Review of Economic Studies Submission Guide

Source: ReStud Submissions, ReStud Editorial Board, Clarivate JCR 2024, accessed April 2026.

The timeline matters because ReStud's first screen is not a generic OUP workflow. It is an economics-specific Editorial Express process shaped by managing-editor fit and the 45-page hard cap.

Week 0: Editorial Express upload

This is where the PDF, fee payment, 45-page cap, 150-word abstract, online appendix, author information, and cover letter have to be complete before the managing editor sees the paper.

Week 1: managing-editor assignment

The assignment is an economics-field routing decision, not an Oxford Academic production step. The package should make the theory, applied econometrics, finance, trade, IO, or related subfield obvious.

Weeks 2 to 6: desk screen

The managing editor tests whether the contribution is broad enough for ReStud rather than a field journal, while also checking whether the submission violates the hard page and appendix constraints.

Weeks 4 to 16: referee invitations and reports

If the paper clears desk, the referee stage turns on whether the main file lets reviewers evaluate the theory, identification, data, programs, supplementary appendix, and robustness evidence without reconstructing the paper.

ReStud's hard length rule is one of the strictest in top economics:

Verbatim from the ReStud submissions page: "Papers should be under 45 pages, including title, tables, figures, references, and appendices."

That's stricter than JF (60 pages) and stricter than QJE (no hard cap). Authors arriving from QJE or JFE routinely submit 70-page manuscripts and discover the cap pre-review.

The second rule that's easy to miss: online appendices are capped at 30 pages maximum. This is unusual. Most journals treat the online appendix as an unlimited spillover for supporting analyses; ReStud doesn't. If your robustness tables, additional specifications, and supplementary proofs together run more than 30 pages, you're over the online-appendix limit too.

The third rule that's actually useful: manuscript-length exceptions exist, handled by Elias Papaioannou directly by email before submission. The exception path is real but is reserved for papers where the case for length is structural (long mathematical derivations, multi-part empirical-theory packages, etc.), not for authors who haven't cut. If you're at 50 pages and could be at 44 with disciplined editing, the exception request is unlikely to succeed.

The practical consequence: the 30 minutes spent compressing the main text and pushing material to a 30-page-capped online appendix is the highest-ROI work in the entire submission process. Authors who arrive with a 65-page manuscript at QJE-style length expectations face mechanical desk-rejection regardless of substance.

Source: ReStud Submissions page, fee structure effective July 1, 2023.

ReStud explains the policy directly: the journal receives nearly 2,000 submissions per year, of which half go through full refereeing. The fee covers editor time spent on the desk-screen for every submission, not just papers that go to referees. This framing matters because it tells you what the editorial team thinks the desk-decision is worth: a 1-of-2,000 attention slot at $200 each.

ReStud uses a multi-managing-editor process. As of 2026, the joint managing editors include:

• Jan De Loecker (KU Leuven), industrial organization, applied econometrics

• Antonio Penta (Universitat Pompeu Fabra), microeconomic theory, mechanism design

• Jakub Steiner (University of Zurich, CERGE-EI, CTS), behavioral economics, information economics

• Victoria Vanasco, financial economics

• Thomas Chaney, international trade

The editorial board is chaired by Ruben Enikolopov. Elias Papaioannou handles manuscript-length exception requests outside the regular submission flow.

The practical consequence: when you submit, your paper is assigned to one managing editor based on field fit. Knowing the editor lineup means knowing whose taste your paper is going through. ReStud's editor rotation is more frequent than QJE's: De Loecker, Penta, and Steiner all joined in early-to-mid 2025, and editorial preferences are visibly shifting. Recent advance articles are the best signal for current editorial direction.

ReStud desk-rejects ~50% of submissions, similar to JF and lower than QJE. The desk screen turns on three operational signals:

1. The contribution is theoretical-mechanism-clear or empirically-identified. ReStud has a strong tradition in microeconomic theory and applied econometrics. For theory papers, the mechanism must be explainable in a paragraph and the result must matter beyond the immediate model. For empirical papers, the identification strategy must be visible from the introduction (similar to JF). ReStud is unforgiving on either path: theory without a clear mechanism or empirics without credible identification get desk-rejected fast.

2. The paper fits within 45 pages or has a structural reason it cannot. The page limit is real and screened pre-review. If your paper is 50 pages because you couldn't bear to cut the proofs, that's a fail. If it's 50 pages because the proofs structurally require that many pages and the writing is already disciplined, the length-exception path through Elias Papaioannou is the intended escape valve.

3. The contribution sits at the theory/empirical interface ReStud particularly rewards. ReStud has historically published papers that integrate theory and empirics: papers where a structural model is taken to data, papers where empirical results constrain the theoretical interpretation, papers where mechanism design is implemented and tested. Pure-theory papers without applied implication and pure-empirics papers without theoretical structure both fit better at AEJ family or specialty journals like Theoretical Economics or RAND.

Before submitting to Review of Economic Studies, a Review of Economic Studies manuscript fit check identifies whether the package meets the editorial bar before you commit to the submission.

Recent advance and issue papers, with DOIs:

• "The Heterogeneous Effects of Government Spending: It's All About Taxes" by Axelle Ferrière and Gaston Navarro (NYU, 2024), 10.1093/restud/rdae032. Empirical identification of heterogeneous fiscal-policy effects with explicit theoretical mechanism for tax-financing channels.

• Advance article (December 30, 2025), 10.1093/restud/rdaf098. One of the late-2025 advance articles representing the new editorial team's selections.

• Advance article by Eric Anderson and co-authors (January 13, 2026), 10.1093/restud/rdag001. Among the first 2026 papers under the De Loecker / Penta / Steiner editorial team.

The pattern across recent ReStud papers: tight theoretical or empirical contributions where the methodological approach and the substantive result are equally legible. Papers that are 100% applied without theoretical framing tend to land at AEJ Applied or specialty journals; papers that are 100% theory without empirical implication tend to land at Theoretical Economics.

For the initial submission via Editorial Express, you provide:

1. The manuscript as a single PDF. 1.5-spaced, 12-point font, 1-inch minimum margins, consecutively numbered pages.

1. Manuscript under 45 pages total including title, tables, figures, references, and appendices. If structurally longer, request an exception from Elias Papaioannou by email before submission.

1. Abstract under 150 words plus keywords.

1. Online appendix as a separate file, capped at 30 pages.

1. Submission fee payment ($200 standard / $120 reduced).

1. Cover letter with any data/programs exemption requests at first submission, or COI disclosures.

1. Author information entered into Editorial Express, including funding statement, conflicts of interest, author contributions if requested, data availability/programs statement or exemption, supplementary materials, references, and any online appendix files.

A Review of Economic Studies submission readiness check before upload can flag whether the manuscript fits the 45-page rule cleanly, whether the abstract stays under 150 words while remaining comprehensible, and whether the contribution sits in ReStud's theory/empirical sweet spot.

Desk decisions at ReStud arrive in 2 to 6 weeks. That's slower than QJE (~2 weeks) but in line with JF (median ~10-25 days desk). Papers that survive desk and go to referees typically see first decisions in 3 to 6 months, depending on reviewer availability and revision cycles.

Start with the official rules for upload mechanics, then judge the draft itself. The review tells you whether your paper clears the Review of Economic Studies fit check before upload, especially around manuscript exceeds 45 pages including appendices, with no structural reason for the length, theoretical mechanism is implicit rather than stated explicitly in the introduction, and empirical paper without theoretical structure for an editorial team that rewards integration. Paid Manusights reviews include a 60-day money-back guarantee, and we do not train models on submitted manuscripts.

Across ReStud-targeted manuscripts, three editorial flags drive desk rejection most frequently.

Manuscript exceeds 45 pages including appendices, with no structural reason for the length

This is the single most common cause of mechanical desk rejection at ReStud. Authors arriving from QJE (no cap) or JFE (no hard cap) routinely submit 65-70 page manuscripts, often with the assumption that "online appendix" means unlimited spillover. ReStud's online appendix is itself capped at 30 pages, and the main file's 45-page limit explicitly includes appendices.

The fix is mechanical and structural: cut the main text disciplinedly, move material to the 30-page-capped online appendix, or if length is structurally necessary, email Elias Papaioannou before submission to request the exception.

Check manuscript exceeds 45 pages including appendices, with no structural reason for before submitting to Review of Economic Studies →

Theoretical mechanism is implicit rather than stated explicitly in the introduction

ReStud's theory-leaning culture rewards papers where the mechanism is explainable in a paragraph in the introduction, not derived in section 3. Manuscripts where the mechanism only becomes visible after the model is fully specified routinely face desk-rejection from editors who are reading dozens of submissions per week and need to assess theoretical contribution from the first 5 pages. The fix is to write the introduction so a generalist economist can state the mechanism in one sentence after reading it.

Check theoretical mechanism is implicit rather than stated explicitly in the introduct before submitting to Review of Economic Studies →

Empirical paper without theoretical structure for an editorial team that rewards integration

ReStud has historically rewarded papers integrating theory and empirics. Pure-empirical papers without explicit theoretical structure face more competitive assessment at ReStud than at AEJ Applied or specialty journals. The fix is to either embed empirical work in a theoretical framework that the empirics test, or to recognize that the paper's natural home is AEJ Applied, ReStat, or a top field journal where pure-empirics fits more cleanly.

A ReStud manuscript readiness check can help assess whether the paper's theory/empirics integration is visible enough.

Check empirical paper without theoretical structure for an editorial team that rewards before submitting to Review of Economic Studies →

• Is the Review of Economic Studies a good journal?

• Journal of Political Economy Submission Guide

• Quarterly Journal of Economics Submission Guide

• Journal of Finance Submission Guide

Before the reviewer-invitation stage, read the Review of Economic Studies package against the same risks this guide flags in the Manusights section. The practical question is whether the abstract, cover letter, figures or tables, methods, reporting statements, supplementary files, and references all make the journal choice obvious.

• If the abstract still points toward manuscript exceeds 45 pages including appendices, with no structural reason for the length, revise the central claim before upload.

• If the evidence package leaves theoretical mechanism is implicit rather than stated explicitly in the introduction, strengthen the methods, controls, figures, or supplementary material rather than expecting reviewers to infer it.

• If the cover letter cannot resolve empirical paper without theoretical structure for an editorial team that rewards integration, compare the target journal against the adjacent venues named above before submitting.

Use these nearby guides when the target journal is still uncertain:

• Review Of Economic Studies submission guide

• The Journal of Economic Perspectives Submission Guide

• Journal of Economic Theory Submission Guide

• Journal of International Business Studies Submission Guide

• Journal of Marketing Submission Guide

• Organization Science Submission Guide

• Production and Operations Management Submission Guide

• Journal of Statistical Software Submission Guide

• Computers In Human Behavior Submission Guide

• Review of Financial Studies Submission Guide

• Review of Economics and Statistics Submission Guide

For the related journal overview, see Review Of Economic Studies submission guide. In our work on Review Of Economic Studies submissions, we observe that editors specifically screen the abstract, first figures, cover letter, and evidence package for whether the manuscript answers the journal's stated fit test; our analysis of Review Of Economic Studies pages treats those checks as submission-risk signals, not as official guidance.

Last verified: April 2026 against the official ReStud Submissions page, the ReStud Editorial Board page, and recent advance articles.