fmill019

Dang, no thoughts at all on this?

Hi all! My research goal is to take a city, such as North Miami, and analyze its local economy. In particular I would like to analyze the things it is doing in terms of increasing economic growth or what it isn't doing. Would Economics be the correct discipline to base such a research goal on? Contemplating going back for a 2nd Master's or 2nd Bachelor's to give me this skillset. Thanks!

Can someone please tell me why my posts are disappearing?! This is the third post I've written that refuses to show up! What gives?

Apologies... but I swear I made two posts in this thread that are now deleted. One in response to "tm_member" and the other in response to "applicant12" but they are both missing! Shame really as both went into a bit more detail about my background... but to reply back to you zshfryoh, I've actually taken math all the way up to Linear Algebra and was getting ready to take Real Analysis until my funding ran out. I was previously a math major (as well as stats major and a bio major and a chem major) before I pursued sociology and then anthropology. Until I can get some funding I plan on starting some free MIT Opencourseware in Real Analysis in the meantime. I also need to brush up on my R skills that I used two years ago but have forgotten since-- but I think I will scrap that and go for Python instead. Sorry for the ramble but that's the extent of my background. Are you sure about this? From the looks of this forum Real Analysis, Probability Theory and Topology are standard undergrad topics that pretty much all prospective Econ MA students need to master before even applying to grad school. I just can't see an MPA being rigorous enough to even require those same hefty barriers to entry, let alone standard grad school courses that carry textbooks like Mas Colell, which give even qualified PhD students problems. And this is honestly what scares me. The fact there is something inherently more valuable to having an Econ PhD when it comes to being an analyst must count for something. I imagine it must be the expert training that Econ students have over fluffy MPA students. I guess I'm really having a hard time understanding the differences between "academic research" and "practical development". It's a shame that my reply to "tm_member" was deleted because in that post to him I had already expounded on my confusion but I guess I might as well repeat it here as well. Part of the reason why I am confused about "Academic research" and "practical development" is that both want to understand how economies grow and seek to elucidate the steps a certain country or region of the world should take in order to best develop themselves (this is what I've read from Stiglitz, Acemoglu, etc). And both must use some method of investigation in order to analyze and come up with a strategy of how to do so before laying down any plans. In this sense-- I am not understanding how this form of analysis can be readily separated into the dichotomy of "academic" versus "practical". Unless this is totally not the way practical developers go about their routine. But I really love your last line about being able to take whatever I want with the MPA as it will be directed at my interests. I would definitely swing towards the harder Econ courses. I've gotten enough fluff from my undergrad Anthropology degree.

Oh! One last thing! MPP/MPA- that's only good for the public sector, correct? But what about the private sector? Surely there is much more in the way of a country's economic "development" than can be controlled or even initiated by the government! Will an MPA/MPP hamper my ability at thinking outside of the "let's-rely-on-the-government" box? Too many anthropologists and sociologists already rely too strongly on the state for delivering solutions. Is this not yet another argument for Econ over PP/PA?

Oh, thank you so much! So the PhD in Economics would be a mistake as the emphasis would be on "publish or perish" and not about getting to the bottom of my real substantive interests or issues I would be looking to probe? It's actually interesting because taking a look at some of the people whose work I love (Joseph Stiglitz, Daron Acemoglu) I would have never gotten this impression but I guess it makes sense! Both of those guys push out tons of work-- and I am not sure the "publish or perish" mindset would allot me enough time to really dig in deep into my work like I would like. Kind of ironic though, as I could have sworn the PhD was pretty much crafted for people who wanted to do deep research. My only worry is that MPA would be too easy and nowhere near enough of a challenge and not rigorous like Economics would be. I've already had enough fluff Anthropology/Sociology courses in my undergrad. If you don't mind me asking, what MPA program out there is considered the best/hardest? I'm getting ready to take Real Analysis next semester and I would love to be in a MPA program that's going to kick my *** as much as RA will, if not more!

So an MPA is good for either being an analyst or a practitioner? I've always heard that when it comes down to MPA vs. Econ.. that the Econ should be chosen because it is always more rigorous, and versatile.

Thanks for this! I think I'm finally starting to understand. A development policy analyst is pretty much a spectator on the sidelines separate from the activity with no skin in the game, while a development practitioner could pretty much only be a politician that wields enough influence and power to make substantive changes in the local economy? Interesting! I always envisioned the analyst as the proper subset of the practitioner-- so that they were virtually one and the same. So for instance a politician, in say Jamaica, who wanted to increase jobs would already have a team of analysts who would then analyze, interpret, and evaluate the best strategy for doing so. Or at least the politician would consult an economist and then proceed forward with whatever economic plan(s) the economist would give them. This latter role is what I was looking for. But from the way it sounds, this is not usually the case?

Oh wow! thank you so much everyone! Sorry for being so late coming back to this thread! School has been kicking my tail recently! I will come back and respond asap!

Hi, yes-- I am an Anthropology major. Funnily enough, I just got through emailing the web developer for the AEAwebsite trying to get clarification on the difference between JEL Code O10- Econ development and O20- Development policy/planning, and am STILL not understanding the difference in the way he was trying to explain it to me: "Re your request for clarification of JEL codes: O10 deals with topics related to general areas of economic development, while O20 focuses on matters of policy and planning. So if one were interested in industrial development in Thailand, for instance, the code would be O14 (perhaps cross-classified with L60), but if interested in industrial policy, then O14 would be cross-classified with O25 and L52. Also, matters dealing with developing country macroeconomics would be classified under O10 (and the appropriate E category), but if the topic focused on policy, then O23 would be added. We have updated the guide to reflect more accurately the meaning of O10 and distinguish it from O20. Thank you." I suppose this must have something to do with my background in Anthropology and the rather strange way we approach things as opposed to the other social sciences. Even our "practitioners" in the discipline don't actually do anything -- as the discipline requires the Anthropologist to distance themselves from their objects of study. So naturally our "practice" is not much different than academic publishing or policy recommendations.

I guess I'm just a little confused on what you mean by "if you want to actually develop a country". Isn't giving the best policy recommendations possible to a country also "actually developing" that country? And by political mechanism are you referring to political parties and becoming a politician? I wouldn't hate to be a politician. Playing an analyst role is my forte.

This is excellent! Thanks for this! Unfortunately yes I am interested in doing field work as well which makes my path quite difficult to decide! Currently it's a toss up between Economics PhD and PublicPolicy. Public Policy seems a tad bit too fluffy but at least the bulk of the discipline involves actively putting forth solutions to issues of economic and social inequality. I'm not sure if Economics as a whole really concerns itself with such things.

Sorry but are you sure about this? I just got through meeting two economists who work at the IMF who just released a book studying how best to develop the Caribbean as a regional economic super-power! They trekked everything from how to deal with crime, to different energy sources each Caribbean country should tap into to make their region more competitive with the rest of the world. Both of them were PhD Economists.

Oh awesome! Thank you so much! It is surprising that you say post-graduate qualifications aren't necessary in learning this! Usually the advice given over the internet is that Economics at the undergraduate level is completely useless, and that in order to understand anything at least a Master's is needed!

Should I get an advanced degree in Economics if I want to learn how to develop and grow (improve the livelihoods) an impoverished region in the world and turn it into a regional super-power, either a city, a state, or a country? I really am trying to decide on a graduate program that would best give me the skills towards doing this whether it be Finance, Economics, Business Administration, etc. But I am really confused as towards which discipline would help me in this. Thanks any and everyone for any advice!