wber-workflow
GitHubWBER投稿工作流路由器，根据稿件阶段智能推荐后续专用技能。覆盖从选题、定位、因果识别到回复信的全流程，针对世界银行经济评论的实证与发展政策要求提供精准指引。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill wber-workflow -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "wber-workflow",
"description": "Use when deciding which wber-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing manuscript work from topic selection through rebuttal for a The World Bank Economic Review (WBER) submission. Routes — it does not replace — the specialized skills."
}
WBER Workflow Router (wber-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It tells you which wber- skill to use at the current stage* of a manuscript aimed at The World Bank Economic Review (WBER) — the rigorous empirical development-economics journal published by Oxford University Press for the World Bank (founded 1986, quarterly). WBER prizes two things at once: credible identification AND clear development-policy relevance for a World Bank / policymaker audience. A paper that nails one and ignores the other is the classic WBER misfire.
Default assumption: unless the user says otherwise, treat the target as WBER. Operational tells that you are at WBER and not a sibling: the journal requires public release of all data and code as a condition of publication (it is, by repute, the only development field journal that does this routinely); review is single-anonymized (referees blind, author names on the title page); there is a 40-page total cap including everything; and WBER welcomes short-format policy-relevant papers alongside full articles. Editors as of 2026: Eric Edmonds and Nina Pavcnik (Dartmouth) (检索于 2026-06；以官网为准). Re-verify volatile specifics on the OUP WBER pages.
When to trigger
- The user asks "what should I do next?" on a development-economics manuscript
- A draft's binding constraint (fit, identification, policy framing, exhibits, package) is unclear
- Work is ping-ponging between design, framing, evidence, and the response letter
- A WBER decision letter arrived and the user needs to switch into revision mode
Routing table
| Current symptom | Next skill |
|---|---|
| Question is interesting but not clearly development + policy-relevant | wber-topic-selection |
| Contribution vs. JDE / World Development / the Research Observer is fuzzy | wber-literature-positioning |
| Causal design (RCT/DiD/RD/IV) credibility is the bottleneck | wber-identification |
| A development model is needed to interpret or to run a counterfactual | wber-theory-model |
| Results may be specification-, sample-, or inference-sensitive | wber-robustness |
| Exhibits are dense; significance asterisks still present | wber-tables-figures |
| Prose buries the policy "so what"; intro/abstract do not land | wber-writing-style |
| Data + code deposit, README, DOI link, restricted-data path | wber-replication-package |
| Want to anticipate referee objections before submitting | wber-referee-strategy |
| Ready to submit via ScholarOne; need a preflight | wber-submission |
| Received an R&R; need a response-letter strategy | wber-rebuttal |
Default order
wber-topic-selection— lock a development question with policy stakeswber-literature-positioning— stake the contribution; rule out sibling venueswber-identification— make the causal design crediblewber-theory-model— only if interpretation or counterfactual needs a modelwber-robustness— threat-by-threat, not an appendix dumpwber-tables-figures— exhibits a policymaker can read; no asteriskswber-writing-style— make the policy contribution land (abstract + intro last)wber-replication-package— assemble the data + code deposit with a DOIwber-referee-strategy— pre-empt the predictable objectionswber-submission— ScholarOne preflight (40-page cap, single-anon title page)wber-rebuttal— after the R&R
wber-writing-styleis a late polish; do not rewrite the intro before identification and the policy frame settle.wber-theory-modelis conditional — a clean reduced-form evaluation often needs no formal model.
Anti-patterns
- Treating WBER as interchangeable with the Journal of Development Economics (the rigorous-dev-econ field journal — equally demanding on method but less insistent on a World Bank policy hook)
- Treating WBER as World Development (interdisciplinary, broader on qualitative/mixed methods)
- Routing a survey or literature overview to WBER — that belongs at the World Bank Research Observer (not refereed; Editorial-Board reviewed)
- Polishing prose before design, contribution, and the evidence hierarchy are stable
- Letting the appendix carry claims the main 40 pages must establish
Routing by paper archetype
WBER spans several development archetypes, and the binding constraint differs. Read the archetype, then enter the chain at the right link.
| Archetype | Likely first bottleneck | Enter at |
|---|---|---|
| program/impact evaluation (RCT or quasi-experiment) | estimand + external validity / scaling | wber-identification |
| policy-reform DiD / RD around a developing-country reform | staggered-DiD bias or RD manipulation | wber-identification |
| measurement / poverty / inequality using LSMS/DHS/admin data | data construction transparency + reproducibility | wber-replication-package → wber-robustness |
| development model + structural counterfactual | what identifies parameters; policy-invariance | wber-theory-model → wber-identification |
| short-format policy note | sharp single result + tight framing | wber-topic-selection → wber-writing-style |
Worked routing example (illustrative)
A user says: "My RCT of a school-grants program in three districts estimates a clean ITT, but a referee says it reads like a project report and isn't general enough for WBER." That is two distinct WBER pushbacks — policy/general-interest framing (owned by wber-topic-selection + wber-literature-positioning) and external validity / scaling (owned by wber-identification). Route to positioning first to reframe the evaluation as evidence on a mechanism of interest to development policy, then to wber-identification to argue what the three-district LATE implies for scale-up (general-equilibrium, fiscal cost). Only once the framing and external-validity story hold do you return to exhibits and the rebuttal.
Minimal decision snippet
if decision_letter_arrived: -> wber-rebuttal
elif ready_to_submit: -> wber-submission
elif anticipating_referees: -> wber-referee-strategy
elif data_code_deposit: -> wber-replication-package
elif exhibits_or_significance: -> wber-tables-figures
elif results_fragile: -> wber-robustness
elif need_model_for_counterfactual: -> wber-theory-model
elif identification_shaky: -> wber-identification
elif contribution_or_fit_fuzzy: -> wber-literature-positioning / wber-topic-selection
else: -> wber-topic-selection
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 14:31
