What you call framework would be probably more appropriately called paradigm in philosophy of science, following the terminology set up by Khun Kuhn in his seminal work.
There are paradigms or frameworks in economics. In economics people often call them 'schools of thought' , and laymen usually associate these schools of thought with some political set of beliefs or ideologies, but actually if you look into scientific literature they are paradigms that are independent of political or ideological values.
Some non-exclusive list of examples includes (taken from Brue & Grant History of Economic Thought 8th ed):
- Keynesian economics
- Neoclassical economics
- New-classicism
- New Keynesian economics
- Post-Keynesian economics
These can be considered analogies to frameworks such quantum mechanics, since they are not just a single theory but 'frameworks' or paradigm that leads to creation of theories and models.
For example the (old) Keynesian framework, that is nowadays no longer followed because it got replaced by the synthesis of Neoclassical and New Keynesian framework, emphasized modelling from top to bottom, and adaptive expectations. This sometimes leads to different models and theories than frameworks that emphasize bottom up modelling (i.e. starting from individual or household).
For example, the Ramsay's model you mention would be considered to be following neoclassical paradigm, because it starts with the behavior of representative household, and builds the economy from bottom up, besides other reasons.
