These GCSE Economics 2017 spec topics consistently produce the lowest scores. Prioritise these in your revision.
!
Price Elasticity of Supply (PES) — concept, calculation, and real-world application
PES appears in Paper 2 every year and is repeatedly identified as a weak area. In 2023, a significant number of candidates were unfamiliar with PES despite it appearing on the advance information. In 2025, some candidates mixed PES with PED. Application of PES to specific markets (e.g. why housing supply is price inelastic) generates particularly poor responses.
Affects: Paper 2
!
Evaluation in extended responses — providing a reasoned overall judgement
The single most consistently flagged weakness across all three years and both papers. Candidates provide analysis but omit evaluation, capping themselves at Level 2. This applies to 'discuss' questions in Section C (Paper 1) and extended questions in Paper 2. Examiners state this explicitly in the subject overview of the 2024 and 2025 reports.
Affects: Paper 1, Paper 2
!
Distinguishing private and external costs/benefits — externality analysis
In 2023, Paper 2 Q2(f), examiners stated 'many failed to differentiate between private and external costs and benefits — a fundamental concept at GCSE level'. Candidates who could make this distinction clearly and produce an explicit judgement achieved full marks; those who could not were restricted to lower levels.
Affects: Paper 2
!
Market failure and negative externalities — definition and diagram
In 2025, Paper 2 Q5(a)(ii), many candidates were unable to explain what market failure was. Some candidates defined market failure but did not connect it to climate change as an example of negative externalities. Understanding market failure as a concept — and distinguishing it from government failure — is a recurring gap.
Affects: Paper 2
!
Macroeconomic policy evaluation — identifying drawbacks and limitations of policies
In 2023, candidates who failed to discuss drawbacks of fiscal, monetary, or supply-side policies were limited to Level 2 in Section C. In 2024, the same pattern repeated — candidates produced good analysis of policies but did not evaluate their limitations. In 2025, weaker responses on fiscal policy were too descriptive and lacked depth.
Affects: Paper 1
!
Interpreting and applying stimulus data — rather than giving generic answers
Across all three years, the subject overview highlights that candidates ignored stimulus material (tables, graphs, case study text) and gave generic answers. In 2023, candidates gave 'generalised responses about macroeconomic implications of rising prices' instead of focusing on the specific housing market context asked. This costs AO2 application marks.
Affects: Paper 1, Paper 2
!
Characteristics and measurement of macroeconomic indicators — unemployment and inflation
In 2025, many candidates struggled to explain how unemployment is measured, particularly the distinction between the Claimant Count and the Labour Force Survey. Inflation was generally well defined, but weaker candidates confused it with rising wages or specific price increases rather than a sustained general rise in the price level.
Affects: Paper 1
!
Nationalisation, trade unions, and financial products — less familiar applied concepts
In 2024, some candidates did not fully understand nationalisation. In 2023 and 2024, candidates confused store cards with gift/loyalty cards and could not explain a bank overdraft. These are lower-frequency topics but generate disproportionate mark losses because candidates do not prepare them as thoroughly as core macro topics.
Affects: Paper 1, Paper 2
