---
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 `d.romer@aeapubs.org`, 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
```