How to submit to the Journal of Peer Production
JoPP will be published twice a year. All scientific contributions will be peer reviewed. Submissions should be made to the editors though our contact form.
Once papers have been accepted, it is the author’s responsibility to format them in accordance with our specifications.
Contributors are invited to follow the Harvard citation style and to submit papers using free software such as Open Office. Authors are invited to limit their usage of italics and endnotes. If endnotes are indispensable, please manually insert them with [square brackets]. Refer to published papers for examples of more specific referencing guidelines.
Tables and illustrations
If your paper includes tables and illustrations, it is necessary to indicate where they should appear in the paper and to submit them separately: tables should be converted to html and illustrations submitted in the SVG format.
The journal welcomes submissions based on interdisciplinary approaches including information and computer sciences, science & technology studies, anthropology, legal studies, economics, geography, history, communications, and sociology. JoPP accepts a variety of manuscripts. Please review the descriptions below and identify the submission type best suited to your intended submission.
Research papers are theoretically driven, focusing on key facets of peer production, and reporting substantial findings. Suggested length: 8000 words. You may be interested to find out more about our open peer review process.
Debates, essays and interviews
We welcome testimonies, working papers and critical essays by peer production researchers and practitioners. Debates are essays by several authors expressing clearly contrasting viewpoints about a relevant issue. All these contributions should comprise 1000-3000 words.
These contributions should also comprise 1000-3000 words. Suggested topics for conference organisers who wish to file a report include:
- Name and theme of the conference?
- What were your goals in organising this conference?
- Do you think those goals were met?
- What did you learn in organisational terms?
- With the benefit of hindsight, what would you do differently?
- Were there any particularly interesting, poetic or dramatic moments?
- What was your favorite presentation and why?
We also seek reviews of relevant projects and of books analysing peer production processes. Reviews should be 500-1000 words.
Editors are happy to discuss other possibilities with potential contributors. Please use the contact form to get in touch.