Wikipedia says
Natural science is concerned with the description, prediction, and understanding of natural phenomena based on empirical evidence from observation and experimentation. It can be divided into two main branches: life science (or biological science) and physical science.
Social science is concerned with society and the relationships among individuals within a society. It has many branches that include, but are not limited to, anthropology, archaeology, communication studies, economics, history, human geography, jurisprudence, linguistics, political science, psychology, public health, and sociology. Social scientists may adopt various philosophical theories to study individuals and society. For example, positivist social scientists use methods resembling those of the natural sciences as tools for understanding society, and so define science in its stricter modern sense.
Economics is a "social science". Should we also categorise it under the bare label of "science" as well?
I think it would make sense to do so. Most social sciences are based on the first process of the natural sciences: observation. While observation would not suffice for most natural sciences, some like astronomy are arguably predominantly observation based, as humanity is not currently capable of affecting star formation etc.
Experimentation is tricky for the social sciences because of the ethical questions around using human subjects. But with willing volunteers experiments can be made. For example, some people create their own languages, called conlangs, in order to test theories of language, and then teach them to other people.
Economics clearly has a strong observational and theoretical history, but there are also times in which people have experimented with economic ideas. I would say that Basic Income trials would count as economic experiments for example. With observation, analysis and theorising, and experimentation, I think economics should be considered a science.
