Quick answer: Economists are less stress-exposed than most Australian occupations — ranked #315 of 317 by workplace mental health hazard exposure, with a composite stress score of 30.8/100 against a national average of 47.4.
Economists stress profile vs the national average
Each occupation is scored across six categories of workplace mental health hazard, built from 22 stress factors identified in SafeWork Australia's occupational hazards data. Higher scores mean greater exposure.
- Emotional demands17.8 vs 37.9 avg
- Responsibility burden35.2 vs 60 avg
- Pace and demands54.5 vs 56 avg
- Lack of control6 vs 24.5 avg
- Precision and monotony58.8 vs 67.7 avg
- Physical environment12.4 vs 38.2 avg
Scores range 0–100; higher = more stress-inducing. Source: SafeWork Australia Beta Occupational Hazards Dataset.
What drives the score for economists
The occupation scores below the national average for physical environment (12.4 vs 38.2), responsibility burden (35.2 vs 60) and emotional demands (17.8 vs 37.9), which moderates the overall ranking.
See how this compares across all 317 Australian occupations, ranked by stress score.
The biggest stress factors for economists
- 1Pace and demands
Duration of Typical Work Week
86.5/100
All-occupation average: 62.1
- 2Precision and monotony
Importance of Being Exact or Accurate
83.8/100
All-occupation average: 78.6
- 3Pace and demands
Level of Competition
72.8/100
All-occupation average: 52.4
- 4Pace and demands
Time Pressure
61.2/100
All-occupation average: 71.6
- 5Responsibility burden
Impact of Decisions on Co-workers or Company Results
55.5/100
All-occupation average: 70.4
All 22 stress factors for economists
The complete scorecard: every stress factor measured for this occupation, grouped into the six categories, with the all-occupation average alongside.
Emotional demands
17.8 vs 37.9 avg- Deal With Physically Aggressive People0 vs 14
- Deal With Unpleasant or Angry People26 vs 50.4
- Frequency of Conflict Situations27.2 vs 49.3
Responsibility burden
35.2 vs 60 avg- Responsibility for Outcomes and Results33.8 vs 58.5
- Responsible for Others' Health and Safety9.8 vs 57.3
- Impact of Decisions on Co-workers or Company Results55.5 vs 70.4
- Consequence of Error32.5 vs 49
- Coordinate or Lead Others44.5 vs 64.9
Pace and demands
54.5 vs 56 avg- Time Pressure61.2 vs 71.6
- Duration of Typical Work Week86.5 vs 62.1
- Pace Determined by Speed of Equipment4.2 vs 23.1
- Frequency of Decision Making47.8 vs 70.7
- Level of Competition72.8 vs 52.4
Lack of control
6 vs 24.5 avg- Lack of Autonomy to Make Decisions5.5 vs 23.6
- Amount of Highly Structured Work6.5 vs 25.3
Precision and monotony
58.8 vs 67.7 avg- Importance of Repeating Same Tasks33.8 vs 56.9
- Importance of Being Exact or Accurate83.8 vs 78.6
Physical environment
12.4 vs 38.2 avg- Sounds and Noise Levels Are Distracting or Uncomfortable15.2 vs 52.3
- Extremely Bright or Inadequate Lighting5.5 vs 24.9
- Very Hot or Cold Temperatures3.2 vs 32.4
- Exposed to Disease or Infections5.5 vs 20.2
- Physical Proximity32.5 vs 61.1
Methodology
Clearhead scored 317 occupations in the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations (ANZSCO) using SafeWork Australia's Beta Occupational Hazards Dataset. We kept only the 22 hazard variables relating to mental health — such as conflict exposure, decision-making pressure, and time pressure — and deliberately excluded physical safety risks like working at height.
The 22 variables are grouped into six categories: emotional demands, responsibility burden, pace and demands, lack of control, precision and monotony, and physical environment. An occupation's composite score is the equally weighted average of its six category scores. All scores run 0–100, where higher means more stress-inducing.
Two control-related variables are reported by SafeWork with inverted polarity (“freedom to make decisions” and “structured versus unstructured work”). We reverse these and present them as lack of autonomy to make decisions and amount of highly structured work, so that a higher score consistently indicates greater stress exposure.
Hazard exposure describes the average conditions of an occupation, not any individual's experience — everyone has a different tolerance for these challenges, and conditions vary between workplaces.
Frequently asked questions
Economists: how stressful is the job?
Economists rank #315 out of 317 Australian occupations for workplace mental health hazards, with a composite stress score of 30.8/100 against a national average of 47.4. That makes the occupation more stress-exposed than 0.6% of Australian jobs.
What are the biggest mental health stress factors for economists?
The highest-scoring hazards are duration of typical work week (86.5/100), importance of being exact or accurate (83.8/100) and level of competition (72.8/100).
Which stress factors are lower for economists?
Economists score below the national average for emotional demands (17.8 vs 37.9 average) and responsibility burden (35.2 vs 60 average) and pace and demands (54.5 vs 56 average) and lack of control (6 vs 24.5 average) and precision and monotony (58.8 vs 67.7 average) and physical environment (12.4 vs 38.2 average), which partially offsets the higher-scoring hazards.
Where does this data come from?
Scores are derived from SafeWork Australia's Beta Occupational Hazards Dataset. Clearhead filtered the dataset to the 22 mental-health-related hazard variables — excluding physical safety risks — and scored 317 ANZSCO occupations across six categories: emotional demands, responsibility burden, pace and demands, lack of control, precision and monotony, and physical environment.
Beyond the average
This is the average hazard exposure for economists. Your workforce isn't average.
Clearhead's Psychosocial Risk Pulse measures the actual psychosocial risk in your organisation, quarterly — across 18 ISO 45003-aligned work factors.