Policy & Politics at the Political Studies Association conference talking about how to get published

Sarah Ayres
Sarah Ayres

by Sarah Ayres, Co-editor, Policy & Politics

At Policy & Politics, we are passionate about ensuring that all of our published research is accessible, relevant and interesting for a broad range of readers worldwide. We are painfully aware of the huge proportion of research in general that is published in obscure outlets and read by very few people. This is why we invest heavily in promoting our content via our blog, our associates at Discover Society, LSE Public Policy and The Conversation and our social media channels. We’re so serious about this that we now have more twitter followers than any other international journal in the discipline!

In this blogpost, I’ve drawn on my experience of editing Policy & Politics for the last 4 years to set out a few golden rules to remember when submitting, although some of my points are relevant to getting published in academic journals more broadly. I should say these have been arrived at by looking at some of the most common reasons for rejection recently and by contrast, some of the papers which received most media and public attention.

Here are my 6 best tips: Continue reading

Governing, governability, the future of the state and other minor issues

Jon Pierre
Jon Pierre

Jon Pierre is Professor of Political Science at the University of Gothenburg and professor of public governance at the Melbourne School of Government, University of Melbourne. He serves on the editorial advisory board of Policy & Politics.

Two recent papers in the October 2015 edition of Policy & Politics  provoked my thinking about governing and governance; Bob Jessop’s “Crises, crisis-management and state restructuring: what future for the state?”, and Allan Cochrane, Bob Colenutt and Martin Field’s “Governing the ungovernable: spatial policy, markets and volume house-building in a growth region”. They did so for quite different reasons. Or so I thought.

The two texts could not be more different in style and presentation. For me, reading Bob Jessop has always been like having a bowl of fettuccine al burro in an Italian restaurant; it is pure delicacy but at the same time so incredibly rich that in order not to choke you have to proceed very slowly. You read a paragraph or even just a sentence (sometimes that can be one and the same thing) and then find yourself forced to sit back to take in and digest Bob’s argument. His analysis covers several discourses and perspectives, then puts a diachronic spin on the analysis and ends up asking Continue reading