International law is, by definition, a global discipline. Yet in practice, scholarly discourse often remains hampered by the borders of national publishing cultures and fora. The voices that are most audible internationally often come from the same (Western) elite institutions. The internet with its unprecedented communicative potential offers a unique chance to make international legal scholarship more inclusive, participatory \u2013 and simply more international. Nonetheless, old dynamics of center and periphery have not been overcome. The COVID-19 pandemic further increased the use of digital technologies for global scientific exchange and collaborations, highlighting their potential and revitalizing debates about open access (OA) and inequalities in knowledge production and dissemination.\u00a0 For those engaged in Open Access debates, the steps taken by publishers and academic institutions during the pandemic showcased the wealth of available possibilities – and their promise for advancing international legal scholarship.<\/p>\n
It remains to be seen whether the pandemic will bring the long-predicted \u201caccess revolution\u201d, in other words, whether it will have lasting effects in terms of opening up science. It may well be that the lifting of paywalls, which many publishers have undertaken to facilitate access to science in the age of working from home, and the invention of open COVID licenses will turn out to be only temporary phenomena. Undeniably, however, the pandemic is a gamechanger in that it shows that change is possible – and that it can happen very fast. Many things that seemed impossible not so long ago became reality within months.<\/p>\n
After nearly two years of online teaching, zoom conferences and writing sprints on the web, it is a good moment to discuss the chances and challenges of the digitalization of international legal scholarship. Is the digitalization of scholarly communication a chance to include more voices and perspectives and to finally overcome the multiple existing barriers? In other words, are we on the verge of realizing the utopia of a global, democratic, and equitable system of knowledge production and diffusion, as propagated by early open access enthusiasts? Or, on the contrary, does the current development further contribute to neoliberal performance absolutism in science and produce new exclusions?<\/p>\n
As a digital publication format which has aimed to contribute to overcoming obstacles of traditional publishing and to foster transboundary discourses in international law since 2014, V\u00f6lkerrechtsblog is pleased to organize a conference on open access and global justice. The conference will explore and further theorize the effects of the digitalization of scholarly communication on international legal scholarship by bringing together different perspectives and experiences. While contributions discussing experiences during the pandemic are welcome, the framework is broader. We are particularly interested in voices from the \u201cGlobal South\u201d. Where do scholars, blog and journal editors, librarians, teachers, and platform providers see the chances and where limits of digitalization for scholarly communication in international law?\u00a0 We want to question, discuss, and critically analyze the conditions and infrastructure\u00a0of scholarly communication in international legal scholarship.<\/p>\n
Submissions on any of the following topics are welcome: <\/strong><\/p>\n To what extent do paywalls inhibit transnational scholarly discourses? Can OA be a tool to\u00a0close the \u201cknowledge gap\u201d and\u00a0internationalize scholarly discourses in international law?\u00a0Can it even increase the legitimacy of international law as such?\u00a0What are OA practices in different countries and on different continents?\u00a0What are possible downsides of OA (e.g. new exclusions with business models charging authors rather than readers)?<\/p>\n How do journals shape international legal discourses? Do they perpetuate inequalities by upholding the prevalence of dominating voices? Are \u201ccitation cartels\u201d an issue, if so, how can they be overcome? Other questions: Predominance of the English language and specific writing styles to the detriment of others\/diversity; mainstream vs. niche topics.<\/p>\n In a self-reflective and self-critical exercise, we are also interested in reflections about the role of blogs in international law. Often having started as alternatives to traditional journals, have they succeeded in breaking up old structures and hierarchies and enhancing diverse debates? Or, to the contrary, have they driven the \u201cpublish or perish\u201d mentality to new extremes? What lessons can be learned to harness blogs for a fruitful and sustainable advancement of international law?<\/p>\n What are the potentials and limits of \u201ce-conferencing\u201d? Can online or hybrid conferences address the problem that not all scholars have the financial and time resources to travel to traditional in-person conferences? Could the possibility to participate online remedy existing access inequalities? Or, to the contrary, does \u201ce-conferencing\u201d prevent the beneficial confrontation and interaction of conferences?<\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n