Why Economics? Why Trade?

Economics and me

My dedication to learning about and contributing to economic knowledge originates in a larger passion for dynamic social systems. I grew up in a space where cultural constructs, social norms, political overreach, economic struggles, and religious beliefs seemed to constantly collapse into one another. The identities that I carry put me at odds with many of these otherwise impercitible forces. And the constant tensions and hesitations of a country that is in perpetual transition emphasized the emphasized the complexity of the systems at play. I was fascinated. I have since never ceased to be.

So in college, I chose the most multidisciplinary social science program that I knew off. Sciences Po’s undegraduate program operated very much beyond disciplines. This made it an excellent gateway to the study of those dynamic social systems that I was so anxious to understand, analyze and critic. I used the flexibility of my year abroad at the University of Southern California to focus on two vantage angles : the history of religions, and political science. Through these exposures, I was becoming increasingly aware that the system that (tw: controversial statement) mattered most, in informing the others was the economy.

So I went back to Paris, graduated with a MSc in Economics and Public Policy from l’Ecole Polytechnique and Sciences Po, applied what I had learnt and picked up some more skills working in the financial sector, and here I am now!

Why trade ?

For most of my 2nd year, I agonized over having to choose a field to focus on. A little of this indecision had to do with my epistemological resistence to specialization. A lot of it was about my genuine fascination for most of economic thought. There was very little research at the UO’s Econ department that I couldn’t get into. I very much enjoyed applied macroeconomics. Labor aligned well with my interest in distributional issues. The resource-related literature in environmental economics seemed like mandatory reading.

I was eventually drawn to the international trade literature, for the same reasons I was drawn to economics. It interfaces with all of the other fields I was inclined to. The way economies trade relates to their very production structure, is informed by and consequential for their labor market outcomes and resulting welfare. It is impacted by their resource endowment, and is also a path towards optimized global resource use. By studying trade, I could continue to learn about macroeconomic dynamics not only in large insular economies, but in the more challenging and fluid context of the small open economies. Just as importantly, I could adapt new micro and macro econometric and modelling methods to questions old and new. The international dimension of the literature would allow me to stay atune with economic concerns that are specific to poor peripheral economies, that I do not want to lose from sight in my research. For its breadth, its global encline, and its promise, international trade was the field for me.