jel-proposal-and-commissioning

name	jel-proposal-and-commissioning
description	Use when pitching a survey to the Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) editor before writing it — the ~10-page proposal route, the pre-proposal email, and understanding the commissioning process. Builds the proposal; it does not write the survey or run the AEA portal preflight (jel-submission).

Proposal & Commissioning (jel-proposal-and-commissioning)

When to trigger

• The topic passed jel-topic-selection and you are ready to approach JEL
• You want to know whether to email the editor first, and what a proposal contains
• You are unsure whether JEL is invitation-only (it is not exclusively — proposals and full papers are also considered)
• You are weighing the proposal route vs. submitting a full draft

How JEL intake actually works (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准)

JEL articles are frequently commissioned/invited, but the journal also considers unsolicited proposals and full papers. The official guidance (AEA JEL submission page, accessed 2026-06) describes a proposal-first route:

• Pre-proposal email (optional but efficient). Authors who are unsure of fit may email the editor to ask about potential interest before formally submitting. Use this to test scope and avoid wasted effort. (Editor contact and address are volatile — confirm on the AEA JEL page; the listed editorial email as of 2026-06 was [e-mail], 以官网为准.)
• The proposal. A sketch of roughly ten pages (not counting references) describing (a) the contents of the proposed article, (b) why the topic is of interest to readers, and (c) the main references to be covered.
• Full-paper alternative. Beginning with a proposal is "more efficient," but the journal will also consider a full paper; the submission mechanics are the same.
• Decision. Editor (and referees, where used) appraise the proposal for scope, importance, and the author's command of the literature, then decide whether to invite/encourage a full draft. Re-confirm timeline and exact process on the official page.

The proposal route is the leverage point: a strong ~10-page sketch can secure encouragement before you sink months into reading and drafting. Treat it as the single most consequential document in the JEL lifecycle.

Commissioning vs. proposing: some JEL surveys begin when an editor invites an author to cover a field. You cannot manufacture an invitation, but a sharp pre-proposal email that demonstrates command of a synthesis-worthy area is the closest controllable substitute — it puts your name in front of the editor as the person who could write that survey.

Anatomy of a winning ~10-page proposal

Section	What it must do	Length guide
The field & animating question	State the literature and the question about it (from jel-topic-selection)	~1 page
Why a synthesis is needed now	New evidence / method shift / policy salience; the reader's payoff	~1 page
The organizing framework	The spine — the taxonomy or analytical structure you will impose, not a chapter list	~2–3 pages
Coverage plan	The research lines and the main references you will weigh (breadth evidence)	~2 pages
What the survey will conclude	Your provisional read of the state of knowledge + the open questions	~1–2 pages
Your standing & balance	Why you can survey this fairly (and how you will handle your own work even-handedly)	~0.5 page

Checklist

• Considered a pre-proposal email to the editor to test fit (confirm address on the AEA page)
• Proposal is ~10 pages excluding references
• States the contents, why readers will care, and the main references to be covered (the three required elements)
• Leads with an organizing framework, not a table of contents
• Demonstrates command of the literature (the reference list signals breadth)
• Names the provisional conclusions and the open questions (so the editor sees a payoff, not just coverage)
• Addresses balance, especially if you are a contributor to the field
• Confirmed current process/editor/contact on the official AEA JEL page (volatile)

Anti-patterns

• Submitting a 40-page draft cold when a 10-page proposal would have de-risked the project
• A proposal that is a topic outline ("Section 3 will discuss X") with no analytical spine
• A reference list that is a literature dump rather than evidence of a curated, weighable corpus
• Promising "comprehensive coverage" with no statement of what the survey will conclude
• Asserting editor names/contacts/process from memory instead of the live AEA page

Output format

【Field & question】<one sentence>
【Why now】<new evidence / method shift / policy salience>
【Proposed spine】<the organizing framework in 2–3 sentences>
【Coverage plan】<research lines + key references signalling breadth>
【Provisional conclusions + open questions】<what the survey will argue>
【Route】pre-proposal email? Y/N · proposal (~10pp) / full paper
【Balance note】<how author's own work is handled>
【Open verifications】editor / contact / process re-confirmed on AEA JEL page? Y/N
【Next step】→ jel-literature-synthesis (begin systematic reading) after encouragement