Professors Beyond the Lecture Hall: Gerhard Toews’s Story
Gerhard Toews, an Assistant Professor at NES, is an applied economist with an interest in natural resource economics, political economy, economic growth and economic history.
In the interview, Gerhard shares his unconventional path into academia, touching his childhood and formative experiences. He reflects on the academic environment at NES and challenges in collaborative research, as well as the interplay between his fieldwork-driven research and travels.
Career path: trial and error
«It wasn’t a plan I had ex-ante, it’s just 'trial and error'.»
Anna: How have you started your career? Why have you started in academia?
Gerhard: I'm not from an academic family, I'm from a migrant family moving in the late 80s, just before the Soviet Union collapsed, from Karaganda, Kazakhstan, to Germany, and I grew up there. Until the Master’s, I wasn't even completely aware of what a PhD is. I think, only during the Master’s I started grasping the concept. The reason I kept going is not because I had a clear goal in mind, I just tried different things. I just kept moving until I reached the point which I liked. So, it wasn't a plan I had ex-ante, it's just ‘trial and error’. Before trying the PhD, I've tried many other things.
G: During the Bachelor's, I worked the whole summer because I thought this is where I might end up. Basically, I worked for Schufa. It's not a well-known but important institution in Germany, which collects information on individuals and firms and provides this information to banks, which then use this information to decide whether to give you a loan or not. So, this is the only institution in Germany which is allowed to have this data.
A: So, you worked as some kind of a junior specialist?
G: I wouldn’t call it a specialist anyway [laughing]. I was working with data, and I think, this is where I started liking it. This was the first time I had somebody competent next to me to explain how to run a logit or probit regression, or whatever.
Then, after the Bachelor’s, which was management in accounting and business, I worked for the German Chamber of Commerce in Kazakhstan. I thought to maybe combine economics with international relations, but after half a year, I understood that what they were doing didn't seem sufficiently solid - it felt like making arguments out of thin air.
This is when I decided to do Master's in Economics. And this is where I understood that Economics is so cool and I want to do it. After the Master’s I went to Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan), and conducted interviews to collect data for the research team in Götingen.
The non-financial compass: family, coal, and the joy of research
«I just enjoy thinking about it and so I just keep doing because I enjoy it»
A: Would you do the research work, if money wasn’t a thing?
G: I think most people who choose to stay in academia are not motivated by money too much, since there are outside options, offering much more. So, obviously this choice needs to be compensated somehow.
I grew up in a coal mining town, completely dependent on it. Most of my uncles and my father were either engineers or miners. When you live with this, you understand how the economics of coal industry affects your life. So, I just enjoy thinking about it and I keep doing because I enjoy it.
As I said, it's not always clear at all ex-ante what you enjoy doing. Before me starting the PhD, I wouldn't even know whether I would enjoy doing research. It turned out that I did.
Necessary characteristic of a researcher
«During your Bachelor’s and Master’s the system forces you to do things — if you don’t, you kicked out, while in academia, you’re by yourself»
A: What’s different about PhD comparing to Bachelor's or Master's?
G: During your Bachelor's and Master's the system forces you to do things — if you don't, you're kicked out. You’re constantly under time pressure, facing exams, essay submissions, thesis, whatever. While in academia, you’re by yourself. If you don't push the idea you want to explore, nobody will push it for you. So, you need to be incredibly stubborn — I think this is a necessary characteristic.
I've seen many people who were incredibly smart, but struggled sticking to one specific task. The mind was constantly looking for new ideas and adventures, and they didn't focus for sufficiently long to actually finish the painful parts of the argument necessary for the thesis. On the other hand, people who were less intelligent, in my opinion, would perform much better in the PhD because they would be able to go through this.
A: Well, you said that working with data makes you meditate.
G: [laughing] Yes. I think that's exactly the point. I mean, you don't need to love every part of your job, but you want to minimize the parts which you hate, at least. And there are a few things which I hate about my job.
Teaching: the other side of the coin
«…there are a few things which I hate about my job.»
A: Which things do you hate about your job? Fingers crossed that it's not teaching or giving interviews to students :)
G: No. No. I don't like marking because, oh, it's unpleasant. But you have to do this. Also, you sometimes have administrative tasks, such as discussing the design of the new MyNES webpage. I would prefer to do my research or teaching. The great thing is that there are people who are excited about it, so you can self-select into the things which you like more.
Starting in academia: motivation
«Do you know the feeling when you understand something, but it’s not quite there yet and it’s a little foggy?»
A: What would you recommend to a person who is stubborn enough, and encouraged to start a career in academia?
G: I think that the coolest thing I got out of the PhD is the following. Do you know the feeling that you understand something, but it's not quite there yet and it's kind of foggy? Because you're not quite sure about the completeness, the correctness of the argument and your thoughts are a bit messy.
G: Yeah, yeah, exactly. So what I think the PhD helped me with — is resolving it. Again, I want to emphasise: it still comes back regularly, but during the PhD, you're forced to take this mess and put this cleanly into the cupboard. And that's a very pleasant feeling. You keep doing it on a topic you emotionally connect to, in my case, this is natural resources. So, if one thinks of life as of maximizing quality and number of cool experiences — obviously, that's one of them.
What I recommend, is trying this as an experience and figuring out whether this is a feeling you would enjoy.
Competition in academia has become intense
«The requirements, which a student needs to meet to get a chance to be accepted for a PhD, are on a different level now»
A: Has anything changed in academia since you started your PhD?
G: I started my PhD 15 years ago. It feels like a lot has changed. In particular, it the competition became much harsher. I mean, over the several years people moved from «if you finish a Master's or Bachelor's at NES or HSE, you can apply for a PhD and go on» to now, when you first spend two years on a predoc, and then go for the PhD. By that time, if you did your predoc at the right university, you have an extremely cool CV.
When I applied… First of all, I've sent letters and emails, because universities didn’t have e-mails yet. Second, I applied only to four places and not systematically. I feel that in my case, I was much less prepared than all of you here. It feels like it became much more competitive. The requirements, which a student needs to meet to get a chance to be accepted for a PhD, I think, are on a different level now.
Ethical considerations in academia
«A very common concept, for some reason, is that a slightly senior person takes you as a co-author and then you essentially do all the work and, for some reason, the name of this slightly senior person is on the paper.»
A: Are there some ethical considerations that are the most pressing in your work today?
G: A personal thing, but I know that at least some people struggle with this — free-riding. It is a big problem in academia. A very common concept, for some reason, is that a slightly senior person takes you as a co-author. Then, you essentially do all the work and, for some reason, the name of this slightly senior person is on the paper. This has been annoying me from the very beginning. These people are of a specific type. I would call them shameless and, uh, socially well connected. So, it's difficult to fight them.
Uh, is that a big problem? Well, maybe not, maybe the fact that mineral companies are exploiting children to extract coal is a bigger problem? Yeah, sure it is. In the end of the day, I think I've learned to screen people for co-authorships.
Moving to Russia aligns with mission [im]possible
«I'm trying very, very hard to actually select and work on those research projects, which have the highest potential for policy implications»
A: So, I think that one of the interesting questions is how you see your impact on the industry, policy, society?
G: This one I have a very good answer for. The reason why I'm in Russia is threefold. First one — I wanted to live in a big city, and Moscow is a big city. Second, I wanted to live not too far away from Germany. Moscow, again, fits this criteria. Third, I wanted to move to a resource-rich economy, in particular, one which is dependent on oil, gas, coal, because that's what I am doing. In Europe you have just two options: Norway and Russia. And Norway doesn't have a big city.
I'm trying very, very hard to actually select and work on those research projects, which have the highest potential for policy implications. Ex-ante it is difficult to know, but surely that's what I'm thinking about before I start. Unfortunately, not every government wants to listen to you, but, clearly the contribution motivates me.
A: What are the unanswered questions that keep you motivated to proceed?
G: One is climate change. I genuinely think that Russia is moving with the great optimism into this new world thinking, «Oh, the country will become warmer, we will produce more fruits and everything will be great». But if you just look at the facts: permafrost is melting and buildings are collapsing, natural disasters are increasing in frequency and intensity. I want to put on paper what the cliamte change means to Russia because I don't think this has been properly done.
The other thing is related to my childhood memory of Karaganda. I tried to understand what happens to mining towns which collapse because of the vanished demand for the natural resource. Trying to understand how to buffer those negative shocks is very important, especially for the people, but more generally for the government.
The third one sounds like Karl Marks' question [smiling]. There are rents from resources and you need to decide how to share them between the workers, the capital owners and the people. I think, the way rents are shared, in particular, in natural resource extraction, is a disaster. How this can be improved — that's what I'm thinking about.
Working at NES
Professors' community: sharpening ideas, collaboration, insights
«My supervisor, Tony Venables, used to say that co-authorships are like families: they are always different and you need to manage them»
A: The first question that came up to my mind is about collaboration. Is there any potential there?
G: Yeah, absolutely! I talk with my colleagues about the ideas I have. Why is it this useful? Because it actually eliminates the fog, which we were talking about. While you're talking, your arguments become more precise, until the fog is gone. And I like talking not only to my colleagues, but also to my parents, to my friends…
A: Are there any insights for you as a result of collaboration with other people? Maybe not the research related, but also some kind of life insights.
G: My supervisor, Tony Venables, used to say that co-authorships are like families: they are always different and you need to manage them. I would say that in all of my good projects, I would repeatedly disagree with my co-authors. For example, with Marta (Marta Troya Martinez) we have had this as well.
You're spending so much time together, thinking about an idea. At some point, you disagree during this process. By resolving the disagreement, you actually make the argument stronger. I think it's incredibly useful for the project, and through the process you also bond.
A: Is it difficult to find friendship at NES?
G: I don't think so. I don't know what others think [laughing]. To be fair, I came here because I was already friends with Misha and Marta (Mikhail Drugov and Marta Troya Martinez). I know Marta because we both did the PhD in the UK. But I'm extremely happy with my colleagues not only for professional, but also for private characters.
Professor's perspective: the most valuable thing at NES
«It’s a bit like you’re living in a bubble where you interact with smart, nice, decent human beings»
A: What do you value the most at NES?
G: That's a tricky one, I seriously think there are many things equally important to me. If you press me to identify one, I choose the quality of the students.
I'm not exaggerating, and I'm sure many of my colleagues would agree. It is cool, when you're doing the lecture and can see the connection. Also, it's cool to have these high quality conversations, which, of course, is correlated with the teaching experience. It's a bit like you're living in a bubble, where you interact with smart, nice, decent human beings — that's, I think, what makes a huge difference to many other places.
A: It's a pleasure to get such an answer. So, how do you balance between teaching and research?
G: Oh, it's difficult. The way the world works: the main criteria for getting a tenure position at the university is your publication record, not your teaching evaluation. So the incentives are such that you're focusing on the former, not on the latter. You should be. But of course, if you like your job, whatever your incentives are, you do it because you believe that's the right thing to do. So you invest in teaching because you want to do a good job. And that crowds out time for other things.
I want to add that despite being exhausted now, at the end of my teaching period — because I tried to keep my research alive while teaching, — I think, it's highly complementary, since I'm interacting with students and I'm teaching the stuff I like.
Fun, adventures and spare time
Travelling
«Surely, my profession dictates where I’m traveling, but I wouldn’t call it business. I would always call it leisure»
G: Unfortunately, the current situation is complicated. I used to travel more, now I travel less, but I try my very best. Two years ago, I managed to go to a conference in Alaska and in a month, I'm going to a conference in Almaty. Kazakhstan is my country of origin, so I'm looking forward to go.
A: During the lectures you have mentioned a couple of your trips with other professors. For example, you mentioned your trip to Samara.
G: Ah, with Michele (Michele Valsecchi)! Yes, that's true. My ancestors moved to the area of Saratov and Samara in the 18th century, and one of the first thing I wanted to do whenever I arrive to Moscow is actually to travel there. I told Michele and another professor, and the three of us jointly flew to Kazan, then took the car south, and visited the villages where my ancestors were.
A: Sounds increadibly nice. You also mentioned, that you' ve traveled to Mozambique and to Norway. So is there a difference between the travels you opted for on business and vacation ?
G: The thing is, I like what I'm doing. So I don't think of it as business. For instance, last time I went to Norway, we had a small workshop on resources. Two of my friends came there, and we worked for two days, aferwards we had a few beers, and the day after we went up a small mountain. Do you call this business or leisure trip? Surely, my profession dictates where I'm traveling, but I wouldn't call it business. I would always call it leisure.
A: What was the most adventurous or the most awkward thing that hapened to youon a trip?
G: There are few. And none of them I can say on tape [laughing]. I think one of the cool things happened to me in Brazil, when I was 20. My cousin worked as a Christian missionary there, and I worked there with him. Once we thought, «Oh, let's take the bus and drive to Chile». That's like crossing the continent.
We arrived in Santiago de Chile, and it was really cool, we spent a few days there and enjoyed it. On the way back, when crossing the mountains in Chile, we got robbed. We were left with our stuff but without any money and without our passports. My cousin, who still had his Bible and was a missionary, started doing this amazing thing. Basically, he would arrive to the bus station and say, «Hi. I'm a missionary, this is my cousin. We just got robbed. Could you please help us with the tickets?»
Long story short, in 48 hours, we got a place to sleep and bus tickets back to Foz do Iguaçu, those beautiful waterfalls at the border between Brazil and Argentina, where our friends would pick us up by car and all the way people would constantly give us food.
Free time, hobbies, wishes, work-life balance
«My work is my hobby and I enjoy it very much»
A: What about your hobbies? What do you enjoy in your free time?
G: I genuinely love reading. I don't have the energy right now, in particular during the teaching period, but I like it. One of the few things I still try to take time for is listening to books. I'm trying to listen to half an hour to one hour a day.
I also try to have great relationships in my life. I cannot have many, but I have a small, clearly defined set of them, and I try to make sure that they remain of high quality. So I spend time with these people, which are family, friends, friends from childhood, friends here or in other countries, and this is time-consuming.
So, reading and collecting positive emotional experience with people I care about are — if you want to call it — hobbies, I guess. In terms of specific type of sport or something, I just don't have it. My work is my hobby and I enjoy it very much doing it.
A: As soon as we have started talking about books, what’s the most recent recommendation in behavioral economics?
G: This is, I think, a very cool book called «Behave» by Robert Sapolski, a guy from Stanford, he's a neurobiologist. If you want me to summarize the book, I would call it the biological micro-foundations of microeconomics. That's an extremely long book and it it took me time to fight through the first couple of chapters, but I think it's worth it.
Endeavours, moral compass and principles
«I still have this association with Mafia that people are lying, which undermines trust. Imagine playing it with your partner! You basically observe how the person is lying to you in front of everybody else»
A: Is there anything that you haven't tried yet, but you want to try?
G: Okay, that's a deep one… When I was 25 or something, I wrote a list of things, I want to do before I die. I've done them. I finished the list, so I'm actually in the process of creating a new one. So I cannot tell you something nice.
A: Well, then I guess we will see later, when the list is done. About something small: I've heard that you don't like playing Mafia, one of your former students told me that.
G: [laughing] Yes, I remember. That's true. I even remember the situation. Oh my God, that seems so long ago. Look, I think Mafia is a great game, as far as I know, the idea was developed by a psychologist student that MSU. But why I don't like it is a personal story.
I would play it with my brother and his friends, and I still remember him being the Mafia, and lying to me during the game. I suppose, this had a negative long-term effect on our relationship, because he was so good at it and I believed him. That, I think, undermined trust between the two of us. Ever since I have this association with Mafia and lying, which undermines trust. Imagine playing it with your partner! You basically observe how the person is lying to you in front of everybody else. This is why I don't play it.
A: So, honesty is the core. What else? What you value in people?
G: Oh. For sure, integrity, no doubt about that. Not the same opinion, not loyalty, not success — none of those. Integrity, being truthful to other people and consistent in behavior, and also to him- or herself, which is nearly a necessary condition for the former. I like the British word ‘genuine’. Sometimes you meet a person, you talk to them, and you feel there's something not genuine about this. I think for this to be genuine, you actually need this «the person is honest to herself and to others». And then you can have this qualitative conversation.
We extend our heartfelt gratitude to Gerhard Toews for his generosity in sharing his time, insights, and personal journey. His genuine reflections on academia, research, and the formative experiences offer invaluable perspectives for students.
To the readers, we hope this conversation inspires curiosity about the intersections of economics, ethics, and human resilience.
Finally, we celebrate Gerhard’s Birthday and wish him continued success in his quest to illuminate the complexities of natural resource economies, guided by his steadfast commitment to integrity, fairness, and the pursuit of knowledge for societal good.