Studies Higher Education

For Peer Review O

nly

Economics: an elite subject for elite universities?

Journal: Studies in Higher Education

Manuscript ID: CSHE-2012-0086

Manuscript Type: Article

Keywords: economics programmes, retention and withdrawal, new and old

universities, research activity, widening access

URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cshe

Studies in Higher Education

For Peer Review O

nly

1

Economics: an elite subject

for elite universities?

Abstract

The decline in the number of universities offering programmes in subjects such as chemistry,

physics, mathematics, modern languages and history in the universities of the United

Kingdom has been well documented. It now appears that economics programmes, both in

the UK and in other parts of the world, may be going through a similar process. The paper

explores the changes in the provision of economics programmes in the UK by reviewing the

current state of provision and charting how it has changed in the last ten or so years.

Differences between pre-1992 and post-1992 universities, research performance and

geographical location in the decision to withdraw economics programmes are examined.

Research activity does not explain why new universities have retained or withdrawn

economics programmes. The study reports the results of a survey to reveal a complex

picture with economics provision affected by a number of internal and external factors.

Key words

Economics programmes, retention and withdrawal, ‘new’ and ‘old’ universities, research

activity, widening access

Page 1 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

2

1. Introduction

The initial spur for the paper was informal discussions and anecdotal evidence that seemed

to suggest that economics provision in the post-1992 (‘new’) UK universities has been in

decline over the last few years. Our initial speculation on the description and explanation for

any decline centred on a number of themes and this section of the paper looks to set briefly

these themes within the context of the literature. Firstly, and most importantly for this paper,

we speculate that the division between pre- and post-1992 institutions +may have been

pivotal to any recent decline in economics undergraduate provision. Secondly, was the

concern that perhaps the wider role of economics within society has in recent times been

diminished and this as a result has reduced the demand for economics programmes. Finally,

we consider the trends in a number of nations, particularly those sharing UK traditions. Thus,

while the paper is diagnostic in nature, we use these three themes as a means of setting our

results in context.

The UK Higher Education Statistics Authority (HESA) statistics show that the total number of

students studying at the UK’s universities increased by 13.4 per cent from 2,200,175 to

2,493,415, between 2003/4 and 2009/10. It is against this background of rising student

numbers that the performance of economics programmes has to be assessed. Based on

data supplied by UCAS, the total number of individual applicants for single economics

degrees in the UK rose from 11,699 in 2003 to 14,851 in 2010, having fallen to a low of

11,041 in 2006. Likewise, the total number of offers accepted by applicants fell from 4,043 in

2003 to 3,894 in 2006, increasing to 5,486 in 2010, an increase of 36 per cent over the

period. The most rapid increase in the number of offers accepted has come not from

domestic students where the increase was still a healthy 26 per cent rise over the period

2003-2010 but from EU and overseas students where the increases were 335 per cent and

50 per cent respectively.1 It would appear that interest is studying for an economics

qualification seems to have grown markedly between 2007 and 2008, after a short period of

gradual decline between 2003 and 2006. Moreover, this upward trend continued through to

2010, when the rate of growth slowed.

Notwithstanding the strong performance of the subject as a whole, a growing sense of

disquiet among the economics community regarding the future of the subject seems to be

discernible. It is an anxiety that stems from, among other things, concern over the safety of

Page 2 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

3

the subject’s place in the UK higher education curriculum, and it seems to be especially

pronounced in the new universities of the UK2. The statistics presented above suggest it is

not the result of rapid deterioration in the subject’s standing but has been in the background

at a low level for some time. Nor, it seems, is it peculiar to the UK. Almost fifteen years ago,

Millmow (1997) for example, stated in relation to the health of economics in the Australia HE

sector that:

‘university economics is, as it were, in the decline stage of the product life cycle:

economics major enrolments continue to decline and the forward indicators –

secondary school enrolments and expressions of interest in doing economics are not

heartening’.

By reviewing the current state of provision and identifying those universities that have

withdrawn the subject and comparing this group to those that have retained the subject, we

hope to offer some insights into where the subject is, what has gone wrong and where it

might go in the future. The indicator of the current state of provision used here differs from

that in some other studies such as Siegfried and Round (2001) and Skoorka and Condon

(2003) where the focus is on the number of undergraduate economics degrees awarded.

Here the focus is on the economics programmes offered in UK universities, charting the

changes to the institutions offering single economics degree programmes with special

emphasis on whether they are old or new universities and where they are located. Section 2

of this paper presents a short review of the literature of the international context of the study

and on the broader role of economics programmes. Section 3 sets out one possible

framework on which to make the decision on whether to withdraw, add or retain a degree

title to the portfolio. Section 4 provides some basic information on the current state of

provision in the UK Higher Education (HE) sector. After completing our review of the current

state of play, Section 5 reports on how provision has changed since 2003. In Section 6 the

implications of some interesting case studies are assessed. Finally, in Section 7 we consider

what lessons can be learned from the study and suggest avenues for future research.

2. Literature review

Page 3 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

4

Internationally, a number of studies have addressed the changing role of economics in

higher education. Siegfried and Round’s (2001) study of economics degree trends in the

1990s showed that Australia, Canada, Germany and the United States suffered a decline in

the number of undergraduate economics degrees awarded between 1992 and 1996 followed

by a small recovery. Possible explanations for the changes include the number of economics

degrees following changes in the overall number of degrees awarded; more women students

in the overall student population leading to fewer students taking economics since the

proportion of women taking economics is lower than that in men; and, changes in the

‘academic price’ of an economics degree. Skoorka and Condon (2003) in their study of

economics undergraduate degrees awarded in 20 New Jersey colleges over the period 1979

to 2000 found that business cycle conditions, demographic trends and the desire to move on

to postgraduate professional schools explained about 75% of the variation in economics

degrees awarded. The finding that business cycle conditions affect the trend is in contrast to

previous studies but is not unexpected. Siegfried (2011) reports increased numbers of

economics degrees awarded in the US over the period 1991-2010. Within this period there

have been times when numbers were rising quickly (for example, 1997-2004 and 2008-09)

and others when they have been flat (2005-07). There were big rises in 2009 and 2010

which Siegfried attributes to the massive interest in Levitt and Dubner’s very popular book

Freakonomics which was first published in 2005. Over the three years following the

publication of the book the number of undergraduate economics degrees awarded in the US

rose by 16 percent while the total number of all undergraduate degrees awarded rose by just

8 percent. It is but a hypothesis and in the same vein the world financial crisis may have a

similar effect in stimulating interest in taking undergraduate economics programmes, but

results on the number of undergraduate economics degrees awarded will not be available

until after 2011.

While these trends are encouraging for the US, there is every reason to question whether

the UK and other countries have followed a similar trend over the period, given the HESA,

UCAS and other evidence. For example, in the UK, Ashworth and Evans (2000) note a fifty

percent fall in the numbers taking A-level Economics over the fifteen year period leading up

to their study. In contrast, Hurd, Coates and Anderton (1997) highlight a corresponding

increase in the popularity of Business Studies through the 1990s, which might be consistent

with the notion that the two subjects are close substitutes for one another. Indeed, such

substitution possibilities were cited by heads of UK economics departments as part of the

explanation for the apparent reduced popularity of economics degree programmes (Machin

Page 4 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

5

and Oswald 2000). One reason for this may be that the subject is considered more difficult

than some that have emerged in the last twenty to thirty years. Reilly and Bachan (2005)

consider the notion that economics is more ‘difficult’ than subjects such as Business Studies

and echo the earlier conclusion of Ashworth and Evans (2000) that economists may be

‘grading students away from the subject’ and students and university management are

correct to move into Business Studies if their aim is to achieve higher grades.

In a wide ranging and analytical paper on the nature of the academic profession in the UK

and its failure to change with the realities of mass education and financial stringency,

Shattock (2001) identifies a set of drivers that have resulted in the emergence of a number

of key of themes in UK academia. One of these themes is the emergence of subject

differences in the old and new universities which leads to new universities having a different

portfolio of degree programmes. However, the literature suggests that the picture is

altogether more complex. For instance, the US experience shows that a decline in

economics is actually an increase by other means so that for example economics has found

a new home in the rise in business studies as a main subject (Georgiou 2007). In addition,

Tight (2011) shows that the picture has become even more complicated due to the number

of institutions able to perform the functions of a university in the UK having grown

significantly in recent years. One of the outcomes from our paper is to revisit the taxonomy

of economics provision and to clarify some of the increasingly muddied waters.

The second area of concern was that there may have been realignment in society’s view of

economics as a useful subject. At a fundamental level, raising the issue of changes in

economics provision invokes an examination of the rise of the subject as the pre-eminent

social science and its subsequent spread across the world. If economics has lost its pre-

eminence among the social sciences this raises questions about its role in society and

particularly its value as a universalistic paradigm based on scientific knowledge. A decline

would suggest that economics has somehow lost some of its legitimacy for society; a

legitimacy that springs from being able to provide a clear and coherent set of fundamental

principles and body of knowledge that makes economics the most scholarly of the social

sciences. As Fourcade-Gourinchas (2001) puts it ‘The extensive jurisdictional prerogatives

of economists thus seem to be legitimated be the fact that their discipline constitutes

undoubtedly the most well-bounded and organised scholarly enterprise in the social scientific

field’. The jurisdictional prerogatives reflect the different national economics traditions such

as historical economics in Germany and analytical economics in the UK.

Page 5 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

6

The nature of any decline inevitably raises questions about the standing of the extensive

jurisdictional prerogatives of economists and whether the nature of the subject’s relationship

with the wider UK economy has changed. This may not be a surprise given that previous

research (Roll 1973) has shown the importance of national characteristics and imperatives to

the subject’s development and how it is able to position itself within society. For example in

the past the British approach to the subject tended to view economics as more of an

academic (even amateur) pursuit and less overtly political than the European approach. As

UK society and economy changes, it should not be a surprise that the relationship between

economics and society also changes and so too, jurisdictional prerogatives. Again, we find

support for our concern that wider forces are at work in the changes in economics provision.

Our third area of concern was the idea of some long-term secular decline. Concern

regarding the possible decline in economics provision is not new and has been raised in the

Anglo-Saxon world for some years as seen by trends in the US (Skoorka and Condon 2003;

Siegfried 2011) and Australia (Alauddin and Butler 2004); and if the nature of any decline

has been long-term, then this also suggests that questions regarding the role of economics

have been around for some time, pre-dating the recent financial crisis and any failure on the

part of economics to prevent the crisis or even to predict what was to come. Interestingly,

anecdotal evidence suggests that students are now more interested in economics as a result

of the recent financial crisis and looking to the subject for answers rather than to apportion

blame. Thus, the concern over the health of economics is not unique to the UK and we need

to set any analysis of the UK experience in a longer term, cross-national perspective.

The next section looks at issues surrounding the decision to withdraw economics

programmes.

3. To offer or not to offer economics programmes?

As they attempt to compete with each other for funds, students and league table rankings,

the extent to which an institution’s existing suite of programmes represents an efficient use

of its scarce resources is an important question.

Page 6 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

7

To interpret the current state of economics provision in the UK HE sector it is useful to

consider Table 1.

Insert Table 1 here

First, we compare those universities that currently offer economics programmes with those

that do not (columns one and three of row one in Table 1), to identify any obvious

differences between universities that do and do not currently offer economics. Second, we

identify differences between those that no longer offer economics programmes but did at

some point in the recent past (withdrawers (column 3/row 2) and those that offered

programmes in the past and continue to do so (retainers (column 2/ row 2))3. Column 1/row

2 is largely ignored in what follows as it is expected that universities introducing an

economics title in 2012 for the first time (column/row 2) would be rare. Likewise, those

universities that did not previously offer economics and continue not to do so (column 4/row

2) are also not discussed in great depth. It should also be noted that our focus on economics

as it is defined below means many of the changes in economics provision that have taken

place will be missed by our study. A university which, for example, used to offer Applied

Economics and no longer does so will not be recorded as having withdrawn the subject. It is

also important to stress that some of the changes are cosmetic and the result of

repackaging: a university may stop offering ‘Financial Economics’ but initiate a programme in

‘Money, Banking and Finance’. To put the paper in its broader context, the UK HE scene is

briefly sketched.

4. Identifying the UK HE sector and outlining the current state of play

Settling on a working list of UK universities is not straightforward. There are, for example,

international universities with campuses in the UK. Likewise, there are private institutions,

some of which continue to offer economics programmes. Add in some mergers, some

failures, a few name changes and institutions which straddle the HE/FE divide and it quickly

becomes obvious that defining the university sector in the UK at any particular point in time

requires the adoption of some simplifying assumptions. It was decided that the basis for this

study would be the Guardian University League Table list for 2012. This survey includes

performance evaluations for publicly-funded UK higher education institutions and is based

on Higher Education Statistical Authority data. Even within this group, however, there are

Page 7 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

8

problems with the data. The Open University, for example, is an important feature of the UK

HE landscape but does not feature in the list. This resultant list of 119 universities, listed in

Table 2 (Appendix) is then compared with the UCAS website to identify which offered single

economics degrees through UCAS for entry in 2012.

4.1 The current state of provision of economics programmes in the UK HE sector

Economics enters into HE in various ways. It is common for the subject to be a core part of

the foundation year of Business School and Social Science programmes. Beyond entry

level, economics modules may also be provided as optional elements in degree programmes

not leading to an economics exit award.4 Regarding exit awards where economics is

combined with another subject or subjects, either as an ‘and’ or ‘with’, the range and

diversity of exit awards is striking. UCAS lists a total of 1268 (1273 in 2011) economics titles

that are open for applications in 2012, ranging from ‘Economics and Neuroscience’ and

‘Economics (Applied) with Creative Writing’ to ‘Dance and Economics’ and ‘Economics with

Fine Art and Painting’5.

4.2 What economics programmes do UK universities provide?

Table 3 and Table 4 (Appendix) present some basic frequencies on the economics titles

offered by UK universities. It reveals that Economics, Business Economics and Financial

Economics were by far the most common titles on offer in 2012. The most frequently

occurring single exit title offered by UK universities in 2012 was, perhaps not surprisingly,

Economics, which was available at around half (58 or 49 per cent) of the 119 universities

examined. Next in importance was the Business Economics title that was provided by 35 (29

per cent) institutions. It is noteworthy but perhaps to be expected that there is a significant

element of overlap in relation to course provision. Of those universities providing a single

degree in Economics, for example, 27 also made a single programme in Business

Economics available to prospective students. Similarly, all those universities offering a

degree in Financial Economics (available at 11 universities) also offered a programme in

either Economics or Business Economics. Financial Economics, unlike the other two key

titles, did not stand alone and seemed to complement the other two. Five universities

(Bradford, Coventry, Kingston, Plymouth and Swansea) offered exit titles in all three:

Economics, Business Economics and Financial Economics; 66 universities (55 per cent) in

Page 8 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

9

our sample offered single Economics, Business Economics or Financial Economics. Though

not offered by all universities, the subject is offered by the majority of the UK HE sector.

Insert Table 3

Rather than attempt to investigate what has been happening to economics provision in its

entirety, the focus of this paper is very much on the position as it relates to single exit

awards in Economics, Business Economics and Financial Economics6. The rationale for the

decision to limit the study in this way is a belief that the provision of one of these titles is

likely to be a good indicator of the existence of a healthy economics group in the institution

concerned. It also makes the task of trying to draw lessons from enormous range of options

contained in the data less onerous. It is stressed, therefore, that in the discussion that

follows references to economics programmes refer to these three single titles unless

otherwise specified. However, it is acknowledged that there are clear limitations with this

approach and that these have to be borne in mind when trying to understand what follows.

4.3 New and old universities and economics programmes

Analysis of the data suggests that economics is significantly healthier in old new universities

and that the difference is striking. Indeed, the best predictor of whether a university offers an

economics title is almost certainly whether it is old or new. The data set includes 65 new and

54 old universities. Table 4 (Appendix) shows that three-quarters of those universities

offering single programmes in Economics, Business Economics or Financial Economics

were old universities. In contrast, Table 5 shows that three quarters of new universities did

not offer an economics exit award in 2012. Indeed, as we will discover below, in parts of the

UK, such as Scotland, economics exit titles of any sort have been almost entirely removed

from the prospectuses of the new university sector. In a more positive vein, it is encouraging

to note that when new universities do provide economics programmes, they are more likely

to offer more than one single exit title award than their traditional university counterparts:

three new universities - Coventry, Kingston and Plymouth- offer single honours in

Economics, Business Economics and Financial Economics; in contrast, only one of the old

universities offered all three titles. Old universities are more likely to offer ‘Economics’, new

universities ‘Business Economics’. From the point of view of academic economists, it is

pleasing and reassuring to report that finding old universities not offering an economics

Page 9 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

10

award title is a much less straightforward task, although there do appear to be one or two

cases.

4.4 The Research Assessment Exercise and the provision of economics programmes

As well as weak student demand, an obvious reason for a university to decide to withdraw its

economics programme is a low research underpinning in the subject and we would expect

the presence of a strong research base to be closely associated with the retention of an

economics programme. In this respect it is interesting to consider Table 5 (Appendix) which

shows the average research score in Economics and Econometrics unit of assessment

(UoA) as calculated by the Guardian. Of the 66 universities identified as offering an

economics programme, only one half (33 or 50 per cent) actually had an economics entry in

the 2008 RAE. It would appear that economics programmes do not depend on narrowly

defined economics and econometrics research, as evidenced by an RAE submission in the

subject, for their survival. Unsurprisingly, almost all of the universities with a research score,

irrespective of how high or low it was and whether they were old or new, in the Economics

and Econometrics UoA in the 2008 RAE offered a single honours Economics undergraduate

degree. In contrast, only three of the eighteen new universities which were identified as

offering an Economics degree in 2012 - Kingston, London and Manchester Metropolitan -

had an economics entry in the 2008 RAE. Both findings imply that new universities are

significantly more likely than their older counterparts to offer an economics degree award

without having a research score in the subject.

4.5 Economics research, different Units of Assessment and economics programmes

It is important to note that research done by economists may be entered into alternative units

of assessment, with the most obvious being ‘Business and Management’ and ‘Accounting

and Finance’. The Column 2 of Table 5 (Appendix) shows that almost all of the universities,

irrespective of whether they were new or old, not entered into the Economics and

Econometrics UoA at the last RAE but offering an economics programmes through UCAS in

2012 had a Business and Management UoA entry. This observation would seem to be

consistent with the possibility that research output by economists has been allocated to the

Page 10 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

11

Business and Management UoA, presumably in the expectation of higher returns in the form

of research scores and income for the institution concerned. When compared to the

economics and econometrics submissions, it is noteworthy that of the 89 entries in the

Business and Management UoA in the 2008 RAE, 37 (42 per cent) were new universities.

Similarly, of the fourteen submissions in the Accounting and Finance UoA in 2008, 6 (43 per

cent) were new universities. Both of these proportions are high relative to the Economics

and Econometrics UoA where only three of the 35 submissions (9 per cent) were from new

universities. It would appear that economists working at new universities have, for whatever

reason, not produced research that has been deemed by management to be best placed in

a straight economics submission. As competition for high RAE ratings has intensified,

university management in the new universities it seems have largely given up attempting to

engage in head-to-head competition with the old universities in economics research. A

consequence of the higher research returns is that resources previously tied up in these

activities have been redirected to other areas such as Business and Management and

Accounting and Finance: these groups have grown while economics groups have shrunk.

Given the incentive structure universities face, this change in priorities should not come as a

surprise to economists and may be an illustration of how national research evaluations have

influenced the behaviour of UK universities.

4.6 University alliances and economic provision

A noteworthy facet of the UK HE landscape in recent years has been the emergence of

various university alliances. Within these groups there are pronounced differences in the

importance of economics. 18 of the 20 member Russell group, which describes itself as

representing ‘leading UK universities which are committed to maintaining the very best

research, an outstanding teaching and learning experience and unrivalled links with

business and the public sector.’ offered an economics title. Similarly, only two of the 19 in

the ‘1994’ group of universities, which claims to bring ‘together nineteen internationally

renowned, research-intensive universities’ did not offer an economics title. Both of these

groupings are dominated by old universities and so it is not surprising that almost all offer

economics programmes. Of the ‘University Alliance’ group, which describes itself as ‘a group

of 23 major, business-engaged universities committed to delivering world-class research and

a quality student experience around the UK’, 11 out of 23 members (which included three

old universities) offered an economics degree, with nine out of the 18 new universities

Page 11 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

12

continuing to offer economics being affiliated to this group. In contrast, only eight of the 27

members of the ‘million plus’ group of universities, which in its mission statement suggests it

seeks to enable ‘people from every walk of life to benefit from access to universities that

excel in teaching, research and knowledge transfer’, offered economics programmes.

4.7 New universities with and without economics: do they differ?

It is clear that the threat to economics groups is at its greatest in the new universities and it

is on this group that we focus in what follows.

As all new universities by definition gained university status from 1992, there is little

difference between all in terms of years as an institution with university status. Nonetheless,

it may well be that there is something about an institution’s history that explains its current

relationship with economics. Former polytechnics, especially those which replicated the

more traditional university model, are, for reasons to do with internal dynamics, probably

more likely currently to offer economics programmes than smaller universities without this

background. One reason for this is that the history of the institution has influenced the

composition of its workforce. Those new universities currently staffed for historical reasons

with a large number of long-tenure economists may have been able to take steps to protect

the subject against internal and external pressures. In the short-run, a strong economics

representation in a faculty or university management structure more generally may result in

a more sympathetic approach being taken to the subject, perhaps allowing it to persist for

longer than might otherwise be the case. However, in the long-run, as economists retire or

leave for other reasons, without being replaced, such groups may fracture. The subject may

be allowed to wither on the vine before eventually being removed. This is recognised as a

possibility but to answer this question properly requires a study into the career make-up of

the retainers and how this compares with the withdrawers, something which is outside the

scope of the current review.

From Tables 6 and 7 it appears there may be something of a north-south divide in

economics provision. Many of the new universities currently offering the subject appear to be

located in the Greater London area or on the South Coast. Of those located elsewhere in the

UK, they tend to be city universities.

Insert Table 6

Page 12 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

13

Insert Table 7

The higher is the ratio of student applications to available places, the more viable

programmes will be. Just as some universities will be more attractive to students than

others, some subjects will be more popular. In addition, there is evidence that middle class

students prefer economics and working class students Business Studies (Office for Fair

Access 2012). To the extent this is the case, we would expect universities that have a more

middle class intake to be more likely to continue to offer the subject. This may be correlated

with the geographical locations of institutions.

5. How the provision of economics programmes has changed since 2003

Until now, we have discussed the current state of play. Though useful as a diagnostic, this

offers little insight into whether the subject’s health is or is not changing, and if it is, how it is

changing. To plug this gap in the study, UCAS data with a time-series element are used to

identify those universities that have withdrawn or added the subject to their portfolios in

between 2004 and 20127.

Before considering the data in more detail, it is important stress the need to distinguish

between universities that for various reasons have never offered an economics programme

and those where it was previously withdrawn. Imperial College, for example, does not

appear to offer an undergraduate economics programmes through UCAS in 2012,

presumably reflecting its science ethos. On the other hand, the University of Salford is an

example of an old university that once did offer single economics titles but does so no

longer.

Moreover, just because a university has removed an economics title from its offering does

not mean it has withdrawn from the subject completely: UEL, for example, have removed a

single Economics title but does still retain a single Business Economics title. Nonetheless,

Table 8 shows that sixteen universities have removed at least one of their single degree

titles in Economics, Business Economics and Financial Economics since 2003. All but two of

the withdrawers were new universities. More of a concern is that of those which have

removed an economics title, only four continued to offer a single title in Economics, Business

Page 13 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

14

Economics or Financial Economics. It seems that when a university makes a decision to get

out a subject area it tends to do so completely.

Insert Table 8

The old universities until now seem to be largely immune from the withdrawal of economics

titles. However, the picture among the new universities is very different and is a genuine

cause for concern. Over a nine year period, 13 new universities have effectively removed the

possibility of studying for a single economics title from their students. As there are currently

only 18 new universities currently providing a route for students to a single economics title, it

is probably not too pessimistic to conclude that given the high attrition rate in a relatively

short period of time that the future does not look terribly bright for economics in the new

universities (Table 9).

Insert Table 9

Table 10 provides some simple comparisons between the new universities that have

retained economics title(s) and those that have withdrawn them. Interpreting these simple

statistics is problematic. The first row, for example, is a measure of the entrance

qualifications held by the average student and although the difference is not particularly

pronounced, entrants at the new universities that have dropped the subject appear to have

slightly higher qualifications than those that have continued to offer it. Is it that universities

that drop economics are struggling to attract well-qualified students and by dropping these

subjects the average qualification of the student intake is increased? By dropping the

subject, the university may boost its average entrance qualifications. It is undoubtedly the

case that these decisions are at least partly driven by league tables, another important

change in the HE sector. Removing economics if it were only attractive to poorly qualified

students will boost league table ranking and narrow the gap with those for whom economics

is a source of highly-qualified applicants, with the result that this process will narrow the gap

between those that do provide economic programmes and those that do not.

Insert Table 10

Putting these issues to the side for a moment, Row 2 is a measure of the percentage of

graduates in a job six months after graduating. Once again it seems that students studying

at the withdrawers are more likely to have found employment soon after graduating. In the

wake of increases in tuition fees and the increased need on the part of prospective students

Page 14 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

15

to select courses that enable graduates to find employment this is not an encouraging

finding. It may be that potential students take the view that unlike more vocational disciplines

such as marketing and accounting the study of economics is not viewed as a good human

capital investment. Row 3 shows that if anything, the withdrawers also have slightly stronger

research levels though it should be emphasised that these averages mask a lot of variation

and that some of the research scores among the retainers are very high, while others are

very low. Finally, the average overall Guardian ranking for each group is calculated and yet

again the withdrawers are found a little higher up the league tables than the retainers. The

overall score contains a range of factors including measures of student satisfaction, staff-

student ratios etc. It is not obvious from this that withdrawers are performing less well than

retainers. Rather, if anything, it is the reverse and it may be the case that new universities

that retain the subject pay a price in the form of lower performance indicators.

Finally, Table 11 gives a hint as to what has been happening more generally to economics in

the UK HE sector. This table reports the number of UK HE institutions offering programmes

with an economics element. Unlike the restrictive definition that we have used above this

measure includes all of the major/minors and other combinations and offers a more

sanguine picture of the current state of play for the subject in the UK HE sector. It is

encouraging that the vast majority of universities do still offer some sort of economics exit

title. If this is added to the more general economics teaching that takes place within

universities and the economics material that has no doubt been repackaged, it would clearly

be wrong to write off economics as a subject just yet. Indeed, recent events would appear to

have given a something of a fillip to the subject, with a slight increase in the numbers

offering the subject after 2008, something which is supported by the UCAS data discussed in

the introduction. Nonetheless, it would also be complacent not to acknowledge that there is a

issue. Universities as they compete are clearly making strategic decisions about what

subject areas they want to offer and what they would rather not offer and this reshaping of

portfolios has meant many of the new universities have now effectively withdrawn the

subject. How this plays out in the future will be interesting to watch. Whether it is a trend that

will intensify as the competition between universities increases and to the extent that this is

the case whether it means the subject is destined to one which is studied and researched by

a small number of elite students at elite universities remains to be seen.

Insert Table 11

Page 15 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

16

6. Results of the interviews with two retainers and two withdrawers

To attempt to explain some of the changes described here, especially the withdrawal of

economics programmes in the new universities, but also ironically, the retention of them in

some other new universities, we conducted a small survey of four new universities. We

decided that since the old universities had by and large retained their economics

programmes we would not survey them. This is not to say that economics programmes are

not under threat in some universities in this sector, rather that the evidence is that old

universities continue to offer them and that numbers of applicants and places have risen in

recent years. The sample consisted of two withdrawers and two retainers (see Table 1).

Conducted in July and August 2011, this was by its very nature very much an exploratory

survey and the results are only a guide to what we might find in a fuller survey. For this

reason they should not be seen as representing all the retainers or all the withdrawers

because clearly each institution has undergone different experiences and the economists in

the four institutions surveyed had very different stories to tell.

We started by selecting at random two institutions from each of the categories and contacted

an economist by phone or email and fortunately each was prepared to be interviewed. We

guaranteed them anonymity so that neither they nor their institution would be identified. The

interviews were open ended and conducted at or near to the interviewees’ institution, each

interview lasting about two hours. We started by explaining the reasons for doing the project

and that we were interested in the history of economics provision at each institution. It was

important to build up a picture by allowing interviewees enough time to talk about the origins

and changes that has taken place over the years. The interviews were not recorded but

extensive notes were taken. A thematic analysis identifying themes and patterns in the

interviews was used to analyse the results. (Braun and Clarke 2006)

6.1 Results

There were a number of features common to economics groups in all four institutions and

some significant differences. All economics groups were part of their respective business

school but in the two withdrawers economics had previously been a separate unit not in the

Page 16 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

17

business school. In one case it was part of a social science department and in the other it

was linked to management, also in a separate department. In both cases economics had

moved into the business school following restructuring. This was reported to have seriously

weakened the position of economics and economists in both institutions as much autonomy

in decision making had been lost. Economists had also to teach a variety of non-economics

modules such as management and enterprise.

The demand for economics programmes measured by the number of students being taken

into the economics programmes was generally much lower in the withdrawers, at least at the

time of withdrawal with both reporting big falls in demand over a number of years. In one of

the institutions the first year intake was down below ten and in the other about 30. In the

former institution, despite the fall in first year intake to economics programmes the number of

students taking economics modules actually increased because of more international

students admitted to the third year of the economics programme and more demand for

economics modules from the social science students. In the two retainers it is currently

running at over 100. In both of the withdrawers economics was said to have been run down

over a number of years as a specific policy to boost other programmes and despite healthy

numbers in many economics modules, economics programmes were withdrawn. One of the

consequences of withdrawing programmes is that modules are also run down.

Managers at university and faculty/school-levels in the withdrawers were said to be

unsympathetic to economics and were unwilling to incorporate economics in business school

core programmes. In one institution it was reported that there was a very much an anti-

economics feeling among senior staff and in the other that staff from other disciplines

actively encouraged students to take any modules other than economics. In contrast, in the

retainers, economics and economists were seen as a valued and integral part of their

respective business school. Economists in the two retainers had made it their aim to be part

of the major university committees and to contribute as much as possible to the running of

the business school and the wider university. In this way they made themselves into a very

important part of school and university management. In both retainers the economists had

strong patronage from senior management who had the foresight either to offer active

support in one case and passive support in the other. Table 12 below summarises our

interview findings.

Insert Table 12 here

Page 17 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

18

At all four institutions economists were among the most research active in their respective

schools/faculties. All four had RAE entries going back to at least 2001. Economists’ research

went into several UoAs including Economics and Econometrics, Business and Management,

Finance and Accounting and European Studies. It is difficult to see how research might have

contributed to the withdrawal decision since at the two withdrawers economists had been

very productive in research and the same can be said of economists in the two retainers.

Nonetheless for the retainers it was said that research was important to the success of their

economics groups.

Insert Figure 1 here

The geography of the withdrawers and retainers is interesting. The two withdrawers were in

the north of Great Britain and the two retainers in the south. Analysis of the data shows that

there are now no economics programmes on offer in the new universities north of a line

between Preston (Central Lancashire) and Sheffield (Sheffield Hallam) (Figure 1). Six of the

withdrawers were below this line and six above it. It was thus inevitable that the retainers

would be in the south of the country.

7. Conclusions and suggestions for future research

Though it is pleasing to note that some new universities continue to offer economics titles

and that the subject has shown signs of regaining popularity in recent years, it is apparent

that economics has been withdrawn from large parts of the new university sector in the UK.

If the recent withdrawal rate continues then economics provision will have largely

disappeared from the UK’s new universities. Is economics, like medicine, then becoming an

elite subject for elite universities? If so, what are the implications of this, will for example

large numbers of applicants who have little hope of getting into a top university be excluded

from the possibility of studying economics? Is this inequality of access to the study of

economics and its implication for economic literacy among the population is something with

which we as educators ought to be concerned?

If the purpose of widening access to university education is to allow students from poorer

backgrounds the chance to study a full range of subjects, then subjects like economics

should be available at universities where wider access students are likely to be admitted.

The decline of economics in new universities reported here will thus be damaging to such

Page 18 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

19

students who find their subject choices limited in the business area to softer subjects

(Johnston, Reeves and Talbot 2012).

It would also seem to reflect a change in the nature of higher education, particularly in the

new universities. Here the emphasis appears to be more to a much greater extent on

training people for work rather than providing an education per se. With increased

specialisation in the sector this task of educating students more generally has to a much

greater extent been allocated to the old universities. The recent criticisms from employer

organisations appear to suggest that the new universities are not always being successful in

their allotted role. (CBI/NUS)

The influence of internal politics as opposed to external market factors on the withdrawal

decision is hinted at above but we really need more detailed analysis particularly as the

numbers applying for economics courses has recently been increasing. Here the recent

experience of economics in the US may be of value. Quite why there has been a failure to

succeed in economics research when they have had success in other related areas is an

interesting and important question. Likewise, why much of the research done by economists

in both old and new universities is not assessed in the Economics and Econometrics UoA is

another question worthy of further research. There are thus serious concerns about the

direction of economics and its fate as a viable subject in parts of the UK university system.

Page 19 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

20

References

Ashworth, J. and L. Evans. 2001. Modelling Student Choice at Secondary and Tertiary Level: A Cross-section Study. Journal of Economic Education 32: 311 - 20.

Alauddin, M. and J. E. Butler. 2004. Teaching economics in a changing university

environment: Some Australian experience. International Journal of Social Economics 31:

706 – 720.

Braun, V. and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research

in Psychology 3: 77-101.

CBI/NUS Employability Report: 2011. Working towards your future: Making the most of your

time in higher education. PLACE OF PUBLICATION: CBI/NUS.

Fourcade-Gourinchas, M. 2001. Politics, institutional structures, and the rise of economics: a

comparative study. Theory and Society 30: 397-447.

Georgiou, G. C. 2007. Demise of the economics major? International Advances in Economic

Research 13: 515-6.

Hurd, S., G. Coats and A. Anderton.1997. Economics and business studies – trends in GCE A Level. Division of Economics Working Paper 97.8, University of Staffordshire. Levitt, S. D. and S. J. Dubner. 2005. Freakonomics. New York: William Morrow. Machin, S. and A. Oswald. 2000. UK economics and the future supply of academic economists. Economic Journal 110: F334–49.

Millmow, A. 1997. To Eke Out a Marginal Existence: Economics in Business Schools, Economic Papers: Journal of Applied Economics and Policy 16:88-96. Office for Fair Access (2010). What more can be done to widen access to highly selective

universities?

Page 20 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

21

Reilly, B. and R. Bachan. 2005. A comparison of A-level performance in Economics and Business Studies: how much more difficult is Economics? Education Economics 13: 85-108. Roll, E. 1973. A History of Economic Thought. London: Faber and Faber. Shattock, M. 2001. The academic profession in Britain: A study in the failure to adapt to

change. Higher Education 41: 27–47.

Siegfried, J. J. 2011. Trends in undergraduate economics degrees, 1991-2010. The Journal

of Economic Education 42: 270-4.

Siegfried, J. J. and D. K. Round. 2001. International trends in economics degrees during the

1990s. The Journal of Economic Education 32: 203-18.

Skoorka, B.M. and C. M. Condon. 2003. Trends in US economics majors: why the decline in

the 1990s? Atlantic Economic Journal 31: 195-204.

Tight, M. 2011. How many universities are there in the United Kingdom? How many should

there be? Higher Education (accessed online:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/3146w04v65x78605) (Accessed 29.2.2012).

Number of words 8,049 excluding appendices

Page 21 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

22

List of tables and figure to be inserted in the text

Table 1: Interpreting the current level of economics provision in the UK HE Sector

Offered economics programmes in 2012 Did not offer economics programmes in 2012

Did not offer

economics before

2012

Offered economics

before 2012

(Retainers)

Offered economics

before 2012

(Withdrawers)

Did not offer economics

before 2012

Page 22 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

23

Table 3: The range of economics titles offered by UK universities. (Based on UCAS

website for UG admissions in 2012)

Exit title [1] Number of UK Institutions offering this exit title

through UCAS in 2012

Applied Economics 3

Business Economics 34

Development Economics 1

Economics 57

Economic History 2

European Economics 1

Financial Economics 13*

Industrial Economics 1

International Economics 3

International Business

Economics

3

Land Economy 1

Management Economics 1

Political Economy 1

* Includes Birkbeck College.

Page 23 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

24

Table 6 New Universities and economics exit title in 2012.

(*Indicates that the institution offered an economics title through UCAS in 2012)

1 Robert Gordon University 34 Hertfordshire University *

2 Oxford Brookes University 35 University of Gloucestershire

3 University of Chichester 36 Glasgow Caledonian University

4 Nottingham Trent University* 37 Edinburgh Napier University

5 De Montfort University 38 University of Wales Institute (UWIC),

Cardiff *

6 Bournemouth University * 39 Queen Margaret University College,

Edinburgh

7 University of Northumbria 40 University of the West of England *

8 Plymouth University * 41 University of Central Lancashire *

9 Lincoln University 42 Brighton University

10 The University of Northampton 43 Sheffield Hallam University *

11 Teesside University 44 Huddersfield University

12 The University of Worcester 45 Portsmouth University *

13 Kingston University * 46 the University of Winchester

14 Glyndŵr University 47 Edge Hill University

15 Glamorgan University 48 Staffordshire University

16 Manchester Metropolitan University * 49 University of Cumbria

17 University of Wales, Newport 50 Sunderland University

18 Canterbury Christ Church University 51 Bath Spa University College

19 Liverpool John Moores University 52 York St John University

20 Leeds Metropolitan University 53 Birmingham City University

21 University of Westminster * 54 University of Chester

22 University of Bedfordshire 55 Coventry University *

23 Abertay Dundee University 56 University of Wales Trinity Saint David

24 Greenwich University * 57 Roehampton University

25 Middlesex University * 58 Bucks New University

26 Derby University 59 St. Mary’s UC

27 Thames Valley University (now UWL) 60 Trinity UC

28 Anglia Ruskin University * 61 Marjon

29 University of Bolton 62 UWS

30 London South Bank University 63 UC Falmouth

31 Southampton Solent University 64 Newman UC

32 University of East London * 65 Leeds Trinity UC

33 London Metropolitan*

Page 24 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

25

Table 7 Economics titles offered by new universities. (from UCAS website for UG

admissions in 2012)

University Offering through

UCAS a single

Economics title in

2012 [1]

Offering through

UCAS a single

Business

Economics title

in 2012

Offering

through UCAS

a single

Financial

Economics title

in 2012

1.Anglia Ruskin - Y -

2.Bournemouth Y - -

3.Central Lancashire Y Y -

4.Coventry Y Y Y

5.East London - Y -

6.Greenwich Y Y -

7.Hertfordshire Y Y -

8.Kingston Y Y Y

9.London Metropolitan Y Y -

10.Manchester

Metropolitan

Y Y -

11.Middlesex - Y Y

12.Nottingham Trent Y Y -

13.Plymouth - Y Y

14.Portsmouth Y Y -

15.Sheffield Hallam - Y -

16.UWIC Y Y -

17.West of England,

Bristol

Y - -

18. Westminster - Y -

Page 25 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

26

Table 8: Economics titles withdrawn between 2003 and 2012

University Economics Business

Economics

Financial

Economics

1.University of Abertay 2007

2.University of the West of England**

2007*

3.University of Central England

2003

4.University of East London** 2007 2006

5.University of Glamorgan

2005

6.Glasgow Caledonian University

2007

7.University of Liverpool**

2007

8.Liverpool John Moores University 2009

9.Edinburgh Napier University

2008

10.Northumbria University 2005 2004

11.Nottingham Trent University**

2006

12.Oxford Brookes University

2009

13.University of the West of Scotland

2011

14.Salford University 2009 2009

15.Staffordshire University 2004

16.Teeside University 2004 2005

*International Business Economics

** These universities still offer a minor or joint exit title in economics, business economics

or financial economics and so have partially rather than completely withdrawn.

Page 26 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

27

Table 9: New University retainers and complete withdrawers

Retainers Complete Withdrawers

1.Anglia Ruskin 1.University of Abertay

2.Bournemouth 2.University of Central England

3.Central Lancashire 3.University of Glamorgan

4.Coventry 4. Glasgow Caledonian University

5.East London 5.Liverpool John Moores University

6.Greenwich 6.Edinburgh Napier University

7.Hertfordshire 7.Northumbria University

8.Kingston 8.Oxford Brookes University

9.London Metropolitan 9.University of the West of Scotland

10.Manchester

Metropolitan

10.Salford University

11.Middlesex 11.Staffordshire University

12.Nottingham Trent 12.Teeside University

13.Plymouth

14.Portsmouth

15.Sheffield Hallam

16.UWIC

17.West of England,

Bristol

18. Westminster

Page 27 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

28

Table 10: New university retainers and withdrawers compared

Measure Retainers[1] Withdrawers[2]

Average Entry Tariff

234 245

Average Percentage with a job

after 6 months

55

60

Average Research Assessment

Rating – Business and

Management[3]

1.89 2.00

Average Guardian League Table

Position

82 80

[1] Based on Guardian 2011 league Tables

[2] Average excludes UWS

[3] No entries are treated as a zero.

Page 28 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

29

Table 11: The number of universities with applications and/or acceptances for

programmes containing the word economics in the exit title 2003-2010: data supplied

by UCAS.

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

96 93 91 90 93 89 92 91

Page 29 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

30

Table 12: Contrasting experiences of retainers and withdrawers

Retainers Withdrawers

The demand for economics programmes had

remained healthy

The demand for economics programmes had

fallen considerably over time

Economics had always been part of a

Business School

Economics was once a separate

section/department

Economics was strongly supported by senior

management

Economics lacked support from senior

management and was often hindered

Economists were very active in

School/Faculty/University business

Economists were not very active in

School/Faculty/University business

Economists brought in significant income

from external activities

Economists were less actively engaged in

external income generation

Page 30 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

31

Figure 1: The geography of economics provision

Above the line there is no economics provision in the new universities.

Page 31 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

32

Appendix

Table 2: All of the universities included in this study

1 Oxford University ** 32 University of Surrey

2 Cambridge University 33 Aberdeen University

3 Imperial College of Science, Technology &

Medicine 34 Cardiff University

4 University of St Andrews 35 Reading University

5 London School of Economics and Political

Science 36 Queen Mary and Westfield College

6 The University of Durham 37 Strathclyde University

7 University College London 38 Queen's University, Belfast

8 University of Warwick 39 University of Kent

9 University of York 40 University of Wales, Aberystwyth

10 Lancaster University 41 Essex University

11 Edinburgh University 42 Keele University

12 Exeter University 43 Heriot-Watt University

13 The University of Bath 44 University of Dundee

14 University of Bristol 45 Stirling University

15 Leicester University 46 Robert Gordon University

16 Loughborough University 47 City University

17 King's College London, University of London 48 Hull University

18 The University of Sheffield 49 University of Wales, Swansea

19 Southampton University 50 Brunel University

20 The University of Nottingham 51 Oxford Brookes University

21 Sussex University 52 Goldsmiths College, University of London

22 The University of Birmingham 53 University of Chichester

23 University of East Anglia 54 University of Wales, Bangor

24 Glasgow University 55 Nottingham Trent University

25 Newcastle University 56 University of Ulster

26 Leeds University 57 Bradford University

27 School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) 58 De Montfort University

28 Liverpool University 59 Bournemouth University

29 Aston University 60 University of Northumbria

30 The University of Manchester 61 Plymouth University

31 Royal Holloway, University of London 62 Lincoln University

Page 32 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

33

63 Hertfordshire University 88 Salford University

64 University of Gloucestershire 89 The University of Northampton

65 Glasgow Caledonian University 90 Teesside University

66 Edinburgh Napier University 91 The University of Worcester

67 University of Wales Institute, Cardiff 92 Kingston University

68 Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh 93 Glyndŵr University

69 University of the West of England 94 Glamorgan University

70 University of Central Lancashire 95 Manchester Metropolitan University

71 Brighton University 96 University of Wales, Newport

72 Sheffield Hallam University 97 Canterbury Christ Church University

73 Huddersfield University 98 Liverpool John Moores University

74 Portsmouth University 99 Leeds Metropolitan University

75 the University of Winchester 100 University of Westminster

76 Edge Hill University 101 University of Bedfordshire

77 Staffordshire University 102 Abertay Dundee University

78 University of Cumbria 103 Greenwich University

79 Sunderland University 104 Middlesex University

80 Bath Spa University College 105 Derby University

81 York St John University 106 Thames Valley University (now UWL)

82 Birmingham City University 107 Anglia Ruskin University

83 University of Chester 108 University of Bolton

84 Coventry University 109 London South Bank University

85 University of Wales Trinity Saint David 110 Southampton Solent University

86 Roehampton University 111 University of East London

87 Bucks New University 112 London Metropolitan

113 St. Mary’s UC 116 UC Falmouth

114 Trinity UC 117 Newman UC

115 Marjon 118 Leeds Trinity UC

119 UWS*

Page 33 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

34

Table 4: The exit titles offered by those universities offering economics titles: (Based

on UCAS website for UG admissions in 2012)

University Offering through

UCAS a single

Economics title in

2012 [1]

Offering through

UCAS a single

Business Economics

title in 2012 [1]

Offering through UCAS

a single Financial

Economics title in 2012

[1]

1.Aberdeen Y - -

2.Aberystwyth Y Y -

3.Anglia Ruskin - Y -

4.Bath Y - -

5.Bangor - Y -

6.Birmingham Y - -

7.Bournemouth Y - -

8.Bradford Y Y Y

9.Bristol Y - -

10.Brunel Y - -

11.Cambridge Y - -

12.Cardiff Y Y -

13.Central Lancashire* Y Y -

14.City Y - Y

15.Coventry Y Y Y

16.Dundee Y - Y

17.Durham Y Y -

18.East Anglia Y Y -

19.East London* - Y -

20.Edinburgh Y - -

21.Essex Y - Y

22.Exeter Y Y -

23.Glasgow Y Y -

24.Greenwich* Y Y -

25.Heriot-Watt Y - -

26.Hertfordshire* Y Y -

27.Hull Y Y -

28.Keele - Y -

29.Kent Y - Y

30.Kingston Y Y Y

31.Lancaster Y Y -

32.Leeds Y Y -

Page 34 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

35

33.Leicester Y Y -

34.Liverpool Y Y -

35.London Metropolitan* Y Y -

36.London School of

Economics

Y - -

37.Loughborough Y - -

38.Manchester Y - -

39.Manchester

Metropolitan*

Y Y -

40.Middlesex* - Y Y

41.Newcastle Y - -

42.Nottingham Y - -

43.Nottingham Trent* Y Y -

44.Plymouth* Y Y Y

45.Portsmouth* Y Y -

46.Queen Mary Y - -

47.Queen's – Belfast Y Y -

48.Reading Y Y -

49.Royal Holloway Y - -

50.St Andrews Y - Y

51.Sheffield Y - -

52.Sheffield Hallam - Y -

53.SOAS Y - -

54.Southampton Y - -

55.Stirling Y - -

56.Strathclyde Y - -

57.Surrey Y Y -

58.Sussex Y - -

59.Swansea Y Y Y

60.Ulster Y Y -

61.University College

London

Y - -

62.UWIC Y Y -

63.Warwick Y - -

64.West of England,

Bristol

Y - -

65. Westminster - Y -

66.York Y - -

Page 35 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

36

Table 5: Research scores in the 2008 RAE for those universities offering economics

degrees. (NS – not submitted to the 2008 RAE in the ‘Economics and Econometrics’

UoA.)

University * Research scores in

economics and

econometrics unit

of the 2008 RAE.

Research scores in the

business and

management unit of the

2008 RAE.

Research

scores in the

accounting and

finance unit of

the 2008 RAE.

1.Aberdeen 2.85 2.25 NS

2.Aberystwyth NS 1.95 NS

3.Anglia Ruskin NS NS NS

4.Bath NS 2.95 NS

5.Bangor NS NS 2.75

6.Birmingham 2.75 2.65 NS

7.Bournemouth NS 1.95 NS

8.Bradford NS 2.5 NS

9.Bristol 3.15 2.00 2.55

10.Brunel 2.65 2.35 NS

11.Cambridge 3.05 3.05 NS

12.Cardiff NS 3.00 NS

13.Central Lancashire NS 1.95 NS

14.City 2.65 2.60 NS

15.Coventry NS 1.75 NS

16.Dundee 2.45 NS 2.25

17.Durham NS 2.65 NS

18.East Anglia 2.75 2.45 NS

19.East London NS NS NS

20.Edinburgh 2.95 2.45 NS

21.Essex 3.35 NS 2.6

22.Exeter 2.95 2.65 2.6

23.Glasgow 3.00 2.5 2.35

24.Greenwich NS 1.75 NS

25.Heriot-Watt NS 2.4 NS

26.Hertfordshire NS 2.15 NS

27.Hull NS 2.35 NS

28.Keele NS 2.3 NS

29.Kent 2.9 2.5 NS

30.Kingston 2.0 2.45 NS

31.Lancaster NS 2.95 NS

Page 36 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

37

32.Leeds NS 2.85 NS

33.Leicester 2.9 2.55 NS

34.Liverpool NS 2.45 NS

35.London Metropolitan 2.25 1.55 NS

36.London School of Economics 3.55 2.95 NS

37.Loughborough 2.45 2.70 NS

38.Manchester 3.05 2.85 NS

39.Manchester Metropolitan 1.7 2.2 NS

40.Middlesex NS 2.15 NS

41.Newcastle NS 2.5 NS

42.Nottingham 3.15 2.85 NS

43.Nottingham Trent NS 2.15 NS

44.Plymouth NS 2.05 NS

45.Portsmouth NS 2.1 NS

46.Queen Mary 3.15 2.6 NS

47.Queen's – Belfast NS 2.65 NS

48.Reading NS 2.5 NS

49.Royal Holloway 3.00 2.65 NS

50.St Andrews 2.70 2.65 NS

51.Sheffield 2.8 2.7 NS

52.Sheffield Hallam NS 1.9 NS

53.SOAS NS 2.35 NS

54.Southampton 3.00 2.6 NS

55.Stirling 2.75 2.3 2.35

56.Strathclyde NS 2.85 NS

57.Surrey 2.8 2.5 NS

58.Sussex 2.70 NS NS

59.Swansea 2.75 2.35 NS

60.Ulster NS 2.25 NS

61.University College London 3.5 NS NS

62.UWIC NS 1.35 NS

63.Warwick 3.35 2.95 NS

64.West of England, Bristol NS 2.15 2.25

65. Westminster NS 2.00 NS

66.York 2.75 2.45 NS

*It should be noted that Oxford and Birkbeck were submitted but are not included in the

Table above as they do not meet our rule for selection in the study.

Page 37 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

38

1 Unfortunately the data do not allow us to measure changes in the relative academic price (relative entrance

requirements) of economic programmes over this period, clearly something that is a weakness of our study. If the increase in student numbers in the higher education sector as a whole is the result of a reduction in absolute or relative entrance requirements, then this may indicate that the popularity of the subject is falling more generally and not just at some of the new universities. 2 For the sake of brevity and clarity, and recognising all the difficulties involved in categorising universities in this

way, the term ‘new’ will be used to refer to post-1992 universities and ‘old’ to refer to pre-1992 universities. 3 The extent to which courses were removed before 2004 will lead us to underestimate the importance of

withdrawals. 4 Though the importance of these aspects of economics education is recognised and accepted, and bearing in

mind that it may have changed just as much as the provision of exit titles has changed, their measurement and assessment lie outside the remit of this study. 5 It has to borne in mind that though offered, many of these programmes will not run and indeed many never

have run. To the extent that this is important, it will mean that our data overestimate the extent of provision. 6 Some of the country’s top universities for the study of economics only offer the subject in conjunction with other

subjects at undergraduate level and to conclude that economics is not a serious subject in these institutions would clearly be wrong. 7 We recognise that this means we will not identify changes before this point in time but research constraints

mean that this is the best we can realistically do.

Page 38 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

For Peer Review O

nly

1

Economics: an elite subject

for elite universities?

Abstract

The decline in the number of universities offering programmes in subjects such as chemistry,

physics, mathematics, modern languages and history in the universities of the United

Kingdom has been well documented. It now appears that economics programmes, both in

the UK and in other parts of the world, may be going through a similar process. The paper

explores the changes in the provision of economics programmes in the UK by reviewing the

current state of provision and charting how it has changed in the last ten or so years.

Differences between pre-1992 and post-1992 universities, research performance and

geographical location in the decision to withdraw economics programmes are examined.

Research activity does not explain why new universities have retained or withdrawn

economics programmes. The study reports the results of a survey to reveal a complex

picture with economics provision affected by a number of internal and external factors.

Key words

Economics programmes, retention and withdrawal, ‘new’ and ‘old’ universities, research

activity, widening access

Page 39 of 39



123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960

Studies Higher Education

Documents

Transcript of Studies Higher Education