Use when scoping or scope-testing a Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (JEEM) manuscript — confirming the environmental/resource mechanism is load-bearing and the question clears the field-journal bar before any analysis is finalized. Decides fit and routes; it does not invent evidence or citations.
Scanned 9/5/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jeem-topic-selection --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Jeem Topic Selection?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/brycewang-stanford-jeem-topic-selection)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: jeem-topic-selection
description: Use when scoping or scope-testing a Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (JEEM) manuscript — confirming the environmental/resource mechanism is load-bearing and the question clears the field-journal bar before any analysis is finalized. Decides fit and routes; it does not invent evidence or citations.
---
# Topic Selection (jeem-topic-selection)
## When to trigger
- The paper is aimed at JEEM and you are not sure the **environmental or resource mechanism is doing the work** versus being a label on a generic applied-micro result
- A coauthor asks "is this JEEM, JAERE, JPubE, AEJ: Policy, or Ecological Economics?"
- The result is interesting but the **policy or welfare stakes** are not articulated
- The paper is a method/valuation exercise and you must show it speaks to a substantive environmental question, not just a technique
## Data first or question first
Environmental economics is data-rich — satellite imagery, sensor networks, administrative permit registries, parcel records — and that abundance tempts a "we have a great dataset, what can we estimate?" approach. JEEM rewards the reverse: a sharp environmental-economic *question* that the data then answer. A novel dataset is an asset only if it identifies a welfare-relevant parameter the field wants; on its own it is a desk-reject risk ("interesting data, no contribution"). Before committing, write the one-sentence question and the regulator-usable number it targets, then ask whether the data identify it — not the other way around.
## The JEEM fit test
JEEM is a **field** journal: the environmental, resource, or climate content is the point, and the economics must be credible. A paper passes the fit test only if the environmental mechanism is *necessary* to the contribution — remove it and the paper collapses. Run the question through these gates in order:
1. **Is the object environmental/resource-economic?** pollution & climate, energy, water, fisheries/forests/land, ecosystem services, environmental regulation & permits, or the **nonmarket value** of an environmental good. If the externality or resource is just a setting for a labor/IO/public-finance result, JEEM is the wrong field journal.
2. **Is there a welfare or policy stake?** JEEM rewards numbers a regulator could use — a marginal damage, a willingness-to-pay, a compliance cost, an abatement-cost curve, a resource rent. "X correlates with pollution" is not a JEEM contribution; "the marginal external cost of X is $Y, so the efficient tax is Z" is.
3. **Does the method clear the bar for its branch?** A causal claim needs a real design (not OLS + controls); a valuation needs a defensible preference-recovery argument; a theory paper needs a comparative static that bites.
## Branch-specific scoping
| Archetype | What makes it a JEEM paper | What makes it a desk-reject |
|-----------|----------------------------|------------------------------|
| Environmental-policy causal | a regulation/permit-market/standard generates clean variation; welfare or compliance-cost interpretation | reduced-form correlation with no design; environment is incidental |
| Revealed-preference valuation | hedonic/travel-cost recovers a WTP for a defined environmental amenity | a house-price regression with no amenity/welfare claim |
| Stated-preference valuation | CV/DCE elicits WTP for a policy-relevant good with credible survey design | a survey with no incentive compatibility or scope test |
| Resource/pollution theory | a model yields a testable or policy-relevant prediction about resource use or abatement | math with no environmental comparative static or empirical hook |
| Climate / damages | weather/climate variation maps to an economic outcome and adaptation margin | a climate-impacts paper with no economics (belongs in a science journal) |
## Sibling boundaries (be explicit in the paper)
- **vs. JAERE** — AERE's own journal and the closest substitute; JEEM is the older Elsevier flagship. Position on contribution, not prestige; do not claim "AERE official journal" status without checking current ownership (待核实).
- **vs. AEJ: Economic Policy / JPubE** — those reward the general policy/public-finance contribution; JEEM rewards the *environmental* mechanism and field audience.
- **vs. Ecological Economics** — that journal is pluralist/interdisciplinary; JEEM is neoclassical welfare economics.
- **vs. Nature Climate Change** — that is a science venue; JEEM needs the economics (preferences, welfare, optimization), not just an impact estimate.
## Worked vignette (illustrative)
A team has clean administrative data on a firm subsidy and finds it raised employment. They want to submit to JEEM because the firms happen to be in renewable energy. Run the fit test: the *object* is a labor/IO subsidy effect, the *welfare stake* is jobs not an environmental externality, and the *environmental mechanism is not load-bearing* — strip out "renewable" and the paper is unchanged. Verdict: reroute to a public-finance or labor venue. Contrast a version that estimates how the subsidy changed **abatement and emissions**, recovers the **implied cost per ton of CO2 abated**, and compares it to the social cost of carbon — now the environmental mechanism carries the contribution and a regulator-usable number emerges. That version is a JEEM paper.
## Short-paper route
JEEM accepts short papers / notes that make a contribution comparable to a full paper, with expedited review (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准; exact word ceiling 待核实). This route fits a sharp, single-result environmental contribution: a clean new estimate of one parameter, a decisive robustness correction to a published result, or a focused methodological note for valuation. If the contribution is one crisp number rather than a multi-part argument, scope it as a short paper rather than padding it to full length.
## The desk-reject self-test
Before investing, simulate the editor's scope screen with three blunt questions. (1) If I deleted the word "environmental/climate/pollution" from the title and abstract, would the paper still make sense as a labor/IO/public-finance paper? If yes, the mechanism is not load-bearing — reroute. (2) Can I state a number a regulator could use (a damage, a WTP, an abatement cost, a quota)? If no, there is no welfare contribution yet. (3) Is there a recent JEEM or JAERE paper a referee would say I am merely re-running on new data? If yes, find what I fix. Passing all three is the minimum bar before topic selection is settled.
## Checklist
- [ ] One sentence states the environmental/resource object and why it matters for policy or welfare
- [ ] Removing the environmental mechanism would collapse the contribution (it is load-bearing)
- [ ] The branch is named (policy-causal / RP valuation / SP valuation / theory / climate) and its method bar is met
- [ ] A regulator-usable parameter (damage, WTP, abatement cost, rent, elasticity) is the target, not a bare correlation
- [ ] The paper distinguishes itself from JAERE and from the general-interest / interdisciplinary siblings
- [ ] Short-paper route considered if the contribution is sharp but narrow (JEEM accepts short papers / notes)
- [ ] Process facts cited are in `resources/official-source-map.md` or marked 待核实
## Anti-patterns
- "Environmental" as a setting, not a mechanism — a generic DiD that happens to use a green outcome
- Estimating an effect with no welfare interpretation and no number a policymaker could use
- Picking JEEM for prestige when the audience is really public finance or development
- A pure climate-science impact paper with no economic model of behavior or welfare
- Asserting JEEM is "the AERE official journal" without verifying current ownership (待核实)
## Timeliness without chasing headlines
JEEM rewards questions that matter for current environmental policy — carbon pricing, air-quality regulation, water and fisheries management, climate adaptation, the energy transition — but it is a welfare-economics journal, not a news outlet. A topic earns durability when it pins down a parameter or mechanism that remains useful after the specific policy episode passes: the marginal damage of a pollutant, the WTP for an ecosystem service, the abatement-cost response to a price signal. Choose a question whose answer a regulator could cite in five years, not one that depends entirely on a fleeting policy debate. The best JEEM topics pair a salient policy context with a parameter of lasting interest.
## Output format
```text
【Journal】Journal of Environmental Economics and Management
【Skill】jeem-topic-selection
【Verdict】pass / revise / reroute
【Environmental mechanism】is it load-bearing? [Y/N] — one sentence
【Branch】policy-causal / RP-valuation / SP-valuation / theory / climate
【Policy-relevant target】damage / WTP / abatement cost / rent / elasticity
【Sibling boundary】why JEEM not JAERE / JPubE / Ecological Economics
【Source status】verified URL / 待核实 / not asserted
【Next skill】jeem-literature-positioning
```
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!