Top products from r/academiceconomics

Other 'essential' readings

It's hard to list the essential readings in economics but your list seems like a good start though I must mention that I had never heard of Progress and Poverty. If I were to recommend additional readings I'd definitely add something on mathematical economics and the history of econometrics. There is an immense gap in style, presentation, and overall methodology between a book like Keynes' General Theory and the more recent On the Impossibility of Informationally Efficient Markets. The latter is cited amongst the top 20 articles from the American Economic Review I mentioned before and it reads almost like a mathematics paper. Grossman and Stiglitz begin their work presenting a mathematical model and then follow it by listing conjectures and then go on to postulate and prove theorems and to derive corollaries from these theorems. Economics has become a mathematical and statistical science. You won't find much equations or mathematical theorems (if any) in the books you've mentioned. Even Hicks' Value and Capital, the most 'mathematized' of them is still fairly light compared to modern economics. Indeed, several of the most important economists of the 20th century had a thorough training in mathematics. A short list includes: Jan Tinbergen , Ragnar Frisch , Kenneth Arrow , Simon Kuznets, Leonid Hurwicz, Wassily Leontief, Leonid Kantorovich, Tjalling Koopmans, Gérard Debreu, Maurice Allais, Trygve Haavelmo, John Harsanyi, Harry Markowitz, John Forbes Nash, Daniel McFadden, and many others could still be mentioned. All the names I listed received a Nobel Prize in Economics and all had academic training in either mathematics, physics, statistics or engineering.

​

This is perhaps the single most important change in economics and I believe it is essential to understand it to properly appreciate contemporary economic theory. The change was rather swift and intensified itself in the post WWII period. Grubel and Boland (1986) notes that "[i]n 1951 only 2.2 per cent of all pages [of the American Economic Review] contained at least one [mathematical] equation. By 1978 this proportion had risen to 44 per cent.". A broad overview of mathematical economics is offered by Debreu, a French mathematician who won the Nobel Prize in Economics for his work in general equilibrium theory, in the New Palgrave. The historical context of postwar economics is summarized by Backhouse (2008). Interwar economics is contrasted to postwar economics in Morgan and Rutherford (1998). Blaug (2009) calls this change in the 1950s the formalist revolution noting how mathematical economics began mainstream and arguing that economists began to emulate the "formalist" or axiomatic programme associated with German mathematician David Hilbert.

Perhaps the most comprehensive study on the 'mathematization' of economics is Weintraub's How Economics Became a Mathematical Science. Weintraub goes deep into questions of mathematical rigor and formalization. His study of Gérard Debreu brings him to the Bourbaki Group in mathematics and to the turn of the century Foundational Crisis. Another important book is Ingrao and Israel The Invisible Hand: Economic Equilibrium in the History of Science. This book narrates the history of general equilibrium theory in economics, starting from important economists such as Léon Walras and Vilfredo Pareto, some of the first to introduce mathematics to economic theory.

Econometrics is the other topic I suggested and to keep my argument short I will simply state that a typical graduate course in economics is divided into three major branches: microeconomics, macroeconomics, and econometrics. The Econometric Society was founded in 1930 and it's journal Econometrica is one of the most influential until today. A history of econometrics is available in Morgan's History of Econometric Ideas. Finally, another book that I highly recommend is also from Morgan, The World in the Model: How Economists Work and Think. Models are a central part to economic thinking and theorizing. As early as Quesnay's Tableau and Ricardo's model farms economists use models as ways to not only understand but, to some extent, experiment with reality. Throughout the years, economists have changed their perspectives on how to construct and properly utilize models, but, overall, it's safe to say that they remain one of the major workhorses in economic theory.

"Masters Level" Economic Textbooks.
---

I've picked these texts as they are ones that I ran across in the year I spent as a masters student, or in advanced economics classes when I was an undergraduate/undergraduate tutor.

Hal Varian, Microeconomic Analysis Relatively outdated graduate level textbook in microeconomic theory. I'd imagine his intermediate book would prepare you well for this text. It requires understanding of partial derivatives and some matrix notation to get through, but compared to today's texts comes off comparably light. I'd imagine it'd old and used enough that there exists comprehensive answer guides online that you can track down.

David Romer, Advanced Macroeconomics Romer's Advanced Macroeconomics is used in some undergraduate programs, and some masters/graduate programs. Again, compared to standard texts, it is wanting, but does a good job of covering many of the introductory models that are used in modern economic analysis. This text requires knowledge of at least single variable integration (might require multiple in the later chapters, but when I was tutoring students with it classes never got that far), and the usual multivariate calculus.

Jeffrey Wooldridge, Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach this was the textbook that I first saw econometrics through, and I still think its a fantastic applied text. It has a decent mathematical appendix covering some probability and math topics required for the text. On the flip side, the text gives you some pretty good how-to methods to implement a lot of the common econometric techniques and some intuition behind why they are used.

Simon & Blume, Mathematics for Economists This text is usually used in graduate programs math camps as a book saying "you should feel comfortable using these techniques before entering the program." Covers a wide range of topics from calculus, optimization, and linear algebra, to differential equations and some topics in real analysis. It has a fair amount of exercises to work through, and again, the book has been used enough that answer guides may be available online.

As you've probably heard, graduate school is very mathematical, and very little that I learned in intermediate micro ends up bridging the gap outside of some of the intuition I gathered through it. Most of the books I cited above are a solid jump up in difficulty from most intermediate books I've seen, and still a solid jump away from the common PhD level texts (Mas-Colell, Whinston, and Green "Microeconomic Theory". Sargent and Ljungqvist "Recursive Macroeconomic Theory". Greene "Econometric Analysis", respectively).

As a result, depending on what you plan on doing in the near to short term, its usually better to take more calculus, linear algebra, and other mid level mathematics classes.

I know this is a bit old but maybe it still helps. Simon and Blume is a very good book, I think at a similar level than A. Chiang. Also, Sundaram's book is very good for everything related to optimization. It's much narrower in terms of topics but it's great and pretty cheap for a textbook. Finally, you may be able to find Silverberg's book in your library. It's great for the mathematical approach to microeconomics. It's probably to advanced for an into to micro class but keep it in mind for more advanced classes.

just done something very similar. Took a year off and on my Msc now (broad core econ, haven't specialised). echoing whats been said below:

Was in a similar position with recommendation letters. pretty large UG cohort and I never went to office hours because i just liked to get on by myself. I recommend sending big essays or project examples of work from the classes with those professors. or just sending something you're proud of and reflects your style. that saves them having to dig it up and lecturers can glean a lot from just skimming a students work. dont worry about it, lecturers are such pros and will be happy you want to study more!
obviously give them lots and lots of forewarning.

get into the maths. depending on your program of choice, i would read any level UG econometrics book just to keep you fresh with the methods and lingo. I did quite a bit of metrics at UG but forgot it all after the exams; so useful to go through it at your own pace and see how it fits together.
Pure maths-wise i've stuck with Simon and Blume and the appendix of Greene for some techniques. Greene is pretty dry and scary though, don't be put off! both books and their solutions are available in pdf form everywhurrr

i'm in the UK (from your spelling and tone it looks like you're in the US/Canada?) but at masters level it's just a lot more technical. no more UG waffling about intuition and graphical analysis! I've only been going for a couple weeks but you're expected to derive that equation and really play around with it. a lot of programs i looked at offered preparatory maths courses beforehand but students with solid maths are a lot more confident now real econ has started. just being familiar with the concepts means you're not shocked by them as they're introduced in the micro/macro class. You can follow the lecturer rather than getting derailed at some earlier step.

do an internship, try and think where it's going to lead but failing that, do anything. just anything. they're easy to get, getting some part time work on the side will pay your bills. there really is no excuse. bit daunting applying for them initially and it can be a slog but its worth it.

good luck!

I agree with most that doing some practice with it is probably the easiest, especially if you've already got a lot of knowledge of programming (ie it'll be easy to pick up). Grab something like Cameron and Trivedi as a nice reference, though I don't know if it's the most up to date. I don't know that it's the best text for learning, but will have a wide range of topics that you can easily reference as you approach problems.

​

Have you taken a bunch of stats and/or econometrics? If so then I'd just do some replications of papers Joshua Angrist's site has quite a few that are fairly intuitive and approachable. Also William Evan's has a nice teaching page for learning to use Stata. I link the undergraduate one, but the graduate one is also useful as well and will be pretty approachable if you've had a solid background in stats and econometrics.

Micro isn't short... :(

But yes, macro is pretty broad. Here's what I read to get started for intermediate/advanced macro:

Sargent:

https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/recursive-macroeconomic-theory-fourth-edition

Stokey:

https://www.amazon.com/Recursive-Methods-Economic-Dynamics-Stokey-ebook/dp/B00J8CVOHO

These two should be a good starting point but still workable enough for a solid 2nd-4th year undergrad or 1st year PhD. For more advanced treatment of growth, business cycles etc. you can always find textbooks for those specific topics.

If you're not confident with your math yet, I guess Mankiw? Another options I know of is wickens. I started with Wickens during undergrad but found it boring. If you tell me your mathematical level I might be able to get a better book for you. Economic ability doesn't mean much imho for these introductory macro texts. If you're serious about studying macro take a course or self study analysis, the rest of the math should be easy to pick up once you've trained yourself with analysis.

Also, try one of the MIT open courses for intermediate macro. They're not bad.

Ljundqvist & Sargent alongside Stokey-Lucas-Prescott are pretty much the backbone of a PhD macro sequence, with SLP being a bit more technical out of those two. So something like Romer as a stepping stone is a good idea. This may be redundant, if your reference to Barro was Barro & Sala-i-Martin, but if not, then I highly recommend Economic Growth by - you guessed it - Barro and Sala-i-Martin, but of course that's growth models only. Having a good handle on RCK is, however, really useful moving on to L&S.

The only possible issue I see is your selection of textbook: Principles of Mathematical Economics - I've honestly never heard of this book.

The graduate school go-to textbook is Mathematics for Economists by Simon and Blume. However, I think this book would be overkill for you, as it is geared towards pure, PhD level, economics. Also, I was in a similar place to you, with respect to mathematical training at one point, and Simon & Blume proved to be too large a leap.

My advice would be to use one of the following books (in order of my preference):
1. Essential Mathematics for Economic Analysis by Sydsaeter
2. Mathematics for Economics
by Hoy
3. Fundamental Methods of Mathematical Economics
by Chiang

They'll bring your basic command, of the basic required mathematics up to scratch AND these books cover linear algebra. You will also then be in a good place to tackle Simon & Blume if you ever need to in the future. Another piece of advice: PRACTISE PRACTISE PRACTISE. For what you are doing, you don't need to have a deep understanding of the mathematics you are using BUT, you do need to be very comfortable with applying the techniques.

So, as you are working through (for instance) Sydsaeter, I would be attempting the related practice questions you find in:

1. Schaum's Outline of Calculus
   
2. Schaum's Outline of Linear Algebra
   
3. Schaum's Outline of Introduction to Mathematical Economics
   
   Hope this helps.
   
   P.S. Almost all of these books are available for 'free' on Library Gensis

It's generally considered important to take a lot of math as an undergrad, and if you don't have at least a minor, it will be difficult to compete with those who do, or even have a second major. I asked my undergraduate advisor a similar question in my sophomore year, and I was told that math courses were the most important thing you can do in preparation for Grad School. He was right - you can have holes in your Economics knowledge, that's what they're teaching you, after all. If you have to go back and learn the math to follow the theory, though, the first year will absolutely bury you. If you want to see what you're up against, your school's library might have a copy of Mas-Colell or Romer, which are the standard first year theory books in Micro and Macro.

Leaving admissions completely aside, you should have a good foundation in Multivariate Calculus, Differential Equations, Linear Algebra, and Analysis just to make sure you don't have to learn that alongside your actual coursework. By the time you take those classes and the prerequisites, you may find that you already have basically everything for a math minor. Add a couple stats/probability classes on top to fill out the credits, and you're probably done.

Before you get too discouraged, note that you don't have to do really well in those courses to be considered. You (presumably) aren't looking to do the sort of high-end theory that's more like pure math, so if you can make it through with Bs and the occasional C you still have a shot at respectable programs. You don't have to be the next Walter Rudin to remember a concept that you saw in an undergrad math class when it shows up on the board and not be totally lost.

EDIT: On a related note, if you want to go to Graduate School, don't be one of those undergrads that shies away from Econometrics. Take as much of it as you can.

I've said before that I think Acemoglu's Introduction to Modern Economic Growth is the best graduate macro textbook available. If step-by-step, fully worked-out examples is what you're after, this is the book for you.

A few caveats, however:

• The book is not light on the math at all. But it is mostly self-contained, in that Acemoglu walks you through pretty much all of the math you need to know for the book. It will take time to learn the material, but you will be able to do it with this textbook (unlike Romer, which as you've noticed is basically of no help on this front).
  
  
• Not all of the topics covered in Romer are also covered in Acemgolu, though many of the most important ones are. On the flipside, Acemoglu covers a lot of stuff that Romer doesn't cover, much of which you probably won't need to look at at the Master's level (e.g., the chapters on endogenous growth, technology diffusion and trade, development, and political economy). Those chapters can be easily skipped, though, so I wouldn't worry too much about that.

Good question! I haven't seen much in the way of general literature review books. As I see it, you have a couple options:

• Read/work through a textbook. This will be rather difficult if you don't have a lot of math skill, a ton of intuition, or a great tutor. I suggest Mas-Colell, Whinston, and Green, the standard graduate textbook on microeconomics.
  
  http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomic-Theory-Andreu-Mas-Colell/dp/0195073401
  
  

• If you are interested in technical overviews of some subfields, there are certain standout books that can give you a thorough technical overview. E.g. in health economics, read one of Joe Newhouse's books, or in Development, read something by Abhijit Banerjee. In either case, find ones written for other experts, not for the general public. E.g. don't read "Poor Economics" by Banerjee, read "Understanding Poverty".
  
  Really, there is no one "Economics" but a series of overlapping subfields. At the vanguard, research is done within these fields, and so you should focus on the ones that interest you.

There are not many undergraduate level books, but the main one on asymmetric information is

http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Economics-Information-Incentives-Contracts/dp/0199243255/ref=pd_cp_14_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0B89BW0MXS2476VVNGXT

It goes through adverse selection (akerloff, Stiglitz and Rothschild), signaling (spence), and moral hazard.

As for evolution, you may want to look into agent based models of how information spreads in a market. Microeconomics by Bowles is good, but maybe a bit too advanced to start with. Schellings "Micromotives and Macro..." Is a good popular introduction to these issues.

The point of much of the principal agent literature has been to show how markets mitigate asymmetric information and moral hazard problems.

I'm still an undergrad, but most of the top schools seem to use the recursive macroeconomics book for their first graduate macroeconomics courses. I swear it used to be available legally online free, if not you could probably acquire it online with a bit of looking..

Schaum's Outline of Introduction to Mathematical Economics

was by far the most helpful to me. It contains excellent exposition of all the topics needed. Also the problem sets show the full workthrough, so you can check and see where you screwed up if at any point during the work through of the problem. I know this is sounding like a testimonial but I went from knowing nothing about multivariable calc or linear algebra to being able to having a decent foundation in some of the techniques needed (e.g. constrained optimization problems w/ multiple variables, using matrices to check the second order conditions, other special determinants, comparative statics, etc). It's not a substitute for an actual math course, or the course you're going to take your first year in grad school, but it will help immensely if you work through it prior to or alongside that course. or if you need to refer back to thoroughly explained examples.

As a slightly more applied/topical text that's very intuitive and easy to read, I'd also suggest Personnel Economics. It was a good guide for intuition when I took my Grad Micro 2 course.

This. Chiang is the easiest to read and comprehend, while Simon and Blume go into the technical aspects with more proofs and rigor. I took the graduate level mathematical economics as an undergrad and we used Chiang. As a PhD student now, we use Simon and Blume; although I certainly reference Chiang a lot.

Chaing : http://www.amazon.com/Fundamental-Methods-Mathematical-Economics-Wainwright/dp/0070109109/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382493346&sr=8-1&keywords=chiang+economics


S& B : http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Economists-Carl-P-Simon/dp/0393957330/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1382493357&sr=8-1&keywords=simon+and+blume

It doesn't look great. A classic book that's used by Phd programs for the micro sequence is [MWG] (https://www.amazon.com/Microeconomic-Theory-Andreu-Mas-Colell/dp/0195073401) (pdf copies exist online). If you can follow it then you have a chance at graduating from a phd program.

I'd recommend taking more upper level and graduate level math classes and getting A's. In addition if you can RA for a professor try to get a co-authorship on some publications. After that, you may have a shot at UCSC, UC Riverside, anywhere 70+ in ranking. Getting into an Econ phd program means that you beat out a handful of candidates, you really have to sell yourself that your better than that handful.

my matrix skills were lacking and it would be useful to brush up on that stuff. Schaums outline is lifesaving !

Chiang is a classic. Another good one is this: http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Economists-Carl-P-Simon/dp/0393957330

Try and get either one used.

The game theory chapters in Kreps are fairly good, if not a little wordy.

As others have already said, you'll get even more of this than you want in any graduate micro textbook. I recommend either of the ones from David Kreps from where you are because I think his writing is relatively accessible and chatty. MWG is generally thought of as the definitive one, though

If Gali isn't technical enough for you

http://www.amazon.com/Recursive-Macroeconomic-Theory-Lars-Ljungqvist/dp/026212274X

Lots of microeconomics. See Mas-Colell, Whinston, and Green.