Farewell Editorial

Demand

There are at least two kinds of demand for journals like IRAS – one as source of knowledge and the other as a place in which to publish one’s work. Both have changed during my period in office. The demand for knowledge has intensified as a result of at least two factors. On the one hand, thanks to the Net, it has become easier for academics, even in fairly remote locations, to access a wide range of journals. On the other, the international professionalization (and to some extent standardization) of the academic community has meant that more and more often a proper literature review is demanded as one of the opening components of published articles. It is harder than before to get a ‘think piece’, with few if any references to the works of others, published. In some ways this is a pity, and some very thoughtful papers may be missing out because of this ‘requirement’, but whether it is a Good Thing or not, it is the way the world has turned, and in our field it means that would-be authors need to dine extensively from an ever-widening menu of specialist journals.

The need to publish has certainly increased. More and more academics in more and more countries now live and work under some sort of bibliometric audit – how much have they published recently, in which journals, how many citations have they scored? These metrics now routinely influence appointments and promotions. They help to create a situation in which ‘publish or die’, which used to be a motto applying more in the USA than anywhere else, has spread its domain to many other countries. On a few, thankfully rare, occasions, this pressure on academics to publish leads to literal ‘demands’, where authors write to editors explaining that their promotion or tenure depend on getting this paper published. These are sad signs of the times, and it does seem to me that bibliometriphilia can easily becomes a crude and even counter-productive obsession for those in managerial roles within universities – a cheap alternative to actually making the time to know one’s academic colleagues well and to think hard about their strengths and weaknesses. Good metrics provide invaluable information, but they never tell the whole story. One metric for IRAS/RISA is that the number of papers we receive each year has more than doubled since I took over the editorship. Another is that our Impact Factor has steadily increased. These help to explain why I saw a need to move away from the previous model of a lone heroic (or diabolic) editor and create an editorial team. I would have drowned in text. Now at least the four of us can drown together in mutual sympathy.

At the same time demand for published space has been further enhanced because the number of countries participating in the international Anglophone debates over public administration has increased. IRAS/RISA currently receives a good flow of submissions from (inter alia) Asia, Latin America and Africa. Encouragingly, we are also beginning to receive papers from the Arab world. Our publishers tell us that we are among the most widely read journals in the field, and we continue to try to match that with a similarly diverse authorship.

Supply

Journal publishing has become ever more professional, technical and competitive. The old idea of a scholarly ‘house journal’ belonging to some institute or association has almost disappeared. Paper copies, handsome though they are, are now far less important than electronic copies. The journal publishing business (in which SAGE are among the most experienced, innovative and prestigious players) has changed fast, and continues to do so. The downloading of individual articles is now a main line activity, and journals themselves are most commonly sold in packages rather than individually. Most recently we have moved to the position where subscribers can read IRAS on their mobile phones, and where the social media are an important part of the journal’s communications strategy. And all these activities are religiously measured and reported upon.

Although I am part of a generation that can fondly remember wandering into silent university libraries every couple of weeks and taking a few favourite journals down from the shelves in order to see what was in the latest issue, I must not glorify that era. It is long gone, and the circumstances of today’s working academics (not to speak of the practitioners) demand far more flexible and individually-tailored approaches. We have to notify readers of what we are bringing out, and make it as easy as possible for them to download and use their selections when they are in the office, at home, or in trains, boats or planes. I will certainly fight to preserve the very special atmosphere of great university and public libraries (my own at Leuven is a beautiful building with a cool, reflective atmosphere) but the reading of journals cannot be confined to these sacred spaces. What is more, the increasingly dispersed and tailored modes of ‘consumption’ represent, to some degree at least, a democratization. No longer does one have to be a member of a major university or government institution − or physically present in such – to read IRAS. Our authors can reach a wider, more diverse audience, and can do so more quickly.

All of the above applies not only to the SAGE-published English edition, but also to the other language editions which make IRAS such an unusual and wide-reaching journal. During my watch as Editor we have been delighted to see a Chinese edition launched, and, more recently, finally to get the French RISA placed on an electronic platform (CAIRN) where it can begin to offer the kind of availability that contemporary scholars need. Our Arabic edition fell by the wayside due to institutional changes in the UAE, but currently seems likely to be resuscitated with new institutional support. The Spanish edition was an early victim of European austerity, but, again, is now in the process of making a come-back.

Acknowledgements

Many people contribute to the success of a journal. In the case of IRAS/RISA the main suspects are the team of deputy editors, the journal manager, and relevant staff at the publisher. In each case I have been very fortunate. The deputy editors – Isabella Proeller, Shamsul Haque and Yves Emery – have all taken large slices of time out of their busy professorial schedules to perform their arduous (and sometimes unpopular) roles. They have provided me with a steady flow of firm decisions, wise advice and good ideas and, most importantly perhaps, they have collectively created and sustained a climate of friendly, informal partnership which I will surely miss. At the same time their standards have remained resolutely high, and on occasion they have prompted me to strengthen my resolve when dealing with the kind of awkward situations that inevitably arise when − for example – a very well-known or senior author slips below their own usual levels of attainment (as we all sometimes do). The journal manager – Catherine Humblet – has carried out her (changing and growing) role since before my time, and I quickly came to understand why my distinguished predecessor, Ken Kernaghan, had found her indispensible. On the publisher’s side Lucy Robinson and Anthony Green at SAGE have been consistently flexible and friendly, and have supplied me with enormous amounts of information about almost every aspect of the journal’s performance.

The unsung heroes and heroines are, however, the many, many people who have (wholly unrecompensed) given us their time and expertise by agreeing to review our manuscripts. The general standard of commenting has been high, and it has not been uncommon to find reviewers who write several pages of detailed suggestions. One is tempted to reiterate the truth that a scientific journal can be no better than its (anonymous) reviewers allow it to be. Thank you, in your hundreds. Editors would be lost without you.

It remains for me to welcome my successor, Andrew Massey. I have known Andrew and his work for a good many years and I am truly delighted to know that the journal will now be in his capable hands. I will not embarrass him by further extolling his virtues here, but simply say ‘watch this space’ because I am absolutely confident he will innovate and further improve what I believe is already a very good journal.

So, farewell, IRAS, although, of course it is never farewell because I will continue to read it, and to serve on various committees relating to it. But I shall do so with the novel luxury of knowing that I can make suggestions without any longer having to carry them out myself!