Info for authors
The link below will redirect you to our overview with technical requirements for our articles and essays.
formal requirements for authors
Here you will find a full overview of our the guidelines with examples for references and footnotes for publications in R/evolutions: Global Trends & Regional Issues. The minimum size of a standard article is about 5000 words (about 10 pages A4). All texts are sent in a recent word format (.doc, .docx) so that the editorial team can easily edit them and adapt them to the R/evolutions lay-out. In addition we ask for a short biography (150-200 words), and an abstract (maximum 200 words) with some key words, which will be published likewise. Click on the link to get the ‘Formal requirements for authors’.
When it comes to the publication process, we kindly ask prospective authors to get acquainted with the proposed topics first and then contact the respective topic editor (Global Trend or Regional Issue). More info on the topics and contact info of the ‘topic editor’ can be found under: ‘Forthcoming’ After agreeing on the nature of contribution (Scholarly article, scientific essay or interview) we kindly ask to send an abstract and keywords to the topic editor. Afterwards a deadline will be agreed for the draft article (or other text).
When the draft text has been received, the topic editor (in consultation with the editor-in-chief) will adapt the text (to make it anonymous) and find two reviewers. (One double-blind and one single-blind review). The single-blind review will foremost focus on the formal requirements and structural aspects of the draft paper; the double-blind reviewer on the contrary will tackle scientific and methodological dimensions. The review process can take up to 3-5 weeks (excluding holiday periods).
In case the author does not accept the decision of the review, or has questions regarding its content, we kindly ask to contact the topic editor. In case the reviews are negative, the final decision to publish lies with the topic editor and editor-in-chief. Publication can be denied in case authors do not address the recommendations of the reviewers. (‘address’ in this context refers to: implementing the reviewers recommendations; or justifying their decision not to do so to the topic editor.)
When the final draft is ready, we kindly ask authors to perform a thorough language check. Authors are also expected to implement the formal requirements (see above). Afterwards the final text will be checked once more by the topic team and if approved, will be adapted to the design and lay-out of the journal. In case of (major) editorial changes, authors are ask to accept the final version of their text before publication. Authors will also need to fill in, sign, scan and send the ‘Affirmation of intellectual rights’ document to the editorial team, before publication.
When published the journal in full form will be freely accessible on the website. In addition, there will be a link to the author’s individual contribution, which can be downloaded in a separate PDF-file. In addition the R/evolutions team will upload the journal on several scholarly platforms and databases to enhance promotion of the whole issue and/or individual texts. Authors are free to do the same with their text or the issue as a whole.
Forecasting & Scenario-building
Finally this page will elaborate somewhat on the purpose of forecasting and scenario-building we aim to add to our articles. The aim of the journal is to capture ‘change’ both on global scale and for regional transformations. To acquire insights on how these trends and regional issues evolve, we encourage authors to add some form of forecasting or scenario-building to their articles.
Scenario-building is not a way to predict the future, but to present a spectrum of possible futures, which are plausible and can come true. There are often used to create strategies or formulate policies. This journal does not go that far, since we describe and analyze change, but are not part of the decision-making process. This still does not diminish their usefulness for researchers and analysts. By creating ‘memories of the future,’ paraphrasing the famous Swedish Neurobiologist David Ingvar, one can grasp changes, connect discerned trends with uncertainties, and pour them into clear, consistent narratives.
These different pictures of the future are most useful tools for researchers. They structure uncertainty in different internally coherent outcomes, which allows the analysis of day-to-day changes to be categorized in this or that scenario. The cause-and-effect of an event is no longer isolated, but integrated in a narrative that links them with other variables and presents the possible impact or implications within or outside this dimension. A direct causal link is often easy to spot, but the indirect consequences of a choice or an action are most clearly presented in the form of a narrative, a scenario, a forecast.
We do not force any specific methodology on authors; it would be unwise and counterproductive: As authors themselves need all their intellectual freedom to do their analyses. And not all methodologies are of course suitable for all units of analysis. Any tested forecasting method is allowed: From normative scenarios to explanatory and intuitive forecasts.
A useful method, that we invite you to get acquainted with, is the one developed by the R/evolutions editorial team. It is of the explanatory kind, identifying the main variables in a given process, listing them and ranking them according to importance, with the aim of exposing the causality between them in order to construct narrative scenarios. We can send you more information, if you contact the R/evoltions team. An example of an article using this method would be the text of Rafał Wiśniewski “Political future of the Korean Peninsula – An attempt at forecasting.” (See R/evolutions, Vol. 1, Issue 1. pp. 264-285.)