Running / Training Science
Running Economy Explained: How to Run More Efficiently
Running economy describes how much energy a runner spends at a given pace. This guide reviews what research says about physiology, biomechanics, strength training, and equipment, and why individual differences matter.
This article is educational. It is not medical advice, a diagnosis, or an exercise prescription. Training methods, intensity, workload, and physical demands must be individualized according to health conditions, fitness level, and medical history.
A physician or other qualified healthcare professional should evaluate anyone with health concerns, symptoms, or a relevant medical history before a running or strength program is started or changed, and professional supervision is advisable. Exercise should stop, and medical attention should be sought, if pain or concerning symptoms occur. No result is guaranteed.
MoweSport may earn a commission when readers buy through affiliate links on this page, at no extra cost to them. Commissions do not influence the research summaries.
In brief: Running economy is typically defined as the energy demand of running at a constant submaximal speed, usually measured as oxygen uptake (Barnes & Kilding, 2015a). It is one of three physiological factors, alongside maximal oxygen uptake and lactate threshold, in a widely cited model of distance performance (Joyner, 1991). Research links running economy to biomechanics, strength training, footwear, and fatigue, but most findings come from trained runners, and a change that is economical in one athlete may be uneconomical in another (Barnes & Kilding, 2015a).
What running economy is
Running economy is the energy a runner needs to hold a given speed. Researchers usually define it as the steady-state oxygen uptake (VO2) at a constant submaximal running velocity, which reflects the energy demand of running at that speed (Barnes & Kilding, 2015a). A runner with better running economy uses less oxygen at the same pace than a runner with poorer economy.
Running economy is not a single trait. Barnes and Kilding (2015a) describe it as the sum of metabolic, cardiorespiratory, biomechanical, and neuromuscular characteristics during submaximal running, and Folland et al. (2017) noted that it varies widely between runners, by more than 30% in some reports. Many of these characteristics can adapt to training or other interventions, but an economical change in one athlete may be uneconomical in another because of differences in other physiological or biomechanical traits (Barnes & Kilding, 2015a). That caveat shapes everything that follows.
| Term | Plain-language meaning | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Running economy | The energy demand, typically oxygen uptake, at a given submaximal running speed. | Barnes & Kilding (2015a) |
| Maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) | The upper limit for aerobic metabolism. | Joyner (1991) |
| Lactate threshold | Related to the fraction of VO2max a runner can sustain in longer events. | Joyner (1991) |
| Metabolic efficiency | Use of available energy to support performance. | Barnes & Kilding (2015a) |
| Cardiopulmonary efficiency | Lower work output for the processes of oxygen transport and use. | Barnes & Kilding (2015a) |
Simplified from the categories of determining factors described by Barnes and Kilding (2015a).
Two runners share a maximal oxygen uptake of 55 mL/kg/min and run at the same steady pace. Runner A uses 40 mL/kg/min at that pace, and Runner B uses 44 mL/kg/min. Runner A is working at about 73% of maximum, while Runner B is at 80%, and Runner B is using roughly 10% more oxygen for the same speed.
The numbers are invented for illustration. They are not norms or targets, and real values require laboratory testing.
Running economy and aerobic efficiency
Joyner (1991) modeled distance performance from three physiological factors. Maximal oxygen uptake sets the upper limit for aerobic metabolism, lactate threshold relates to the fraction of that maximum that can be sustained, and running economy interacts with the other two to determine the speed at lactate threshold. The model used values reported for elite runners to test ideas about limiting factors, and the paper itself called for further refinement and testing. It was not designed to predict outcomes for individual recreational runners.
| Factor | Role in the model | In plain language |
|---|---|---|
| Maximal oxygen uptake | Upper limit for aerobic metabolism. | The ceiling of oxygen use. |
| Lactate threshold | Related to the fraction of maximal oxygen uptake sustained in events longer than about 3,000 m. | How much of the ceiling can be used for long stretches. |
| Running economy | Interacts with the other two to set the speed at lactate threshold. | How little energy a given speed costs. |
The word efficiency has two sides in this literature. Metabolic efficiency refers to using available energy to support performance, and cardiopulmonary efficiency refers to reduced work output for oxygen transport and use. Running economy reflects both, together with biomechanical and neuromuscular traits (Barnes & Kilding, 2015a).
Barnes and Kilding (2015b) reviewed endurance, interval, and resistance training, altitude exposure, stretching, and nutrition, and concluded that a range of interventions may improve running economy, while calling for more research on how far economy can be improved outside the laboratory. The review also noted that an optimal degree of flexibility and stiffness appears to maximize economy, so more flexibility is not automatically better. How aerobic base, weekly volume, and training structure build endurance is covered in MoweSport’s guide to improving running endurance. This article concentrates on the energy cost of a given pace.
Biomechanics: how running form relates to running economy
Moore (2016) reviewed modifiable biomechanical factors and found that several were associated with better running economy, while others showed inconsistent relationships. Folland et al. (2017) measured full-body kinematics in 97 endurance runners of diverse standards (47 female) and reported that technique variables explained about 39% of the variance in running economy and 31% of the variance in performance in that sample.
Using a preferred stride length range was associated with better running economy, and deviations of up to 3% shorter than the preferred stride length did not appear to be penalized (Moore, 2016). The finding suggests that runners tend to self-select economical stride patterns, which is one reason Moore advised caution about general technique recommendations.
Lower vertical oscillation was among the intrinsic factors that appeared beneficial for running economy (Moore, 2016). In the larger kinematic study, pelvis movement and ground-contact mechanics featured among the variables associated with economy (Folland et al., 2017).
Mechanics during ground contact appeared to play an important role, and the propulsion phase had the strongest direct links with running economy. Alignment of the ground reaction force with the leg axis during propulsion, less leg extension at toe-off, and low activation of lower-limb muscles during propulsion were associated with better economy (Moore, 2016).
Greater leg stiffness, a low lower-limb moment of inertia, and maintaining arm swing were also listed among the intrinsic factors associated with better economy (Moore, 2016). The review noted that other factors, such as orthotics, showed inconsistent relationships.
Associations are not instructions. The kinematic study compared runners with one another at one point in time, so it cannot show that changing a variable improves economy. Moore (2016) also noted recurring methodological problems, including assessing variables in isolation and relying on acute or short-term interventions, and concluded that recommending a general economical running technique should be approached with caution. Runners considering changes to their form can ask a qualified running coach or physical therapist for an individual assessment.
Strength training and running economy
Strength training is one of the most studied interventions for running economy. In one randomized trial, 17 well-trained runners who added heavy half-squats to their normal training improved running economy by about 5% and time to exhaustion at maximal aerobic speed, with no change in maximal oxygen uptake or body weight (Støren et al., 2008). Pooled evidence and a recent trial point in the same direction (Balsalobre-Fernández et al., 2016; Blagrove et al., 2018; Zanini et al., 2025), as the table summarizes.
| Study | Participants | Strength method studied | Reported finding | Caveat |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Støren et al. (2008) | 17 well-trained runners | Half-squats, four sets of four repetitions maximum, three times per week for eight weeks | About 5% better running economy; no change in maximal oxygen uptake or body weight. | Small sample; heavy loading needs technique instruction and supervision. |
| Balsalobre-Fernández et al. (2016) | 93 high-level middle- and long-distance runners in five trials | Low- to high-intensity resistance and plyometric exercise | Large beneficial effect on running economy. | Few trials; highly trained runners. |
| Blagrove et al. (2018) | 24 studies of runners with at least six months of experience | Heavy, explosive, or plyometric training for at least four weeks | Running economy generally improved by 2% to 8% versus controls when measured. | Protocols varied; not every study showed a benefit. |
| Zanini et al. (2025) | 28 well-trained male runners | Maximal strength and plyometrics, twice weekly for ten weeks | Improved running economy durability in a 90-minute run and better fatigued high-intensity performance. | Male runners only; highly trained. |
The protocols describe what the studies tested. They are not prescriptions.
Heavy and explosive exercise carries injury risk when poorly progressed, so technique instruction, gradual progression, and medical clearance are appropriate, particularly for beginners, runners returning from injury, and anyone with a health condition. A certified strength and conditioning professional can individualize exercises, loads, and weekly volume. Home equipment options for strength work are compared in MoweSport’s guide to resistance bands vs dumbbells.
Equipment, fatigue, and other influences on running performance
Running performance results from physiological, biomechanical, psychological, environmental, and tactical factors (Blagrove et al., 2018), so running economy is one input among several. Equipment and fatigue are two of the more practical ones.
Extrinsic factors associated with better running economy included a firm, compliant shoe-surface interaction and lightweight shoes (Moore, 2016). In a laboratory study of 18 high-caliber runners, prototype marathon shoes combining a highly compliant midsole foam with an embedded stiff plate lowered the energetic cost of running by about 4% on average compared with two established racing shoes (Hoogkamer et al., 2018). The result applies to the shoes and runners tested, and it may not carry over to every shoe, runner, or setting.
| Factor | What research reports | Practical note | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shoe mass and compliance | Lightweight shoes and a firm, compliant shoe-surface interaction were associated with better economy. | Fit and comfort remain individual; a podiatrist can advise on foot health. | Moore (2016) |
| Fatigue | Strength and plyometric training improved economy durability during a 90-minute run in trained male runners. | Economy is measured at fixed speeds, so fatigue can change it over time. | Zanini et al. (2025) |
| Monitoring devices | Economy is usually determined from oxygen uptake measured in a laboratory. | Watches and heart rate monitors record pace and heart rate but do not directly measure oxygen cost. | Barnes & Kilding (2015a) |
Affiliate links are provided below for readers who want to browse options.
Affiliate links. MoweSport may earn a commission at no extra cost to readers.
Safety, individualization, and when to seek medical advice
Exercise preparticipation screening aims to identify people at elevated risk for exercise-related cardiac events, and the American College of Sports Medicine model considers current activity, symptoms, known disease, and planned exercise intensity. Such events are often preceded by warning signs and symptoms (Riebe et al., 2015). The table summarizes situations in which individualization matters.
| Situation | Why individualization matters | Professional input to consider |
|---|---|---|
| New to exercise or returning after a break | Screening depends on current activity, symptoms, and intended intensity (Riebe et al., 2015). | Physician or qualified exercise professional |
| Known heart, metabolic, or kidney conditions | Medical history changes what is appropriate (Riebe et al., 2015). | Physician before starting or changing a program |
| Current or past injury or pain | Changes in load or technique may affect the injured area. | Physician or physical therapist |
| Thinking about changing running form | Associations are not instructions (Moore, 2016). | Qualified running coach or physical therapist |
| Considering heavy or explosive strength work | Research protocols were run in trained runners under study conditions. | Certified strength and conditioning professional |
Exercise should stop, and medical attention should be sought, if pain or concerning symptoms occur. Exercise screening guidance lists the following among the signs and symptoms that warrant medical evaluation (Riebe et al., 2015):
- Pain or discomfort in the chest, neck, jaw, or arms
- Shortness of breath at rest or with mild exertion
- Dizziness or fainting
- Palpitations or a racing heartbeat
- Unusual fatigue or breathlessness with usual activities
The list is not exhaustive. Sharp or persistent musculoskeletal pain also deserves evaluation. In an emergency, local emergency services should be contacted.
Frequently asked questions
What is a good running economy?
No universal benchmark exists. Barnes and Kilding (2015a) noted that it is difficult to ascertain what is good, average, or poor economy between athletes and studies because protocols, gas-analysis systems, and data-averaging techniques vary. A laboratory can compare one individual’s results over time, and a qualified professional can interpret them.
Can running economy be improved?
Research suggests that a range of training and passive interventions may improve it (Barnes & Kilding, 2015b), and strength training has been examined in several reviews with generally favorable results in trained runners (Balsalobre-Fernández et al., 2016; Blagrove et al., 2018). Responses differ between individuals, and no result is guaranteed.
Do advanced racing shoes improve running economy?
In a laboratory study, prototype marathon shoes lowered the energetic cost of running by about 4% on average compared with two established racing shoes in 18 high-caliber runners (Hoogkamer et al., 2018). The finding applies to the tested shoes and runners, and it does not guarantee the same effect for any individual.
Bottom line
Running economy summarizes how much energy a given pace costs, and it reflects physiology, biomechanics, strength, training history, equipment, and fatigue. Research in trained runners links strength training to better economy and describes several biomechanical associations, but responses are individual and general technique rules are unreliable (Barnes & Kilding, 2015a; Blagrove et al., 2018; Moore, 2016). Improvements are plausible and individual, and they are best pursued with medical clearance and qualified supervision where health concerns exist.
More on building an aerobic base is available in the MoweSport guide to improving running endurance, and equipment options are collected under Running Gear.
This article is for general educational purposes and is not medical advice. It does not diagnose, treat, or prevent any condition. Training methods, intensity, workloads, and physical demands must be individualized according to health conditions, fitness level, and medical history, and exercise should stop, and medical attention be sought, if pain or concerning symptoms occur. No outcome is guaranteed.
