Navigating the Top Economics Publications
The economics research landscape is massive. New working papers drop every day, and knowing which journals actually matter for your career or your reading time takes some effort to figure out. I used to waste months sending manuscripts to places that wouldn't give me a straight answer, or worse, rejected me after four months of silence with a form letter. The Economics Journal Best concept isn't really a single thing. It's more of a shorthand people use when they're trying to sort through rankings, impact factors, and the actual prestige hierarchy that exists in the field. There are tiers. Everyone knows them, but not everyone talks about them plainly.
Understanding the Economics Journal Best Landscape
At the very top you have the five general interest journals: American Economic Review, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Journal of Political Economy, Econometrica, and Review of Economic Studies. Getting published in any one of these changes your life. The selection process is brutal, acceptance rates hover around three to five percent, and the review cycles can stretch to eighteen months if you're unlucky with reviewer assignments. Below that tier sit the field-specific top journals. For macro you have Journal of Monetary Economics and Review of Economic Dynamics. In labor, Journal of Labor Economics and Journal of Human Resources carry real weight. Public finance has Journal of Public Economics. These are where solid researchers spend most of their careers, and they deserve more respect than people give them because they're not as flashy as the big five. The real problem people run into is that Economics Journal Best rankings online are almost never useful. You'll find sites listing journals by impact factor or citation count, but those numbers are gamed. Self-citation inflation is real, and some specialized fields artificially boost their metrics through citation cartels. I learned this the hard way when a colleague recommended a journal based on a high impact factor and we submitted there only to discover the editorial board was mostly people who cited each other exclusively.
Here's what actually matters: Check who your target department's senior faculty are publishing in. If the tenured professors at your dream school are in Journal of Economic Literature and Journal of Development Economics, that's your signal. Prestige is local and relative, not absolute.
Get the Full Details
How to Evaluate Whether a Journal Is Right for Your Work
I've developed a quick checklist that takes maybe twenty minutes and has saved me from several bad submission decisions. First, look at the last two years of issues in the journal you're considering. Skim ten articles. Are they using methods you understand? Is the empirical work rigorous enough for your standards? If the papers look sloppy, no amount of prestige will save you. Second, check the journal's homepage for average turnaround time. Some journals advertise six months from submission to decision. Others take twelve or fifteen. This matters enormously if you're on the job market and need publications quickly. I once waited nine months for a desk rejection from a well-known intermediate journal because they had a massive backlog. Never again. Third, look at the editorial board. Search the names. Are these people active researchers or emeritus professors who haven't published in a decade? A journal run by people who are still in the trenches tends to have faster, more useful reviews. I ran into this exact issue when submitting to a regional economics journal. The editors were all retired, the review comments were generic, and the whole process took fourteen months. I pulled the paper and submitted it elsewhere within a month.
Fourth, and this is the part nobody warns you about, check how the journal handles revisions. Some journals encourage resubmission after major revisions. Others treat a revision as a new submission with a new reviewer cycle. I lost six months to the latter situation without realizing it upfront. Always ask the editor directly: "If I receive a revise and resubmit decision, is that a formal R&R process or does it count as a new submission?" Get the answer in writing before you invest your time.
Common Mistakes That Sink Submissions
The biggest mistake I see is authors treating Economics Journal Best as a rigid ranking system rather than a flexible guide. You'll read something like "publish in top twenty journals" and then blindly submit to journals ranked just above yours on some list, ignoring whether the journal's audience actually cares about your topic. A methodological paper using machine learning techniques might look great on paper for a theory journal, but the editors there will likely send it to applied economics journals where the work belongs. The reverse happens constantly too. Applied empirical work gets submitted to theoretical journals and gets desk-rejected because the reviewers don't have the expertise to evaluate the methodology properly. Another trap is ignoring open access requirements at your institution. Many universities now require publications to be in open access venues or to have a preprint available. If you target a traditional subscription journal without checking whether your institution has a transformational agreement or whether you can archive the accepted manuscript, you might violate policy. I spent three weeks dealing with my university's compliance office because I didn't check beforehand. Worth five minutes of due diligence.
Practical Steps for Building Your Publication Strategy
Start by making a spreadsheet. Columns should include journal name, tier classification, average review time, acceptance rate if available, open access policy, recent special issues, and whether the journal accepts working papers or preprints. I built this for about forty journals over a weekend and it completely changed how I approach submissions. Next, identify your backup options before you submit anywhere. Always have a second choice and a third choice mapped out. If a journal rejects you, you should be able to resubmit within a week, not spend another month researching where to send the paper. I keep a running list of three alternative journals for every project I start. Consider arXiv or NBER working paper series as a first step. Getting a citation or feedback on a working paper version can strengthen your eventual journal submission. Several of my papers were significantly improved after I posted preliminary versions and received comments from people who weren't the official reviewers. The Economics Journal Best hierarchy doesn't penalize you for having a working paper out there first. In fact, some editors view it positively because it shows the work has been externally vetted to some degree.
If you're early in your career, don't obsess exclusively over the top five. A strong record in solid second-tier journals will serve you better than a CV full of rejections from places that aren't right for your work. I watched a PhD student from my cohort spend three years trying to get into Econometrica with a paper that would have been perfect for Journal of Econometrics. He ended up with nothing published while his peers built real careers in good field journals. Time is your scarcest resource. The bottom line is that Economics Journal Best is a starting point for research, not a destination. Your goal should be publishing in journals where your work will be read, cited, and debated by the people who actually care about it. That requires knowing your audience, understanding the review process, and being strategic about where you invest your limited time and energy.
