patience.

Deadline extension to 15th August 2022!

The London School of Economics Students’ Union Economics Society is honoured to collaborate once again with the Centre for Economic Performance, one of the leading economic research centres in Europe, to launch the 2022 Essay Competition. The essay competition will encourage pre-tertiary students to think critically on current social issues such as economic assimilation, diversity in the economics profession, and to explore important intellectual debates, such as the distribution of the burden of environmental policies.

Eligibility

Entrants should be:

●      in the final two years of secondary school,

●      starting sixth form (or an equivalent institution) this year,

●      in sixth form (or an equivalent institution), or

●      starting university this year.

Full-time national servicemen who have completed their pre-tertiary education are also eligible.

This competition is open to students of any nationality and studying in any country .

Submit My Essay Now

In your essay, please answer one of the six questions below:

1. How can the lack of gender balance in Economics be explained? Does COVID-19 represent another set-back for efforts to achieve gender parity in the subject?

2. African nations will be left poorer and more economically vulnerable as a result of the invasion of Ukraine. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

3. Explain the economics behind Europe’s dependence on Russian Energy. How can policymakers reduce the impact of the transition away from these sources of energy?

4. Higher inflation is the inevitable consequence of the large fiscal packages and monetary accommodations introduced by Western Governments over the last few years. Do you agree?

5. What economic theories from the 19th century are most relevant to 21st century problems?

6. How significant is a country’s geographic location in determining its long-term development?

The best 3 essays on each topic will receive an Award Certificate both in print and electronically from the LSE Economics Society

The best entry to Question 1 – (For LSE Offer Holders Only)

Signed Certificate and Book by Professor Nava Ashraf, Director of Research of the Marshall lnstitute.

The best entry to Question 2:

Signed Certificate and Book by Sir Christopher Pissarides, the Regius Professor of Economics.

The best entry to Question 3:

Signed Certificate and Book by Professor Silvana Tenreyro, Professor of Economics and External Member of the Monetary Policy Committee, Bank of England.

The best entry to Question 4:

Signed Certificate and Book by Professor Swati Dhingra, Associate Professor of Economics and External Member of the Monetary Policy Committee, Bank of England.

The best entry to Question 5:

Signed Certificate and Book by Professor Oriana Bandiera, Professor of Economics.

The best entry to Question 6 – CEP Prize.

Signed Certificate and Book by Professor Aghion, Professor of Economics.

Terms and Conditions

• The submission deadline is 15 August 2022 , 23:59 GMT+1.
• There will be one winner for every question.
• Your entry must be in English and at 1,500 words maximum . However, titles, titles of charts, footnotes, citations or references are not included in the word count.
• Submit your entry as a PDF , in size 12, font Times New Roman, double-spaced.
• Name your file exactly as follows: Given Name_Surname_Question Answered (e.g. Adam_Smith_Question 1).
• Each person is allowed to submit only one entry. If you submit more than one entry, only your latest entry submitted before the deadline will be processed.
• Co-authorship is not allowed.
• All work must be your original content and must have been produced solely for this competition. If you refer to quotations or ideas by another author, please cite their work in your entry. We accept APA, Harvard, Chicago, MLA, and any other common citation method.
• Results will be announced by 6 September 2022 .
• Enquiries on the LSE SU Economics Essay Competition should be sent to [email protected] .
• Entries not submitted in accordance with these terms, or entries that are incomplete or illegible (as determined in our sole discretion) will not be eligible.
• The decision of the judging panel is final, and at its sole discretion. No correspondence or discussion will be entered into by us in relation to that decision.
• The winners will be notified (by email, post or phone, using contact details provided with the entry)
• Once you have submitted your essay, you are happy for us to contact you about your submission
• We will make all reasonable efforts to contact the winners. If any winner cannot be contacted or is not available, or has not claimed their prize within 10 days of the announcement date, the LSE Economics Society reserves the right to offer the prize to the next eligible entrant selected from the correct entries that were received before the closing date
• We are not liable for any damage, loss or disappointment suffered by you taking part or not being able to take part in this competition, or from being unable to claim your prize
• In the event of unforeseen circumstances, we may alter, amend or foreclose the competition without prior notice. We reserve the right to change these terms at any time

**The LSE SU Economics Society reserves the right, at its discretion, to change, modify, add, or remove portions of the terms and conditions of the LSE SU Economics Essay Competition.

General Guidelines and Advice

The questions are open to interpretation. We do not have an ‘ideal’ set of arguments or structures that your essay must check. The best essays will be ones that are creative and perceptive in the way they deal with the subject matter. We look for original ideas, clarity of expression, effective communication of ideas and well-substantiated arguments.

We encourage the use of charts, graphs, and other forms of data visualisation, as well as material or concepts that go beyond what you have studied in class. If you do so, please remember to cite! Note that the use of overly complex material without justification or clear sense will not be beneficial.

We look forward to receiving your entries, and we wish you the best of luck!

The LSESU Economics Society Executive Committee (2022/23)

Download the promotional flyer to encourage your students/pupils to enter!

Follow the LSESU Economics Society on social media for future announcements!

Search Results

Young Economist Prize

Young economists can play an important role in shaping the future of Europe. Every year we recognise this through the Young Economist Prize, a research competition that offers talented students the chance to share their fresh perspectives on today’s challenges.

Finalists are invited to the annual ECB Forum on Central Banking, and the overall winner is awarded €10,000 .

2024 Young Economist Prize

Deadline for application: 12 February 2024

What are the topics for 2024 paper submissions?

The theme of the 2024 ECB Forum on Central Banking is “Monetary policy in an era of transformation”. Accordingly, PhD students are invited to submit papers on this theme, including the following topics:

• the rise and fall of inflation in the euro area – past, present and future
• monetary policy cycles
• euro area productivity in the short and long run
• the economics of biodiversity
• drivers of equilibrium interest rates
• geopolitical shocks and inflation

Papers on other topics relevant to euro area central banking (including monetary policy, new means of payment and payments infrastructures, the deepening of Economic and Monetary Union, the functioning of the euro area economy and financial system, financial stability, and banking regulation and supervision) were also considered.

How will we select the finalists?

The papers will be assessed using three selection criteria: (i) innovative thinking and scientific merit, (ii) relevance for ECB/euro area policies, and (iii) pertinence to the Forum theme and aforementioned topics, also taking into account the information provided in the CV and recommendation letter.

What will the finalists do at the Forum?

The selected finalists had the unique opportunity to attend the ECB Forum on Central Banking from 1 to 3 July 2024. Their research papers will be available on the ECB’s website and will be shared with all Forum participants, including policymakers, top academics and market economists from around the world.

During the Forum, the finalists will have the opportunity to attend a varied programme of panel discussions and expert talks.

Their papers will be assessed by a jury of top academics and senior ECB staff, taking into account votes to be cast by Forum participants. Please see the prize rules   and privacy statement for further details.

The call for papers closed on 12 February 2024.

Meet Lukas Nord, winner of the 2023 Young Economist Prize!

European university institute.

Shopping, demand composition and equilibrium prices Poster

“Households can reduce their cost of consumption by comparing prices across stores. In response, retailers set lower prices if more demand comes from buyers who compare prices carefully. This mechanism reduces inequality and affects how retail prices respond to aggregate shocks.”

Find out more about related content

Ecb forum on central banking.

The ECB Forum on Central Banking is an annual event organised by the European Central Bank and is held in Sintra, Portugal.

All pages in this section

Our website uses cookies.

We are always working to improve this website for our users. To do this, we use the anonymous data provided by cookies. Learn more about how we use cookies

We have updated our privacy policy

We are always working to improve this website for our users. To do this, we use the anonymous data provided by cookies. See what has changed in our privacy policy

Your cookie preference has expired

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Xi Thinks China Can Slow Climate Change. What if He’s Right?

By Jacob Dreyer

Mr. Dreyer, an editor and writer who focuses on the Chinese political economy and science, wrote from Shanghai.

At first glance, Xi Jinping seems to have lost the plot.

China’s president appears to be smothering the entrepreneurial dynamism that allowed his country to crawl out of poverty and become the factory of the world. He has brushed aside Deng Xiaoping’s maxim “To get rich is glorious” in favor of centralized planning and Communist-sounding slogans like “ ecological civilization ” and “ new, quality productive forces ,” which have prompted predictions of the end of China’s economic miracle.

But Mr. Xi is, in fact, making a decades-long bet that China can dominate the global transition to green energy, with his one-party state acting as the driving force in a way that free markets cannot or will not. His ultimate goal is not just to address one of humanity’s most urgent problems — climate change — but also to position China as the global savior in the process.

It has already begun. In recent years, the transition away from fossil fuels has become Mr. Xi’s mantra and the common thread in China’s industrial policies. It’s yielding results: China is now the world’s leading manufacturer of climate-friendly technologies, such as solar panels , batteries and electric vehicles . Last year the energy transition was China’s single biggest driver of overall investment and economic growth, making it the first large economy to achieve that.

This raises an important question for the United States and all of humanity: Is Mr. Xi right? Is a state-directed system like China’s better positioned to solve a generational crisis like climate change, or is a decentralized market approach — i.e., the American way — the answer?

How this plays out could have serious implications for American power and influence.

Look at what happened in the early 20th century, when fascism posed a global threat. America entered the fight late, but with its industrial power — the arsenal of democracy — it emerged on top. Whoever unlocks the door inherits the kingdom, and the United States set about building a new architecture of trade and international relations. The era of American dominance began.

Climate change is, similarly, a global problem, one that threatens our species and the world’s biodiversity. Where do Brazil , Pakistan , Indonesia and other large developing nations that are already grappling with the effects of climate change find their solutions? It will be in technologies that offer an affordable path to decarbonization, and so far, it’s China that is providing most of the solar panels , electric cars and more. China’s exports, increasingly led by green technology, are booming, and much of the growth involves exports to developing countries .

From the American neoliberal economic viewpoint, a state-led push like this might seem illegitimate or even unfair. The state, with its subsidies and political directives, is making decisions that are better left to the markets, the thinking goes.

But China’s leaders have their own calculations, which prioritize stability decades from now over shareholder returns today. Chinese history is littered with dynasties that fell because of famines, floods or failures to adapt to new realities. The Chinese Communist Party’s centrally planned system values constant struggle for its own sake, and today’s struggle is against climate change. China received a frightening reminder of this in 2022, when vast areas of the country baked for weeks under a record heat wave that dried up rivers , withered crops and was blamed for several heatstroke deaths.

China’s government knows that it must make this green transition out of rational self-interest or risk joining the Soviet Union on history’s scrap heap, and is actively positioning itself to do so. It is increasingly led by people with backgrounds in science, technology and environmental issues. Shanghai, the country’s largest city and its financial and industrial leading edge, is headed by Chen Jining, an environmental systems expert and China’s former minister of environmental protection. Across the country, money is being poured into developing and bringing to market new advances in things like rechargeable batteries and into creating corporate champions in renewable energy .

To be clear, for Mr. Xi, this green agenda is not purely an environmental endeavor. It also helps him tighten his grip on power. In 2015, for instance, the Central Environmental Inspection Team was formed to investigate whether provincial leaders and even agencies of the central government were adhering to his green push, giving him another tool with which to exert his already considerable power and authority.

At the same time, locking in renewable energy sources is a national security issue for Mr. Xi; unlike the United States, China imports almost all of its oil, which could be disrupted by the U.S. Navy in choke points like the Malacca Strait in the event of war.

Mr. Xi’s plan — call it his Green Leap Forward — has serious deficiencies. China continues to build coal-fired power plants , and its annual greenhouse-gas emissions remain far greater than those of the United States, though American emissions are higher on a per-capita basis. China’s electric vehicle industry was built on subsidies , and the country may be using forced labor to produce solar panels. Those are serious concerns, but they fade into the background when Pakistan floods or Brazil wants to build an E.V. factory or South Africa desperately needs solar panels for a faltering energy grid.

American politics may be inadvertently helping China gobble up global market share in renewable energy products. When the United States — whether for national security or protectionist reasons — keeps Chinese companies like Huawei out of the American market or rolls up the welcome mat for electric vehicle makers like BYD or companies involved in artificial intelligence or self-driving cars, those businesses must look elsewhere.

President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act , aimed at tackling climate change, has put the United States on a solid path toward carbon neutrality. But America’s decentralization and focus on private innovation means government policy cannot have quite the same impact that it can in China.

So it is crucial for Americans to recognize that, for most of the world, perhaps for all of us, China’s ability to provide low-cost green technology is, on balance, great news. All of humanity needs to move toward renewables at a huge scale — and fast. America still leads in innovation, while China excels in taking frontier science and making its application in the real world cost-effective. If American politicians, investors and businesses recognize that climate change is humanity’s biggest threat, that could open pathways for diplomacy, collaboration and constructive competition with China that benefit us all.

Together, China and the United States could decarbonize the world. But if Americans don’t get serious about it, the Chinese will do it without them.

And if the United States tries to obstruct China, by way of corporate blacklists, trade or technology bans or diplomatic pressure, it will end up looking like part of the climate problem. That happened earlier this month when Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, during a visit to China, urged officials here to rein in green technology exports that the United States says are hurting American companies.

Mr. Xi won’t completely toss out the polluting manufacturing-for-export economic model that has served China so well, nor does he seem ready to halt construction of coal plants. Both are considered necessary for economic and energy security until the green transition is complete. But they are now only a means to an end. The endgame, it seems, is to reach carbon neutrality while dominating the industries making that possible.

Much like how the United States showed up late for World War II, China’s clean-tech companies are latecomers, piggybacking on technology developed elsewhere. But history rewards not necessarily who was there first but who was there last — when a problem was solved. Mr. Xi seems to discern the climate chaos on the horizon. Winning the race for solutions means winning the world that comes next.

Jacob Dreyer is an American editor and writer focused on the intersection of the Chinese political economy and science. He lives in Shanghai.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .