A-Level Economics
Your daily economics brief, mapped to your exam board
Real news, analysed by AI, mapped to your exam board. Supports all six UK specifications — AQA, Edexcel, OCR, WJEC, CCEA, and SQA.
How it works
News that teaches
Real-world economics, distilled into exam-ready insights every day.
AI-Powered Analysis
Every morning, Claude analyses the latest economics news and extracts the concepts, data, and arguments that matter for your exams.
Curriculum Mapped
Every article is mapped to your exam board's specification — AQA, Edexcel, OCR, WJEC, CCEA, or SQA — so you know exactly which topics it covers.
Daily Email Digest
A concise briefing delivered before school. Read it on the bus, in registration, or over breakfast.
Exam Technique Tips
Each article includes guidance on how the topic could appear in an exam and how to use the data in your answers.
Preview
See What You'll Get
Here's a taste of what students receive every morning — real news, mapped to your exam board, with exam-ready analysis.
Sunday, 8 February 2026
Brexit Bites: UK Farm Exports Plunge 37% as Trade Barriers Mount
Today's digest reveals how government intervention shapes our economic landscape, from Brexit's impact on British farming to the hidden costs of caring responsibilities. We explore international trade barriers (4.2.4), government spending decisions (4.1.5), and how changing consumer tastes are reshaping Britain's high streets (4.1.2). Plus, we discover why Team GB's rejected skeleton helmet is actually a fascinating case study in innovation versus regulation. And find out what happened on this day in economic history when European nations took a giant leap towards monetary union.
Post-Brexit sales of British farm products to EU fall by 37%
British farm product exports to the EU have fallen by 37% in the five years since Brexit, according to National Farmers' Union analysis of HMRC data. The decline affects products from beef to cheddar cheese, highlighting trade barriers from the UK's departure from the EU, and could take years to restore despite UK-EU reset efforts.
Exam Tip: This article is highly relevant for Paper 2 international trade questions (4.2.4.2) and protectionism discussions (4.2.4.4). Students can use concrete data on Brexit's trade impact to evaluate arguments about free trade versus protectionism, trading blocs (4.2.4.3), and non-tariff barriers. The 37% decline provides specific evidence of how trade barriers affect export volumes. It's excellent for evaluation in 25-mark essays - students can discuss the magnitude and persistence of trade effects, time lags for adjustment, and whether trade deals can restore losses. The NFU's warning it could take years illustrates dynamic effects of leaving trading blocs. Also useful for discussing balance of payments (4.2.4.5) impacts of reduced exports, and supply-side effects (4.1.2.6) of reduced market access on farmers.
UK’s ‘unsung army’ of full-time unpaid carers needs more support, report says
A Resolution Foundation report reveals that 1 million people in the UK provide full-time unpaid care, with one in three carers from poorer families unable to work due to their caring responsibilities. The trend reflects an ageing society and increasing ill-health and disability concentrated among working-age families in the poorest half of the population.
Exam Tip: This article is excellent for multiple specification areas. For labour markets (4.1.4.9), it shows how non-wage factors affect labour supply. For inequality (4.1.5.10), it demonstrates how caring responsibilities disproportionately affect poorer families. At macro level, it connects to employment/unemployment (4.2.3.2), aggregate supply constraints (4.2.2.7), and policy conflicts (4.2.3.4) - between supporting carers and maximising labour force participation. Students can use the '1 million full-time carers' statistic and '1 in 3 unable to work' figures in evaluation.
Have You Thought About This?
The Economics of an Illegal Helmet: When Innovation Meets Regulation
Inspired by: “Team GB skeleton helmet appeal dismissed by Cas”
When Team GB's skeleton athletes were banned from using their new helmets at the Winter Olympics, most people saw a sports controversy. But there's a fascinating economics story hiding in plain sight about innovation, regulation, and market failure. Here's the economic puzzle: Team GB invested resources into developing helmets that presumably offered a competitive advantage—better aerodynamics, improved safety, or both. They were seeking what economists call 'product differentiation' in the skeleton market. But the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled these helmets didn't comply with shape regulations. Why do such regulations exist, and what's their economic purpose? The answer lies in understanding sports as a market with unique characteristics. Unlike typical markets where innovation is celebrated, sports competitions require standardisation to maintain 'fair competition'—a form of market regulation. Without rules limiting equipment design, skeleton would become an 'arms race' of technology rather than athletic skill. Wealthier nations could simply outspend poorer ones on equipment R&D, creating significant barriers to entry for less-developed countries. This represents a potential market failure where unrestricted competition would lead to outcomes society deems undesirable. From a cost-benefit analysis perspective, Team GB now faces sunk costs—the investment in helmet development cannot be recovered. This connects to contestability in markets: the regulations act as 'barriers to entry' for new technology, reducing the contestability of equipment innovation. The helmets represent capital goods that cannot generate returns due to regulatory constraints. There's also an information asymmetry at play. The governing body possesses superior information about what constitutes 'legal' helmet shapes, but teams must invest resources before receiving definitive rulings. This imperfect information creates risk for innovators and potentially discourages beneficial technological advancement. The broader question is whether these regulations create government (or in this case, governing body) failure. Do they protect fair competition, or do they stifle innovation that could improve safety and performance? The regulations aim to correct one type of market failure but may inadvertently create another by limiting dynamic efficiency—the long-run improvement of products and processes. This sporting dispute reveals a fundamental economic tension: when should authorities intervene to maintain 'fair' market conditions, and when should they let innovation flourish?
‘We need to accept the cost’: future of British Steel unclear as bills for government build up
The UK government is spending over £1.2 million per day to keep British Steel's Scunthorpe site operational after taking emergency control from Chinese owner Jingye. The total cost has reached £359 million, with the government legally controlling operations while Jingye retains ownership, creating uncertainty about the steelworks' future.
Exam Tip: This article is highly relevant for discussing government intervention (4.1.5.8), subsidies, and potential government failure (4.1.5.9). Students can use specific data (£1.2m daily cost, £359m total) to evaluate whether subsidising loss-making industries represents efficient resource allocation. It connects to fiscal policy (4.2.3.5), supply-side policies (4.2.3.7), and international competitiveness (4.2.4.7). Perfect for 25-mark essays evaluating industrial policy, with clear evaluation points about opportunity cost, time lags, and competing policy objectives.
Historical Insight
When the European Monetary System Was Born
13 March 1979
On 13 March 1979, the European Monetary System (EMS) officially came into operation, creating the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) that linked European currencies within agreed bands of fluctuation. Led by France and West Germany, the EMS aimed to reduce exchange rate volatility and create monetary stability across the European Community. Member states agreed to maintain their currencies within 2.25% (or 6% for some) of central rates against each other, intervening in foreign exchange markets when necessary. The system represented a significant step toward monetary integration, establishing institutional frameworks for coordinated European monetary policy. The EMS replaced the previous 'snake in the tunnel' arrangement, which had struggled during the turbulent 1970s. This mechanism laid crucial groundwork for the eventual creation of the euro nearly two decades later, demonstrating how fixed exchange rate systems could foster economic cooperation. The EMS's legacy resonates powerfully in today's eurozone, home to 340 million people using a single currency. Modern debates about exchange rate systems—whether floating, fixed, or managed—directly echo the trade-offs the EMS confronted: monetary policy independence versus exchange rate stability. The 1992 ERM crisis, when speculation forced sterling and the lira out, taught policymakers about the vulnerabilities of semi-fixed systems in an era of mobile capital—lessons relevant as countries today navigate currency management amid global capital flows. The EMS experience informs current discussions about international monetary cooperation, from debates over yuan flexibility to proposals for global currency coordination. For A-Level students, the EMS illustrates how exchange rate regimes affect trade competitiveness, inflation control, and policy sovereignty—concepts central to understanding both UK monetary independence and European integration. Note: This feature is AI-generated. While care has been taken to ensure accuracy, dates and details should be independently verified for academic use.