Economic Policy Workflow Router (ecopol-workflow)

SkillDev tools

Use when deciding which ecopol-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic pitch through post-panel revision for an Economic Policy (EP) manuscript. Routes, it does not replace, the specialized skills.

Instructions available. Your AI can read the instructions. Execution depends on the setup they require.

Add ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.

Then ask your AI: use the Economic Policy Workflow Router (ecopol-workflow) skill

What this skill tells your AI

The instructions your AI receives, as published by brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills in Economic-Policy-Skills/skills/ecopol-workflow/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.

Overview

This is the router. It tells you which ecopol- skill to use at the current stage* of a paper aimed at Economic Policy — the CEPR / CESifo / Sciences Po (Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques) policy-economics journal published by Oxford University Press. EP's identity is European, policy-first, and accessible: rigorous analysis of a current policy question written so that economists and policymakers can read it, with the heavy machinery pushed to an appendix.

What makes EP unlike any sibling is its lifecycle. EP does not run standard anonymous refereeing. Papers are selected by the Managing Editor / Panel, presented at the journal's biannual conference (summer and winter), where two invited discussants debate each paper from an academic and a policy angle and act as the referees. The final paper is published together with the discussants' comments and a summary of the panel discussion, within ~6 months of presentation (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Since the 2025 relaunch as Economic Policy: Papers on European and Global Issues, the journal is online-only and commissioned — "all articles are invited by the Managing Editor"; unsolicited submissions are not accepted (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Treat ecopol-submission as the pitch / commissioning + camera-ready route, not an open portal.

Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, the target is EP and the bottleneck is "will the Panel want this, and will it survive two discussants in front of a policy audience?"

When to trigger

  • The user asks "what should I do next?" on an EP-bound paper
  • A draft's current bottleneck (fit, framing, evidence, exhibits, prose) needs diagnosing
  • Work is ping-ponging between the policy question, the identification, the writing, and the discussant-proofing
  • A commissioning invitation or a post-panel revision request arrived and the user must switch modes

Routing table

Current symptomNext skill
Not clearly a timely, important policy question the Panel would commissionecopol-topic-selection
Contribution vs. the policy debate / adjacent journals is fuzzyecopol-literature-positioning
Causal or structural credibility is the binding constraintecopol-identification
The mechanism / model that organizes the policy logic is looseecopol-theory-model
Results may be specification-, sample-, or inference-fragileecopol-robustness
Exhibits are too technical for a policy reader or don't carry the messageecopol-tables-figures
Main text reads like a tech report, not accessible policy proseecopol-writing-style
Data / code package and verification material need assemblingecopol-replication-package
Need to anticipate the two discussants and the panel debateecopol-referee-strategy
Camera-ready / commissioning logistics need a final checkecopol-submission
A post-panel / discussant revision request needs a response planecopol-rebuttal

Default order

  1. ecopol-topic-selection — lock a timely, Panel-worthy policy question
  2. ecopol-literature-positioning — stake the contribution to the live policy debate
  3. ecopol-identification — make the data-to-policy-claim mapping credible
  4. ecopol-theory-model — the minimal model that disciplines the policy logic
  5. ecopol-robustness — pre-empt the discussants' fragility tests
  6. ecopol-tables-figures — exhibits a minister could read
  7. ecopol-writing-style — accessible main text, technical appendix (do this late)
  8. ecopol-replication-package — verification-ready data + code
  9. ecopol-referee-strategy — war-game the two discussants + panel
  10. ecopol-submission — commissioning / camera-ready preflight
  11. ecopol-rebuttal — revise after the panel and discussant comments

ecopol-writing-style is late polish; do not rewrite the intro before the identification and the headline policy number settle.

Routing by paper archetype

The discussant duo and panel debate hit different papers at different seams. Read the archetype, enter the chain at the right link.

ArchetypeLikely first bottleneckEnter at
empirical causal evaluation of a policystaggered-DID / weak-IV credibility under a hostile discussantecopol-identification
structural / quantitative policy modelwhat identifies parameters + counterfactual policy-invarianceecopol-theory-model → ecopol-identification
macro / fiscal / monetary policy analysistimeliness + the central policy number's robustnessecopol-topic-selection → ecopol-robustness
cross-country / EU-institutional studycomparability of data + the "so what for European policy"ecopol-literature-positioning

Worked routing example (illustrative)

A user says: "We were invited to present a paper on an EU minimum-wage directive at the winter conference; one likely discussant is a labor economist, the other sits in a finance ministry." That is the EP-specific bottleneck — survive two discussants from two worlds. The labor discussant will press identification (ecopol-identification) and robustness (ecopol-robustness); the ministry discussant will press the headline magnitude, the welfare/cost framing, and whether a non-economist can read it (ecopol-tables-figures, ecopol-writing-style). Route to ecopol-referee-strategy to map both personas, then to the two technical skills they will probe.

Anti-patterns

  • Treating EP like a journal with an open submission portal and anonymous referees — it is commissioned, panel-reviewed, with named discussants
  • Polishing prose before identification and the central policy number are stable
  • Confusing EP with AEJ: Economic Policy (AEA, anonymous refereeing, more technical), Brookings Papers (the US panel analogue), or Journal of Public Economics (field journal, no panel)
  • Letting the technical appendix carry a claim the accessible main text must make to a policymaker

Minimal decision snippet

if post_panel_revision:            -> ecopol-rebuttal
elif commissioned_camera_ready:    -> ecopol-submission
elif facing_the_two_discussants:   -> ecopol-referee-strategy
elif exhibits_too_technical:       -> ecopol-tables-figures
elif results_fragile:              -> ecopol-robustness
elif identification_shaky:         -> ecopol-identification
elif model_loose:                  -> ecopol-theory-model
elif contribution_fuzzy:           -> ecopol-literature-positioning
else:                              -> ecopol-topic-selection

Signals

GitHub stars
1k
Forks
155
Last commit
Sep 2026
Advanced
Item type
skill
Key
ecopol-workflow
Source
github.com/brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills