Description
Legal academics in Europe publish a wide variety of materials including books, articles and essays, in an assortment of languages, and for a diverse readership. As a consequence, this variety can pose a problem for the evaluation of academic legal research. This thought-provoking book offers an overview of the legal and policy norms, methods and criteria applied in the evaluation of academic legal research, from a comparative perspective.
The expert contributions explore developments relating to professional vs academic publications, editorial review vs peer review, rankings of journals and law schools vs other reputation mechanisms and a range of other evaluation practices and their intended and unintended effects. Analysing research evaluation practices across more than ten jurisdictions and multiple contexts, this insightful book reveals how evaluation practices differ across Europe. Through this analysis, the book exposes a range of possibilities for further debate and study.
Engaging and topical, Evaluating Academic Legal Research in Europe will be valuable reading for legal academics, university and faculty managers, higher-education policy-makers and administrators as well as editors of law journals, legal publishers and research foundation and funding bodies.
Contributors include: A. Bakardjieva Engelbrekt, K. Byland, D. Costa, J. Hojnik, P. Letto-Vanamo, A. Lienhard, D. Mac Síthigh, E. Maier, G. Peruginelli, N. Petersen, K. Purnhagen, A. Ruda Gonzalez, M. Schmied, M. Snel, R. van Gestel
