Aims and scope
The Internet Policy Review explores regulatory issues that emerge at the crossroad of online information communication technologies and society. The aim of the journal is to provide timely and critical insight on technological, policy and governance developments which are expected to have long lasting impacts on the political, economic and social life of European societies.
Reflecting a diversity of socio-technical concerns, the Internet Policy Review is a multidisciplinary journal at the confluence of policy studies, technology studies, law, economics, communication studies and sociology. Its research articles are published on an ongoing basis and it aims at keeping to short review cycles. The Internet Policy Review reaches a wide audience of academic researchers, policy makers, and industry practitioners, as well as civil society advocates and media professionals. All articles are available to the public in a libre open access fashion.
We welcome submissions from all related fields, with particular preference for contributions which critically examine the relationship between regulatory initiatives and technological change, rule-making processes embedded in technology and, make direct reference to relevant Europe-based policies.
We publish articles on the following themes:
- Infrastructure & Standards
- Information & Data
- Intellectual property rights
- Privacy & Security
Prospective authors may contact the editors of Internet Policy Review prior to submission with any questions about the appropriateness or fit of a draft article idea.
The Internet Policy Review invites papers that identify and engage with current debates about the regulation of information communication technologies. Engagement may take the form of empirical, legal or theoretical analysis or scholarly essays but should always be critical and original. Submissions should make explicit reference to European policy and should be oriented towards analysing and, if appropriate, proposing regulatory solutions to emerging socio-technical challenges.
Papers should make an original contribution to existing understanding and/or practice. Claims must be supported by evidence, and ideas should be supported with ample reference to existing academic literature in one or more related disciplines. Submissions which are overly descriptive or anecdotal will generally not be selected to proceed to peer review.
The Internet Policy Review is a multidisciplinary international journal with a diverse audience. In addition to academic rigour, we encourage contributions that communicate practicable knowledge and findings to policymakers, practitioners and the wider public. Submissions should make explicit a) their contribution to scholarly understanding and b) the relevance of findings for policy makers and/or practitioners.
Submissions must be in clearly-written English. The editorial team requests that initial submissions be around 36,000 characters (6,000 words) in length, to encourage concise and parsimonious discussion of core issues. The final published paper will not exceed 48,000 characters (8,000 words).
Papers must be accompanied by a list of academic references. The Internet Policy Review requires that authors use APA 6th Edition style for referencing. Refer to our style and formatting guide prior to submission.
All Internet Policy Review articles are peer reviewed by two or more external subject experts. Our review process is an innovative non-blind transparent procedure in which the contributing author(s) are visible to reviewers, and reviewers’ identities and comments are fully visible to authors. The purpose of this review procedure is to foster interdisciplinary discussion, collegiality and respect in the publication process.
Publication process and steps
The Internet Policy Review aims for quick turnaround (ten weeks) on submitted draft articles. The typical workflow from submission to publication is as follows:
The article is published when ready on policyreview.info. It receives a digital object identifier (DOI), an open access license (Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Germany), and is automatically archived in the appropriate issue. A typeset PDF version is offered for download.
The managing editor checks submission for fit with the journal.
The managing editor allocates the submission to one academic editor, in charge of leading the review and the decisional process.
- In case of solicited articles, the review process is handled by an academic editor independent from the solicitation.
The academic editor commissions two reviewers, who accept to perform their review of the manuscript within four weeks.
- If reviews are contradictory, a third review is commissioned.
Based on the reviews, the academic editor drafts a decision: either i) accept, ii) accept subject to minor revisions, iii) accept subject to major revisions, iv) reject.
The editorial team discusses the submissions and reviews, and takes a final decision based on the lead academic editor’s draft decision.
- If the editorial team does not reach a joint decision, the managing board is asked to evaluate.
The managing editor sends the team/board decision to the submitting author(s) with a link to the electronic and editable version of the manuscript. The reviewers' identities and comments are visible to the submitting author(s).
For a manuscript accepted subject to revisions, once performed, the manuscript is reviewed by the academic editor and managing editor. If deemed satisfactory, the editorial team prepares the final proofread version for publication.
Submissions should be submitted to email@example.com.
For submissions, please use our manuscript guidelines as stated here: template for Internet Policy Review research paper or essay.