Writing Conventions for Economics
The introduction gives away the result immediately
Economics introductions run four to six pages and tell the reader the question, the data, the identification, the headline estimate, and the contribution — in that order, before any suspense can build. Withholding the finding for effect is read as a sign the finding is weak.
There is usually no standalone literature review
Related work is folded into the introduction as a short, pointed passage explaining what three or four specific papers did and what yours does differently. A separate chapter-length review is a dissertation convention, not a journal one.
The identification strategy is the paper
Empirical work lives or dies on why the variation you exploit can be treated as exogenous. That argument gets its own section, states the assumptions in plain language alongside the notation, and is followed by the tests that would fail if it were wrong.
Equations are numbered and referenced by number
Models are set out in displayed, numbered equations with every symbol defined at first use, and the text refers back as “equation (3).” Notation is expected to stay consistent from the model section through the estimating equation.
Tables carry the results; prose interprets magnitudes
The main table is often the first thing a reader looks at, so it has to be self-contained — variable definitions, standard errors, clustering, and sample size in the notes. The text explains what a coefficient means in units people care about rather than restating it.
Robustness lives in the paper; detail lives in the appendix
A results section is followed by robustness checks that anticipate the referee’s objections, with fuller specifications pushed to an online appendix. Long review cycles mean papers circulate as working papers for years, so the draft has to be readable in isolation.
