From jeem-skills
Scopes and tests whether a manuscript fits the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (JEEM) field journal, checking that the environmental/resource mechanism is load-bearing and the question has welfare or policy stakes.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/jeem-skills:jeem-topic-selectionThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
- 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
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.
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:
| 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) |
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.
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.
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.
resources/official-source-map.md or marked 待核实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.
【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
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin jeem-skillsHelps determine if a manuscript fits the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (JEEM), including scope, method bar, house style, and desk-reject risks.
Positions a JEEM manuscript's contribution relative to the environmental-economics frontier and sibling journals when the novelty is fuzzy or undersold.
Guides topic selection for JEEA manuscripts by testing general-interest fit and sharpening the question. Use when deciding between JEEA and field or sibling general-interest outlets.