Economists
Also called Senior economist, Research economist, Applied economist, Labor economist, Macro economist
In brief
In May 2025, BLS counted 17,790 US economists, with median pay of $124,720 a year. Of the BLS counts since 2003, the highest was 19,550, in May 2017. The earliest figure here is an estimate of 868 from 1903, not measured the same way as today's count. The last full technology era for economists: Machine learning libraries, cloud compute, and Python for economics, 2015 to 2023.
What the sources say
Official outlook
BLS projects employment to grow 4.7% from 2025 to 2035.
AI exposure studies
- 45.8% of this job's tasks are exposed to large language models. Not a forecast of job losses. Eloundou and others, 2023
- 36% of work tasks in life, physical, and social science occupations, this job's group, are exposed to automation by AI. Not a forecast of job losses. Goldman Sachs, 2023
Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35. BLS publishes these counts as yearly survey snapshots and cautions against reading them as a precise trend. In May 2021 BLS changed how it estimates these counts (a model-based method using three years of survey data) and moved fully to the 2018 occupation codes, so part of a change across 2021 can come from the method rather than the work.
Last updated .
Cite this page
Future History. (2026, October 11). Economists: jobs and pay since 1903 [Data set; data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35]. https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/19-3011
Future History. "Economists: jobs and pay since 1903." Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35. Last modified October 11, 2026. https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/19-3011.
@misc{futurehistory_19_3011, author = {{Future History}}, title = {Economists: jobs and pay since 1903}, year = {2026}, month = oct, howpublished = {\url{https://futurehistory.earth/timeline/19-3011}}, note = {Last updated 2026-10-11. Data as of BLS OEWS May 2025; BLS Employment Projections 2025-35}, }
The access date is today's date on your device.
≈ $121,522 in 2024 prices (derived by us, CPI-adjusted)
The American Economic Association was founded in Saratoga Springs, New York, by Richard T. Ely, Edwin Seligman, and approximately two dozen colleagues, mostly younger economists trained in German graduate programs who wanted to distinguish their empirical, institutionally grounded approach from the laissez-faire orthodoxy of the older generation. Initial membership was roughly two dozen individuals. The AEA became the defining professional organization of the US economics profession; by 2024 it had over 17,000 members.
Simon Kuznets, at the request of the US Senate, published the first modern national income accounts for the United States through the Department of Commerce, covering 1929-1932. National income accounting created an entirely new demand for practicing economists in government: once the concept of GDP existed, governments everywhere needed economists to measure, track, and interpret it. Kuznets received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 1971 for this work.
The Employment Act of 1946, signed by President Truman on February 20, created the Council of Economic Advisers within the Executive Office of the President. It was the first statute to explicitly require the federal government to pursue maximum employment, production, and purchasing power, and it gave the president a permanent staff of professional economists. The CEA, combined with the already-growing presence of economists at the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, institutionalized the profession in the executive branch in a way that had not existed before the New Deal.
The first Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was awarded to Ragnar Frisch and Jan Tinbergen, recognizing econometrics as the methodological core of the modern profession. The Nobel Prize in Economics became the most visible signal of the profession's academic prestige and, indirectly, influenced the direction of the field toward mathematical formalism and empirical testability. Whether this "mathematization" improved economic policy outcomes has been a contested question within the profession ever since.
The "credibility revolution" in empirical economics, associated most prominently with Joshua Angrist, Alan Krueger, and Guido Imbens, shifted the dominant methodology of applied microeconomics from structural models estimated on convenience samples toward quasi-experimental identification strategies exploiting natural experiments in administrative data. The Card-Krueger minimum wage study (1994) is often cited as the paradigm case. The approach became dominant in labor economics, health economics, development economics, and public finance over the following two decades, and was recognized by the Nobel Committee when Angrist, Imbens, and Card shared the 2021 Nobel Prize in Economics.
The BIS Working Paper series and IMF Staff Discussion Notes from 2010 onward documented a structural shift in how central banks used economic research: the 2008 financial crisis exposed significant limitations in the dominant Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium models that had guided monetary policy, and central banks began hiring more empirically oriented economists alongside macroeconomic modelers. The Federal Reserve's research staff, the Bank of England, the ECB, and major central banks globally expanded their applied-micro and financial-stability research functions, creating sustained demand for economists with credibility-revolution identification skills in addition to traditional macro.
Will AI replace economists? What the research says
Each figure is stated by the named source; we publish no forecasts of our own. Where sources disagree, we show the disagreement rather than an average.
Each figure is stated by the named source; we publish no forecasts of our own. Where sources disagree, the spread is the honest signal.
What's changing day to day for economists
Three parts of your work where AI is already doing real lifting, and what stays yours.
AI is sitting alongside you hereConduct systematic literature triage and synthesis using NotebookLM and AlphaSense: upload a corpus of working papers, journal articles, and policy reports to identify the frontier consensus on a research question, map the empirical variation used in prior studies, and surface methodological gaps before committing to a new research design.
Conduct systematic literature triage and synthesis using NotebookLM and AlphaSense: upload a corpus of working papers, journal articles, and policy reports to identify the frontier consensus on a research question, map the empirical variation used in prior studies, and surface methodological gaps before committing to a new research design.[10],[11],[5]
AI literature synthesis tools like NotebookLM can screen dozens of papers in minutes and surface thematic clusters across large corpora, delivering the "10x leverage factor" Brookings (2023) attributed to AI-adopting research economists. The residual human judgment lies in critically evaluating whether a cited paper's identification strategy is actually valid in its context, something current AI tools cannot assess. Develop a two-pass habit: use AI tools to map the landscape and surface candidates, then personally read and assess the identification quality of the papers that most directly inform your own research design.
AI is sitting alongside you hereRetrieve and organize macroeconomic time-series data using Bloomberg Terminal AI Assist or Refinitiv Workspace: query GDP components, CPI sub-indices, employment series, yield curves, and commodity prices across international markets
Retrieve and organize macroeconomic time-series data using Bloomberg Terminal AI Assist or Refinitiv Workspace: query GDP components, CPI sub-indices, employment series, yield curves, and commodity prices across international markets; cross-validate retrieved series against official statistical agency publications before use in forecasting models.[12],[13],[14]
Bloomberg AI Assist and Refinitiv Workspace reduce the time required to locate and structure macroeconomic data series from hours to minutes, but the validation step (confirming that the retrieved series uses the correct vintage, seasonal adjustment method, and revision policy for the research question) remains critical and human. Series definitional drift (e.g. BLS CPI methodological changes, BEA NIPA revision schedules) is not consistently flagged by AI retrieval tools. Build familiarity with the revision and methodology histories of the core macro series your work depends on.
AI is sitting alongside you hereAssemble and clean large economic datasets using AI-assisted code generation: use GitHub Copilot or Jupyter AI to accelerate R, Python, Stata, or Julia scripts for merging panel datasets, handling missing observations, constructing price deflators, and reshaping administrative microdata, then audit the generated code against the variable codebook before any estimation.
Assemble and clean large economic datasets using AI-assisted code generation: use GitHub Copilot or Jupyter AI to accelerate R, Python, Stata, or Julia scripts for merging panel datasets, handling missing observations, constructing price deflators, and reshaping administrative microdata, then audit the generated code against the variable codebook before any estimation.[15],[5]
AI code generation dramatically reduces the manual coding burden for data assembly: a task that historically consumes a large share of junior-economist time. However, generated scripts routinely mishandle survey weights, misinterpret variable definitions from agency codebooks, and produce incorrect merge keys for multi-file administrative datasets. Build a validation discipline: always check a generated merge against the source documentation, verify that observation counts match expected population coverage, and confirm that constructed variables replicate published summary statistics from the upstream source.
Where economists go next
Natural next steps for someone with your foundation: not exits, evolutions.
- Financial Managers
- US median pay
- $166,570 (May 2025)
- BLS outlook 2025-35
- +9.7%
- Management Analysts
- US median pay
- $101,860 (May 2025)
- BLS outlook 2025-35
- +10.1%
- Operations Research Analysts
- US median pay
- $88,940 (May 2025)
- BLS outlook 2025-35
- +11.9%
What each move takes
Financial Managers
Applied and macroeconomists (particularly those with experience in financial sector analysis, central banking, or risk economics) have a natural path into Financial Manager roles at banks, asset managers, and corporate treasury functions. The transition leverages the economist's strengths in macro-scenario analysis, regulatory economics, and quantitative risk assessment. Goldman Sachs (2025) identifies "economist-trained managers" as a growing segment of senior finance leadership, particularly for roles involving Basel III/IV capital planning, climate-risk scenario modeling, and central bank liaison functions. BLS projects employment growth for Financial Managers through 2034.
- · Financial accounting and reporting fundamentals (GAAP, IFRS)
- · Treasury management: liquidity planning, FX hedging, capital structure
- · Banking regulation: Basel III/IV capital requirements, FRTB, stress testing frameworks
- · Financial modeling in Excel / Python: DCF, scenario analysis, sensitivity tables
- · Leadership and team management in a performance-oriented financial organization
How has the work of economists changed since 1776?
The tools that defined the work, one line per era. Select an era to see how it reshaped the work.
Paper, correspondence, and printed statistical tables (pre-institutional era)
The political economist of the 18th and 19th centuries worked entirely with pen, paper, printed data tables, and correspondence networks. Quantitative work existed, most notably in the British census tradition and in the work of American statistician Francis Amasa Walker, but it was slow, largely hand-tabulated, and accessible only to scholars with access to major libraries. The economist's main tool was argument: deductive reasoning from first principles, illustrated with whatever statistical abstracts were available from government publications. The founding of the AEA in 1885 and the proliferation of university economics departments did not change the tools; it changed the institutional setting in which those tools were applied.
Mechanical calculators, adding machines, and punch-card tabulation (Hollerith era)
Herman Hollerith's punch-card tabulation system, used for the 1890 US Census, was the first mechanical data-processing technology that reached practicing economists and statisticians. By the 1920s and 1930s, Marchant, Friden, and Monroe mechanical calculators had become standard equipment in university economics departments and federal agencies. The New Deal era brought large-scale statistical work into government for the first time, with national income accounts being constructed by hand tabulation in the Department of Commerce (Simon Kuznets' work from 1934 onward). The mechanical calculator era made it possible, with sufficient labor, to run regressions and tabulate cross-sections that would have been prohibitive by hand, but the computation time for a single coefficient estimate could run to days.
Effect on the workPunch-card tabulation machinery required a class of "computing girls" (largely women with mathematical training employed as human computers) to operate the equipment. The economist who designed the analysis was separate from the workers who ran the calculations, a division of labor that persisted until electronic computers arrived in the 1950s.
Mainframe computers and early econometrics packages (IBM 704, FORTRAN, Cowles Commission era)
The arrival of mainframe computers at major universities and federal agencies in the 1950s transformed what an economist could compute. The Cowles Commission at the University of Chicago (and later Yale) had been developing simultaneous-equation econometric methods since the 1940s; by the mid-1950s those methods could be estimated on machines rather than by hand. IBM's mainframe, introduced in 1954, was the first widely available machine with floating-point hardware; FORTRAN, released by IBM in 1957, gave economists a practical programming language. By the mid-1960s mainframe-based regression packages were available at most research universities. The speed difference from mechanical calculators was roughly a thousand-fold, which enabled regression models with dozens of variables and opened the door to Monte Carlo simulation. This era separated the "theorist who could calculate" from the "theorist who could compute at scale" and created the first genuine specialization in econometrics as a distinct subfield.
Effect on the workMainframe access was expensive and mediated through university computing centers, so it remained a shared, scheduled resource rather than a personal tool. Junior economists and graduate students still spent significant time on laborious hand calculations for coursework; the mainframe handled the largest research tasks. The era eliminated the class of "human computers" that punch-card tabulation had required.
Personal computers, SAS, RATS, and TSP (desktop econometrics era)
The personal computer transformed economics from a field where computation required institutional access to one where an economist's individual workstation was the primary research tool. SAS (1976), RATS (Regression Analysis of Time Series, 1983), and TSP (Time Series Processor) became standard desktop packages for applied economists in the 1980s. Stata was first released in 1985 and by the early 1990s was displacing SAS for applied microeconomic research. The desktop era fundamentally changed the scope of empirical economics: a single researcher could now run hundreds of regressions in an afternoon, test robustness across samples, and iterate on specifications in ways that mainframe-queue-based computing had made prohibitive. This is the era that produced the "credibility revolution" in empirical economics, in which the focus shifted from large structural models to quasi-experimental identification strategies, partly because computing had made it feasible to explore datasets exhaustively enough to find natural experiments.
Effect on the workThe desktop econometrics era substantially reduced the proportion of the economist's time spent on computation logistics (scheduling mainframe access, submitting batch jobs, waiting for printouts) and increased the proportion spent on specification design and interpretation. It did not reduce demand for economists; it increased it, by expanding the scope of questions empirical economics could address.
Internet data access, WRDS, FRED, administrative microdata, and R (big-data micro era)
The internet made large economic datasets publicly accessible at negligible marginal cost for the first time. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis launched FRED (Federal Reserve Economic Data) in 1991 with web access from 1994; Wharton Research Data Services (WRDS) gave university researchers online access to Compustat, CRSP, and other financial databases from the mid-1990s onward. The US Census Bureau expanded remote access to restricted microdata through its Federal Statistical Research Data Center network (first RDC opened 1994). R was released as open-source in 1995, eventually displacing SAS and RATS for much academic work. The combination of cheap data access and open-source statistical software enabled a generation of empirical economists to work with administrative datasets containing millions of observations, tax records, and matched employer-employee files that had been inaccessible to the previous generation. Geographic information systems, satellite data, and digitized historical records expanded further what "data" an economist could work with.
Effect on the workThe administrative-microdata era created strong demand for economists who combined statistical skill with knowledge of specific data sources (the LEHD, SIPP, NLSY, PSID, etc.) and who could navigate the institutional processes for data access. It did not threaten economist employment; it expanded the range of researchable questions and, consequently, the demand for economists to answer them.
Machine learning libraries, cloud compute, and Python for economics (causal ML era)
The mid-2010s brought machine-learning methods into the economist's toolkit, initially as predictors for treatment assignment (lasso for variable selection in IV research) and later as first-stage tools in double machine learning (DML) and causal forest methods. Python, with scikit-learn (2011) and later PyTorch and TensorFlow, became a second primary language alongside R and Stata for economists working on high-dimensional data problems. Cloud computing (AWS, Google Cloud) made access to datasets too large for a local machine routine. The "causal machine learning" literature, exemplified by Chernozhukov et al. (2018) on double/debiased ML and Athey-Imbens work on causal forests, combined the credibility revolution's identification discipline with the predictive power of ML. This era expanded what applied economists could do without threatening the core causal-identification judgment that distinguishes a trained economist from a data scientist.
Large language models and AI-assisted research tools (Stata 19 AI, GitHub Copilot, NotebookLM, Bloomberg AI Assist)
The 2023-2026 AI wave has reshaped the junior-economist task stack more than any tool since the personal computer. GitHub Copilot generates R, Python, Stata, and Julia code from plain-English specifications; Jupyter AI provides in-notebook LLM assistance; Stata 19 (2025) offers AI-assisted do-file generation; NotebookLM and AlphaSense accelerate literature triage and synthesis. Brookings (2023) cites a "10x leverage factor" for research-active economists who adopt AI for literature triage and data assembly. The tasks that have remained robustly human are causal identification design, formal theory development, and policy-mandate testimony, all of which require institutional knowledge and accountability that no LLM can provide. The IMF (2024) identifies a growing demand for economists who can validate and contextualize AI-generated economic analysis in policy settings, suggesting that AI tools may increase demand for senior economists even as they reduce the routine coding burden at junior levels.
Effect on the workBLS projects employment growth for economists through 2034, broadly flat headcount with hundreds of openings per year driven primarily by replacement demand. Net effect: stable or slowly growing headcount, with strong upward pressure on wages for AI-fluent practitioners.
See the same long-arc view for your own profession.
Browse the directory by industry, or search by title or SOC code.
Browse all rolesEconomists employment and pay by year
View all 29 years of cited US data, each linked to its source
| Year | US employment | Annual pay (median unless marked) | Source | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1903 | 868 | n/a | Est., Wikipedia Researched context | Report |
| 1916 | 2,392 | n/a | Est., Wikipedia Researched context | Report |
| 1946 | 5,500 | n/a | Est., EH.net Encyclopedia Researched context | Report |
| 1959 | n/a | $8,000 | BLS historical bulletin 1959 Researched context | Report |
| 1980 | 35,000 | n/a | Est., American Economic Association Researched context | Report |
| 2000 | 13,680 | $64,830 | BLS OEWS 2000 Official statistic | Report |
| 2003 | 12,300 | $70,250 | BLS OEWS May 2003 Official statistic | Report |
| 2004 | 12,030 | $72,780 | BLS OEWS May 2004 Official statistic | Report |
| 2005 | 12,470 | $73,690 | BLS OEWS May 2005 Official statistic | Report |
| 2006 | 12,970 | $77,010 | BLS OEWS May 2006 Official statistic | Report |
| 2007 | 12,740 | $80,220 | BLS OEWS May 2007 Official statistic | Report |
| 2008 | 12,600 | $83,590 | BLS OEWS May 2008 Official statistic | Report |
| 2009 | 13,160 | $86,930 | BLS OEWS May 2009 Official statistic | Report |
| 2010 | 13,250 | $89,450 | BLS OEWS May 2010 Official statistic | Report |
| 2011 | 14,270 | $90,550 | BLS OEWS May 2011 Official statistic | Report |
| 2012 | 15,760 | $91,860 | BLS OEWS May 2012 Official statistic | Report |
| 2013 | 17,230 | $93,070 | BLS OEWS May 2013 Official statistic | Report |
| 2014 | 18,680 | $95,710 | BLS OEWS May 2014 Official statistic | Report |
| 2015 | 19,090 | $99,180 | BLS OEWS May 2015 Official statistic | Report |
| 2016 | 19,380 | $101,050 | BLS OEWS May 2016 Official statistic | Report |
| 2017 | 19,550 | $102,490 | BLS OEWS May 2017 Official statistic | Report |
| 2018 | 18,650 | $104,340 | BLS OEWS May 2018 Official statistic | Report |
| 2019 | 19,000 | $105,020 | BLS OEWS May 2019 Official statistic | Report |
| 2020 | 17,520 | $108,350 | BLS OEWS May 2020 Official statistic | Report |
| 2021 | 15,640 | $105,630 | BLS OEWS May 2021 Official statistic | Report |
| 2022 | 16,370 | $113,940 | BLS OEWS May 2022 Official statistic | Report |
| 2023 | 16,420 | $115,730 | BLS OEWS May 2023 Official statistic | Report |
| 2024 | 15,880 | $115,440 | BLS OEWS May 2024 Official statistic | Report |
| 2025 | 17,790 | $124,720 | BLS OEWS May 2025 Official statistic | Report |
More in Science
- Medical Scientists, Except Epidemiologists
- Occupational Health and Safety Specialists
- Environmental Scientists and Specialists, Including Health
- Chemists
- Clinical and Counseling Psychologists
- Biological Technicians
- School Psychologists
- Chemical Technicians
- Urban and Regional Planners
- Environmental Science and Protection Technicians, Including Health