Topic Selection (jue-topic-selection)
When to trigger
- The question is interesting but it is unclear it is spatial — could it be a labor or public-finance paper that merely uses geographic data?
- The paper sits on a boundary with RSUE, Journal of Regional Science, JEG (OUP), or JPubE and you must decide where it belongs
- A reviewer or coauthor asks "why is this urban economics?" and the answer is thin
- You have a clean result but no urban mechanism — only a geographic correlation
- You are choosing between a full JUE article and the short-paper JUE: Insights track
Is this a JUE paper? The spatial-mechanism test
JUE publishes work where space is constitutive of the economics, not a label on the data. The question should turn on at least one spatial primitive: agglomeration economies, housing supply elasticity, land use & zoning, commuting/transportation, local public finance & Tiebout sorting, neighborhood effects, or spatial sorting/equilibrium. Run the manuscript through three gates:
- Mechanism gate. Can you name a spatial mechanism — capitalization, agglomeration spillover, sorting across locations, congestion, market access — that generates the result? If the mechanism is a-spatial (it would hold with units relabeled non-geographically), it is not a JUE paper.
- Equilibrium gate. Does the question respect that people and firms move? A partial result that ignores spatial reallocation (workers/firms/residents re-sorting) will draw the JUE referee's first objection. The contribution should engage spatial equilibrium even if reduced-form.
- Marginal-contribution gate. Urban economics is mature; "X affects house prices / city size / wages" is rarely enough. The novelty must be a new mechanism, a new spatial design, novel geocoded data, or a quantitatively important magnitude for urban policy.
Sibling-boundary decision table
| If the paper's core is... |
It belongs at... |
because... |
| a spatial mechanism with urban data and an urban audience |
JUE |
the field flagship for urban & regional economics |
| methods/theory of regional science, broader spatial econometrics |
RSUE or J. of Regional Science |
JUE leads with the economics, not the spatial method per se |
| economic-geography framing, clusters, evolutionary geography |
JEG (OUP) |
JEG is geography-leaning and non-Elsevier |
| the tax/spending design dominates; geography is the setting |
JPubE |
a place-based result is not automatically a public-finance contribution |
| a broad applied-micro causal result with a city setting |
AEJ: Applied |
AEJ rewards the design; JUE wants the spatial mechanism too |
Choosing the article format
- Full JUE article — a complete contribution: design, mechanism, magnitudes, robustness, policy reading.
- JUE: Insights — a focused, well-identified short result. Cap ≤6,000 words and ≤5 exhibits (each exhibit below five buys +200 words; a zero-exhibit paper ≤7,000 words) (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Use it for a single sharp finding (a clean policy evaluation, a measurement contribution) that does not need a full model. The track was launched to publish timely, tightly-identified short papers; do not pad a Insights-sized result into a full article to look weightier.
What gets desk-rejected at JUE
JUE is a high-volume field flagship and the editors desk-reject freely. The recurring desk-reject patterns are worth designing against from the start:
- No spatial mechanism — a result that uses geographic units but whose economics is a-spatial (a labor or finance result that happens to be measured by city).
- Setting mistaken for contribution — "the first study of [city/country]" with no new mechanism, design, data, or magnitude.
- Wrong venue — a tax-design paper (JPubE), a spatial-method paper (RSUE), or an economic-geography paper (JEG) sent to JUE because it is "about cities."
- Identification not credible for space — a cross-location OLS that any urban referee will read as sorting, presented as causal.
- Stale question with no new angle — re-confirming a well-established urban regularity without moving the frontier.
Timeliness and the JUE: Insights niche
The Insights track was built for results that are sharp and timely — a clean evaluation of a recent policy, a measurement contribution, a decisive null. If your finding is one well-identified estimate that does not need a model and would lose force if delayed by a multi-year full-article cycle, Insights is the right home. Reserve the full article for contributions that need a model, a battery of mechanisms, or a quantitative-spatial counterfactual. Misjudging this — padding an Insights result or compressing a full contribution — is itself a fit error referees notice.
Worked vignette (illustrative)
A team has clean admin data showing firms near a new university campus pay higher wages. Tempting framing: "agglomeration raises wages." But the mechanism gate exposes a sorting story — high-wage firms may have located near the campus. The JUE-viable reframing pins a mechanism: use the staggered campus openings as a shock to local knowledge spillovers, decompose the wage gain into sorting vs true spillover, and report the spillover magnitude relevant to place-based innovation policy. That is an agglomeration contribution; "firms near campuses pay more" is a desk-reject.
Checklist
Anti-patterns
- A national/firm-level result run on county or city data with no spatial mechanism ("geographic data ≠ urban economics")
- Ignoring that agents re-sort, so the estimated effect double-counts or omits general-equilibrium reallocation
- Pitching to JUE a paper whose real contribution is a tax design (→ JPubE) or a spatial-econometrics method (→ RSUE)
- Forcing a thin result into a full article when JUE: Insights fits better, or vice versa
- Claiming "first paper to study X city" as if novelty of setting were novelty of contribution
Data-availability shapes feasibility — decide early
Urban questions are often constrained by what geography you can observe. Before committing, confirm the spatial resolution you need actually exists and is accessible: parcel/address-level for capitalization and boundary designs, establishment-level for agglomeration, tract/block for neighborhood effects, network/GTFS for transport. A question that requires geocoded individual data you cannot obtain (or cannot deposit under JUE's replication policy) is a topic-selection problem, not a later logistics detail — fold the data path and the replication route into the topic decision, and loop in jue-replication-package if the data is restricted.
Output format
【Spatial mechanism】one sentence — what space does in the economics
【JUE vs sibling】JUE / RSUE / JRS / JEG / JPubE / AEJ:Applied + one-line reason
【Format】full article / JUE: Insights
【Marginal contribution】mechanism / design / data / magnitude (pick the real one)
【Equilibrium engagement】how reallocation is handled
【Next skill】jue-literature-positioning
If the spatial-mechanism test fails, the fastest fix is rarely a new dataset — it is reframing the existing result around the spatial primitive (capitalization, sorting, agglomeration) that was always implicit but never made the point of the paper.
Source: brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills → Journal-of-Urban-Economics-Skills/skills/jue-topic-selection/SKILL.md
1---2name: jue-topic-selection3description: Use when deciding whether a question is a genuinely spatial, urban-economics contribution that fits the Journal of Urban Economics (JUE) rather than a sibling venue. Locks the spatial question and outlet fit before positioning; it does not write the literature review or design the identification.4---567# Topic Selection (jue-topic-selection)89## When to trigger1011- The question is interesting but it is unclear it is *spatial* — could it be a labor or public-finance paper that merely uses geographic data?12- The paper sits on a boundary with **RSUE, Journal of Regional Science, JEG (OUP), or JPubE** and you must decide where it belongs13- A reviewer or coauthor asks "why is this urban economics?" and the answer is thin14- You have a clean result but no urban *mechanism* — only a geographic correlation15- You are choosing between a full JUE article and the short-paper **JUE: Insights** track1617## Is this a JUE paper? The spatial-mechanism test1819JUE publishes work where **space is constitutive of the economics**, not a label on the data. The question should turn on at least one spatial primitive: agglomeration economies, housing supply elasticity, land use & zoning, commuting/transportation, local public finance & Tiebout sorting, neighborhood effects, or spatial sorting/equilibrium. Run the manuscript through three gates:20211. **Mechanism gate.** Can you name a spatial mechanism — capitalization, agglomeration spillover, sorting across locations, congestion, market access — that *generates* the result? If the mechanism is a-spatial (it would hold with units relabeled non-geographically), it is not a JUE paper.222. **Equilibrium gate.** Does the question respect that people and firms *move*? A partial result that ignores spatial reallocation (workers/firms/residents re-sorting) will draw the JUE referee's first objection. The contribution should engage spatial equilibrium even if reduced-form.233. **Marginal-contribution gate.** Urban economics is mature; "X affects house prices / city size / wages" is rarely enough. The novelty must be a new mechanism, a new spatial design, novel geocoded data, or a quantitatively important magnitude for urban policy.2425## Sibling-boundary decision table2627| If the paper's core is... | It belongs at... | because... |28|---------------------------|------------------|------------|29| a spatial mechanism with urban data and an urban audience | **JUE** | the field flagship for urban & regional economics |30| methods/theory of regional science, broader spatial econometrics | **RSUE** or **J. of Regional Science** | JUE leads with the economics, not the spatial method per se |31| economic-geography framing, clusters, evolutionary geography | **JEG (OUP)** | JEG is geography-leaning and non-Elsevier |32| the tax/spending design dominates; geography is the setting | **JPubE** | a place-based result is not automatically a public-finance contribution |33| a broad applied-micro causal result with a city setting | **AEJ: Applied** | AEJ rewards the design; JUE wants the spatial mechanism too |3435## Choosing the article format3637- **Full JUE article** — a complete contribution: design, mechanism, magnitudes, robustness, policy reading.38- **JUE: Insights** — a focused, well-identified short result. Cap ≤6,000 words and ≤5 exhibits (each exhibit below five buys +200 words; a zero-exhibit paper ≤7,000 words) (检索于 2026-06;以官网为准). Use it for a single sharp finding (a clean policy evaluation, a measurement contribution) that does not need a full model. The track was launched to publish timely, tightly-identified short papers; do not pad a Insights-sized result into a full article to look weightier.3940## What gets desk-rejected at JUE4142JUE is a high-volume field flagship and the editors desk-reject freely. The recurring desk-reject patterns are worth designing against from the start:4344- **No spatial mechanism** — a result that uses geographic units but whose economics is a-spatial (a labor or finance result that happens to be measured by city).45- **Setting mistaken for contribution** — "the first study of [city/country]" with no new mechanism, design, data, or magnitude.46- **Wrong venue** — a tax-design paper (JPubE), a spatial-method paper (RSUE), or an economic-geography paper (JEG) sent to JUE because it is "about cities."47- **Identification not credible for space** — a cross-location OLS that any urban referee will read as sorting, presented as causal.48- **Stale question with no new angle** — re-confirming a well-established urban regularity without moving the frontier.4950## Timeliness and the JUE: Insights niche5152The Insights track was built for results that are sharp and timely — a clean evaluation of a recent policy, a measurement contribution, a decisive null. If your finding is one well-identified estimate that does not need a model and would lose force if delayed by a multi-year full-article cycle, Insights is the right home. Reserve the full article for contributions that need a model, a battery of mechanisms, or a quantitative-spatial counterfactual. Misjudging this — padding an Insights result or compressing a full contribution — is itself a fit error referees notice.5354## Worked vignette (illustrative)5556A team has clean admin data showing firms near a new university campus pay higher wages. Tempting framing: "agglomeration raises wages." But the mechanism gate exposes a sorting story — high-wage firms may have located near the campus. The JUE-viable reframing pins a *mechanism*: use the staggered campus openings as a shock to local knowledge spillovers, decompose the wage gain into sorting vs true spillover, and report the spillover magnitude relevant to place-based innovation policy. That is an agglomeration contribution; "firms near campuses pay more" is a desk-reject.5758## Checklist5960- [ ] A spatial mechanism is named in one sentence, and the result would not survive relabeling units non-geographically61- [ ] The paper engages spatial equilibrium / reallocation rather than assuming a closed location62- [ ] The marginal contribution is more than "X affects an urban outcome"63- [ ] The sibling boundary (RSUE / JRS / JEG / JPubE / AEJ:Applied) is explicitly resolved64- [ ] Format chosen (full article vs JUE: Insights) matches the scope of the result65- [ ] The urban-policy or theory audience who would cite this paper is identifiable66- [ ] The spatial resolution the design needs exists and is accessible (and depositable)67- [ ] The result is not a known urban regularity re-confirmed with no new angle6869## Anti-patterns7071- A national/firm-level result run on county or city data with no spatial mechanism ("geographic data ≠ urban economics")72- Ignoring that agents re-sort, so the estimated effect double-counts or omits general-equilibrium reallocation73- Pitching to JUE a paper whose real contribution is a tax design (→ JPubE) or a spatial-econometrics method (→ RSUE)74- Forcing a thin result into a full article when JUE: Insights fits better, or vice versa75- Claiming "first paper to study X city" as if novelty of setting were novelty of contribution7677## Data-availability shapes feasibility — decide early7879Urban questions are often constrained by what geography you can observe. Before committing, confirm the spatial resolution you need actually exists and is accessible: parcel/address-level for capitalization and boundary designs, establishment-level for agglomeration, tract/block for neighborhood effects, network/GTFS for transport. A question that requires geocoded individual data you cannot obtain (or cannot deposit under JUE's replication policy) is a topic-selection problem, not a later logistics detail — fold the data path and the replication route into the topic decision, and loop in `jue-replication-package` if the data is restricted.8081## Output format8283```text84【Spatial mechanism】one sentence — what space does in the economics85【JUE vs sibling】JUE / RSUE / JRS / JEG / JPubE / AEJ:Applied + one-line reason86【Format】full article / JUE: Insights87【Marginal contribution】mechanism / design / data / magnitude (pick the real one)88【Equilibrium engagement】how reallocation is handled89【Next skill】jue-literature-positioning90```9192> If the spatial-mechanism test fails, the fastest fix is rarely a new dataset — it is reframing the existing result around the spatial primitive (capitalization, sorting, agglomeration) that was always implicit but never made the point of the paper.9394---9596**Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `Journal-of-Urban-Economics-Skills/skills/jue-topic-selection/SKILL.md`