Abstract
It may be odd for the editor of a journal to promote the competition, but there is such a wealth of new opportunities for publishing research in Science and Technology Studies (STS), and on the other hand for learning from that research, that I want to recognize and point to some of these. That there has been a proliferation of new journals and similar publishing outlets speaks to the vitality and success of STS as a field. In theoretical terms, STS has been strikingly imaginative and productive: as a result of placing under scrutiny so many things normally taken for granted, the field is constantly creating new ideas, concepts and frameworks. In topical terms, the scope for the field is endless, because science, technology and medicine are everywhere in our world, and touch almost everything.
All of the new venues I describe here are open access and are free of publishing fees, whether they are open-access journals, zines, multi-faceted blogs or video journals. In this, they are taking advantage of the relative ease of Internet publishing. They are also depending on a tremendous amount of work by volunteers, and in most cases the support of some institutional backers.
My list is only partial, and only includes recent projects. There are, of course, a great many other journals in STS, such as those listed on the website of 4S, the Society for Social Studies of Science (2015).
Engaging Science, Technology and Society (2015) is the open-access journal of 4S. (Despite the similarity of name, there is no official link between 4S and the journal Social Studies of Science. 4S does support and manage Science, Technology and Human Values, now very successfully in its 41st year, which bodes well for the new journal.) Engaging Science, Technology and Society’s first issue was published in the fall of 2015, and the journal will be publishing articles upon acceptance in one rolling annual volume – so you will need to check in on it occasionally. As a site of experimental writing and publishing, with a strong commitment to openness, the journal publishes pieces by STS scholars, alongside scholars from other fields interested in the interrelatedness of science, technology, society and culture. As an open-access journal, it should gain a wide readership among people interested in these issues. In addition to peer-reviewed research articles, the journal invites a variety of alternative manuscript forms, such as short critical engagements with topical issues, considerations of concepts of value in STS, debates and other interactions, and traces of intellectual paths in the field.
The Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies (2015) is an open-access journal specifically connecting STS researchers from Nordic countries. Since 2013, the journal has published peer-reviewed articles on new and established themes in Nordic STS communities, such as sustainable energy and climate change, information and communication technologies, gender studies, game studies, research on biotechnology and reproductive technologies, media studies, and popular representations of science and the history of science and technology. The journal is also elegantly designed.
Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience (2015) is another open-access journal, a peer-reviewed journal of feminist STS scholarship, published twice a year. Its first issue, like that of Engaging Science, Technology and Society, appeared in the fall of 2015. The title’s metaphor reflects the journal’s aim to provoke extended and distributed chains of reaction in the field of feminist STS. Accordingly, Catalyst focuses on interdisciplinary, collaborative and methodologically creative scholarship, and encourages both empirical and hermeneutical approaches. The first issue combines academic articles, collaborative discussions, reviews and essays that include video components. Catalyst welcomes individual submissions, but its editorial board is also planning themed issues; according to its initial editorial manifesto, forthcoming issues will explore such themes as Black Studies and Feminist Technoscience, Digital Militarism, and Disability and Technoscience. The journal has also been set up to bridge a number of feminist STS programs, working groups and forums.
Let me turn to a journal that pushes boundaries in a different direction, maintaining some key aspects of academic publishing, but insisting on a completely different form for contributions. The Journal of Video Ethnography (2015) publishes peer-reviewed ethnographic studies that are articulated via film and that use film as the central methodological tool – as opposed to studies that merely use film as supplemental component. The journal is linked to an annual film festival in Paris, Ethnografilm (2015), that is, itself peer-reviewed (and is supported by 4S). But by placing videos in a journal, the editors are providing traditional academic credit for this new form of academic knowledge – they argue (Shrum and Scott, 2015) that peer review is a central feature of academic work, but that the journal form makes that feature more recognizable to colleagues. By making the Journal of Video Ethnography open access, the editors also hope to make academic work accessible to audiences beyond the academy.
Limn (2011) is self-described as ‘somewhere between a scholarly journal and an art magazine’, addressing contemporary problems. Since 2011, Limn has published genealogical framings of key themes. Each issue features a problem that has been defined by the editorial team as an intellectual question, and not merely a theme. So far, these have been: systemic risk, social media and data mining, environmental indicators and food infrastructures and the Ebola outbreak’s effects on global health efforts. The contributions reflect networks of research and practice – there are no calls for contributions. Articles are concise, written for a general academic audience, and vetted collaboratively among editors and contributors. Perhaps most striking, though, is Limn’s strong focus on design and images as communicative tools; the journal does indeed have elements of an art magazine, and if you are not content with reading it online you may even buy a printed copy.
An unfortunate trend in scholarly publishing is the shrinking space given over to book reviews. Because of limited resources, Social Studies of Science, for example, has stopped publishing individual book reviews – though we welcome suggestions for essay reviews of multiple books such as that in this issue by Lentacker (2016), or broader literature reviews. There remain important book review sections in some journals in STS, but we may also want to pay attention to more general venues. The New Books Network (2015) takes advantage of one of the possibilities offered by the Internet: it is a network of podcast channels, intended for academic and other intellectually ‘serious’ audiences. In addition to the Science, Tech and Society channel, the network hosts numerous channels relevant to STS, such as Science, Technology, Anthropology, Sociology, History, Politics and Philosophy. As well as providing a venue for authors to promote new books, the network offers scholars the opportunity to use their area expertise as podcast hosts, or to merely listen to a podcast or two.
Let me close by mentioning two topically specialized venues that some readers in STS will find valuable. Medicine Anthropology Theory (2015) is an open-access journal in medical anthropology. Approximately three times each year, the journal publishes issues that include articles, reviews, photo essays, conference reports and more. Its attractive website also highlights recent contributions. Somewhat similar is Somatosphere (2015), a collaborative website and email list that posts on topics about contemporary and historical issues of science, healing, illness and the body. Posts are framed in multiple and diverse ways, including conceptual pieces, reflections on issues of public concern, research or fieldwork reports, book or film reviews, event reports, video or audio recordings of lectures or interviews, photo essays or multimedia presentations, etc. One of the features of Somatosphere that I have found particularly useful is its regular ‘in the journals’ roundup, which simply lists recent relevant publications with short abstracts.
Exciting opportunities like those above present new challenges for more traditionally innovative journals like Social Studies of Science. But because of the wealth of good material in STS, and because of the growing numbers of readers and viewers of that material, I think that there is plenty of room for both the new and the established.