What is running economy and how do you improve it?

What is running economy exactly?

Running economy is a measure of how much oxygen your body uses to run at a given submaximal pace. It is typically reported either in millilitres of oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute (ml/kg/min) at a fixed pace, or in ml/kg/km, which normalizes for speed and is the more useful metric for comparing runners.

The core insight is that two runners with identical VO2max — meaning identical maximum aerobic capacities — can require substantially different amounts of oxygen to run the same pace. The more economical runner uses less oxygen for the same output. Since endurance race pace is limited in large part by how much sustained oxygen delivery you can tolerate, a more economical runner can sustain a faster pace for the same physiological cost, or the same pace with more room to spare.

Running economy is a holistic outcome, not a single mechanism. It emerges from many underlying factors working together: the elasticity and stiffness of your tendons, the length and recoil of your stride, your cadence, the efficiency of your muscle fibre recruitment, the proportion of slow-twitch fibres you have, your body mass and its distribution, your running form, and the economy of your cardiovascular and respiratory systems under load. None of these alone defines running economy; all of them contribute.

Why does running economy matter as much as VO2max?

The three classical determinants of distance running performance — VO2max, lactate threshold (expressed as a percentage of VO2max you can sustain), and running economy — were first formalized by Michael Joyner in the late 1980s. Since then, sports science research led by figures like Andy Jones, Philo Saunders, Adrian Midgley, Carl Foster, and others has examined which of the three actually drives real-world race performance at different levels.

The consistent finding: at the elite level, where VO2max values are all very high (70 and above), running economy becomes the single strongest differentiator between runners. At the amateur level, all three matter and running economy is particularly trainable, which makes it one of the highest-leverage things to work on.

The practical way to think about it: VO2max is how big your engine is. Lactate threshold is how much of that engine you can use without blowing up. Running economy is your fuel efficiency — how fast you can go on each unit of oxygen your engine delivers. A runner with a great engine and terrible fuel efficiency is beaten by a runner with an average engine and excellent fuel efficiency at every distance from 10k upward.

How is running economy measured?

In a lab, running economy is tested the same way VO2max is — on a treadmill with a gas exchange mask, usually running at 3 or 4 submaximal paces for 4 to 6 minutes each. The lab measures your oxygen consumption at each pace and reports the value per kilogram per minute, or per kilometre. Two runners can then be compared directly.

Outside a lab, running economy is harder to measure directly, but it shows up indirectly in metrics most runners can track. A runner whose heart rate at a given pace drops over months is probably becoming more economical — their body is producing the same speed for less physiological cost. Similarly, a runner whose perceived effort at marathon pace is notably lower than it used to be is showing improved economy.

Wearable metrics like Garmin's Running Economy Score or Stryd's Running Stress Score attempt to estimate economy from wrist or foot sensor data. They are rough proxies, useful for spotting trends in your own data over time but not for comparing yourself to other runners.

What actually improves running economy?

Running economy has been studied extensively, and a small handful of interventions have consistently shown real improvements. The following are all backed by multiple studies, including meta-analyses where available.

Heavy and explosive strength training

This is the single most-validated intervention for improving running economy in already-trained runners. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Richard Blagrove and colleagues — looking specifically at running economy studies in distance runners — found that heavy and/or explosive strength training produced meaningful improvements in running economy, with effects typically in the range of 2–8% after 8 to 12 weeks. Those improvements came without significant changes in VO2max, meaning they were pure economy gains.

The mechanism is partly neural (better motor unit recruitment) and partly structural (stiffer tendons store and return more elastic energy per stride). Lifting heavy is not a path to becoming a slow, bulky runner — the research consistently shows it makes you a faster, more efficient one. If you've read the CoreRise article on strength training for endurance athletes, you already know the protocol; running economy is one of its most important reasons.

Practical guidance: two heavy strength sessions per week, compound lifts at ≥ 85% 1RM for 3–6 reps, plus some explosive plyometric work, for at least 8–12 weeks.

Plyometric training

Plyometric work — box jumps, bounding, pogo hops, depth jumps — produces improvements in running economy that often show up faster than pure strength work. Several studies have found 4–6% improvements in running economy after as little as 6 weeks of twice-weekly plyometric sessions in already-trained runners.

The mechanism is again about tendon stiffness and elastic energy storage, plus improved neuromuscular coordination in the stretch-shortening cycle — the rapid lengthen-then-shorten action your calves and Achilles perform with every running step. Plyometric work trains that specific pattern directly.

For most runners, plyometric work sits alongside strength training rather than replacing it. A typical combined session might include back squats, Romanian deadlifts, Bulgarian split squats, and then end with 3 sets of box jumps or bounding drills.

High-volume easy running over years

One of the least glamorous findings in running economy research is that it improves slowly with accumulated training volume, particularly at easy paces. Runners with 10 or 15 years of consistent base mileage typically have substantially better running economy than newer runners with equivalent VO2max and speed.

The mechanism is a combination of biomechanical refinement over millions of strides, mitochondrial and capillary adaptations in slow-twitch fibres, increased muscular efficiency at the cellular level, and the gradual optimization of stride mechanics that happens unconsciously when the body is exposed to running for enough hours. You can't force this in a 6-week block; it's the compounding reward of consistency.

Practically, this means that for an amateur runner, the single most effective long-term running-economy intervention is simply running consistently for years without taking long breaks. That's unsatisfying advice for anyone looking for a quick fix, but it's also one of the reasons older runners often beat younger ones — they have more miles under them, and those miles compounded into better economy that the younger runner hasn't built yet.

Cadence and form refinement

Running form has received enormous attention in popular running culture, and the honest evidence is more nuanced than most blog posts suggest. There is no single 'correct' running form, and attempts to force a specific style (forefoot striking, low heel lift, particular arm positions) onto a trained runner often make economy worse before it gets better, if it gets better at all.

The one consistent finding worth knowing is about cadence. Most recreational runners running at typical paces have a cadence of around 160 steps per minute. Research consistently finds that modestly increasing cadence (by 5–10%) at the same pace — which means taking slightly shorter, more frequent steps — reduces impact forces, lowers overuse injury risk, and often produces a small running economy improvement as an indirect benefit. You don't need to force a big change; adding 8–10 steps per minute over a few weeks is usually sufficient.

Other form cues — landing under the hips rather than ahead of them, relaxing the upper body, avoiding excessive vertical oscillation — can help some runners, but they should be applied carefully and over time, not imposed all at once.

Altitude training

Altitude training is a well-studied intervention for elite runners and has genuine effects on running economy as part of its broader performance package. Living at moderate altitude (roughly 2000–2500 m) for several weeks increases red blood cell mass, improves oxygen-carrying capacity, and — through adaptations whose precise mechanism is still debated — often improves running economy even after return to sea level.

For most amateur athletes, the practical reality is that altitude training is expensive, logistically difficult, and not worth pursuing for a 1–3% gain when simpler interventions produce similar effects. But if you happen to live or spend significant time at altitude, you may accumulate running economy benefits as a side effect, and if you're racing at altitude, spending time up there beforehand is clearly useful for both economy and acclimatization.

What are the common running-economy mistakes?

Five mistakes catch amateur runners trying to improve economy.

• Obsessing over form while ignoring strength and plyometrics. Form cues produce inconsistent results; strength and plyometric work produce reliable improvements.
• Trying to force a dramatic cadence change overnight. Small, gradual shifts work. A jump from 160 to 180 steps per minute in a week is a recipe for sore calves and worse running.
• Skipping easy mileage in favour of hard intervals. The slow accumulation of easy miles is one of the biggest drivers of long-term economy. Cutting it removes the foundation.
• Chasing gadgets and shoe technology over training. Carbon-plated super shoes are real and do improve economy, but they are a ~1–4% effect layered on top of the training effect. They do not replace years of proper work.
• Copying elite form. Elite runners have forms shaped by decades of training and genetic selection. Copying them directly usually makes amateur runners less efficient, not more.