Submission Policy

Rising Asia Journal, the principal scholarly publication of the Rising Asia Foundation, encourages authors to submit manuscripts spanning the humanities and social sciences and various thematic approaches—historical, economic, cultural, foreign policy, military, literary and theoretical. We are particularly interested in explorations of the following themes: war, peace and society (WPS), grand strategy, ideology, ethnicity, race, gender, feminism, indigenous and diasporic peoples, colonialism and postcolonialism.

The RAJ requires authors to certify in a cover letter at the time of submission that the manuscript has been submitted only to the RAJ, and that it has not been published already (including in another language), nor is it under consideration for publication, or is in press elsewhere. A submission should be accompanied by (a) a cover letter with the author’s name, address, phone number and e-mail address, (b) a 250-word maximum abstract, c) Works Cited (bibliography) in Chicago style, (d) 250-word author bio (e) word count, and (f) a statement that the manuscript has not been published elsewhere in any form or language. As manuscripts are refereed anonymously, the author/s name should appear only on the cover sheet. All identifying traces of the author/s identity should be removed from the manuscript.

Authors are invited to submit articles in the following categories:

1. Research Articles up to 10,000 words, exclusive of footnotes. The footnotes should conform to The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition.
2. Commentary articles of up to 2,000 words, exclusive of footnotes.
3. Book Reviews of 1,000 to 2,000 words, exclusive of footnotes. The articles/reviews should focus on the following geographical areas, themes and topics, and should appeal to a multi-disciplinary audience:
   • The history, politics, economics, culture and literatures of the Eastern and North Eastern areas of India, and India’s role in world affairs; Southeast Asia, East Asia (Japan, the Koreas and Taiwan), China, the Indo-Pacific/Indian Ocean Region; and the foreign policy of the United States and other countries towards Asia, as defined above.
   • Foreign policy and International Relations (political, economic, cultural, soft power, informal diplomacy/Track 2, diplomatic history), war, peace, and society; peace studies; national defence; geo-strategy; revolution; colonialism and decolonization; hegemony and resistance.
   • Theories and issues of identity, gender and feminism, and diasporic and indigenous peoples; postcolonial theory and related discourses.
   • World affairs in a contemporary context, as well as 20th Century historical topics and themes.

Articles should offer an original point of view, or new evidence, or a fresh interpretation. They should be written in excellent English and supported by pertinent footnotes. Please consult the RAJ Reference Guide for Authors for details on our house style for grammar and citing footnotes.

Please send a copy of your article in MS Word as e-mail attachment to Dr. Harish C. Mehta, Editor-in-Chief, The Rising Asia Journal at harishcmehta1968@gmail.com / harish.mehta@utoronto.ca. If required, articles should be accompanied by photographs or graphics, along with permission from copyright holders to enable the journal to use them.

Staff

Articles will be initially assessed for publication by the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial staff:
Editor-in-Chief: Harish C. Mehta (PhD, McMaster University, Canada).
Assistant/Copy Editors: Hussena Calcuttawala, Raka Mukherjee, Valentina Notts, Mohini Maureen Pradhan, Hemalatha Sridhar.
Publishing Executive: Roshni Subramani.

Submission of manuscripts

No manuscript will be considered for publication if it is concurrently under consideration by another journal or press, or if it has been published, or is in submission, under contract, or in press elsewhere. Both restrictions apply to the substance as well as to the exact wording of the manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted, the editors expect that its appearance in the RAJ will precede republication of the article, or any significant part thereof, in another work. Final decisions regarding publication are up to the discretion of the editors.

Peer Review Process

The RAJ uses a "double-blind" system (neither the author nor the reviewer know each other) in order to protect the anonymity of the reviewer and the author, and to ensure that authors get a fair reading. The final decision on publication of all manuscripts submitted to the Journal will be made by the Editor-in-Chief.

The Initial Review

After receiving a manuscript, the assistant editors conduct an initial reading to check the manuscript for formatting, sources, and adherence to the journal’s areas of interest. The staff then prepare the article with their comments for the editor-in-chief to review. After the Editor-in-Chief and/or a member of the Editorial Board has read the manuscript, a decision is reached on whether the article is suitable for the Journal. The editors may also send the manuscript to members of the Editorial Board for their view.

If the Editors find that a submitted manuscript shows promise but the author still needs to improve it, they will return the manuscript to the author with suggestions on how the article may be revised so that it is fit to be sent out for peer review.

The Peer Review

If a manuscript meets the initial criteria of fitness, the Editor-in-Chief will then send it out for a peer reviewer to assess the manuscript. The reviewer will be sent a template of questions in a fillable form which he will use to make his evaluation of the essay for content and form. The reviewers are selected by the Editor-in-Chief and other members of the Editorial Board for their expertise on the topic and in the field.

Steps in the Peer Review Process:

• The First Reading: Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript and provide one of three decisions: accept, reject, or revise and resubmit. The reviewers are asked to reach their decision based on the relevance of the topic, whether the author adds a fresh perspective, whether the author uses primary and secondary literature effectively and sufficiently, and what the weakness and strengths in the argumentation are.
• The reviewers are requested to return the manuscript to the editorial staff with their decision of Accept, Revise and Resubmit, or Reject, along with comments, suggestions, and revisions within a period four to six weeks so that the process can move forward.
• The Assistant Editors collate and forward the decisions to the Editor-in-Chief/and or a member of the Editorial Board to review.
• The Editors take about a week to assess the reviews and attach their own decision.
• The manuscript is returned to the author along with the Editors’ decision and reviewers’ reports.
• If the decision is to "Accept" a manuscript, then the author is informed about the next stages of the production process, in which the author will have a last opportunity to correct minor mistakes. After an article has been accepted, the author must not make substantial revisions to the manuscript without the permission of the Editors.
• If the decision is to "Revise and Resubmit," the author is asked to resubmit the article once he/she has done the revisions according to the reviewers’ and Editors’ suggestions. The author is required to clearly answer each question or comment from each reviewer and the Editors, demonstrating how the manuscript has been revised. When the revisions are completed, the author should return the manuscript to the editorial office, under a cover letter listing out the revisions that have been made. The author should make an effort to complete the revisions in a timely manner.
• The Second Reading: Upon receiving a revised and resubmitted manuscript, the Editors will request the same reviewers who had originally read the article to review the revised article. The reviewers are requested to return the manuscript within three to four weeks.
• When the results of the Second Reading reach the editorial office of the RAJ, the Editors decide whether to accept or reject the article. The Editors may request that the author carries out additional revisions. If the decision is to "accept," then the author will receive instructions for the next steps in the production process.
• Finally, if the reviewers’ and Editors’ decision is to "reject" a manuscript, the author will be sent the reviewers’ reports. As the reviews will be comprehensive, the process should end there.

The Time Frame

The peer review takes between two to four months, starting with the submission of the manuscript at the RAJ office and ending with the Editors' decision on publication. There may, however, be delays caused by difficulties in finding reviewers, or reviewers who are late in responding. The editorial staff makes every effort to ensure that proper time is kept. The Second Reading by the reviewers depends upon how soon the author is able to revise and resubmit a manuscript. The revision and second reading should take at least a month.

What Kind of Articles are Likely to be Accepted

• A successful manuscript should demonstrate a novel approach to the issue: geographical, social, economic, historical, chronological, disciplinary.
• It should make a novel theoretical contribution to the particular topic and the discipline in general.
• It should discuss existing theoretical material on the topic in sufficient depth.
• It should be empirically rich.
• It should use sources appropriately to the point that the author is trying to make.
• The writing should clear and compelling, and the work well structured.
• The writing should be understandable to specialists in most major fields of the humanities and social sciences.
• It should employ archival sources or other primary/secondary materials.
• The author should show the importance of their articles within the literature, arguing how the manuscript will advance or add to our knowledge.
• Manuscripts will be returned if they do not adhere to the word limit, style, and citations requirements.

Ingredients of a Good Manuscript

• An attractive and strong introduction that clearly states the principal thesis or argument, specifying how the article makes a contribution to the existing literature.
• A paragraph on why the sources used are important to the article.
• The main body of the article should present a clearly structured argument and lucid presentation of the evidence.
• The conclusion not merely summarize the content and analyze the findings. It should reach some broad conclusions by looking back and looking ahead, and pointing towards future research possibilities.

Book Review Submissions

The Editors and Editorial Staff may solicit/commission authors to write book reviews.

Book Review Guidelines for Reviewers

Reviewers, at the top of the review, please provide the following information:

Title of book, author’s name, place of publication, publisher’s name, year of publication, number of pages, and price. For example: David Best, The History of Food (New York: Penguin, 2006), 350 pages, $65.

Please adhere to the following guidelines:

• Effectiveness: Place the review within a broader context, explaining what important issues are worth the attention of readers.
• Content: Reviews should include a brief summary of the scope, purpose, and content of the book and its significance in the literature of the subject.
• Context: Reviewers should include a brief survey/outline of the literature in the field (i.e. other books by scholars on the same topic or field), with a short comment on how the book being reviewed differs from, or adds to, the existing literature.
• Evaluation: Reviews should go beyond description of the book and should evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the work, paying attention to the use of sources, methodology, organization, and presentation. Evaluation should consider the work's stated purpose.
• Audience: Reviewers need to keep in mind the readership of our journal, which comes from many different disciplines and departments, so it is important for reviewers to provide historiographical and historical background.
• Professionalism: Whether the evaluation of a work is favorable or unfavorable, reviewers should express criticism in courteous, temperate, and constructive terms. Reviewers are responsible for presenting a fair and balanced review and for treating authors with respect.
• Finally, as with any good scholarly review, your review should make reference to related sources, and should help readers consider how the material or presentation being evaluated fits within its discipline. These 1,500 to 2,000-word book reviews need proper footnotes, both giving page numbers for the book being reviewed, and full publication details for other books being cited such as in the survey of the literature in the field.

Permission to Republish/Reprint Articles in the RAJ

In case an author wishes to republish in books or collections articles that appeared in the journal, the RAJ permits republication. The Journal may request the author for a fee for republication depending on the circumstances of the proposed publishing. Authors that wish to republish their articles should contact the editorial office of the RAJ to seek permission from the Editor.

Permission to Publish Photographs, Graphics and Figures

Authors must obtain permission to reproduce copyright material, for print and online publication, in perpetuity. If necessary, authors must pay the holder of copyright for the use of copyright material. Authors must provide the RAJ evidence in writing that such permissions have been obtained from the rights-holders.

Copyright Assignment Form for Publication in the RAJ

After a manuscript has been accepted for publication by the RAJ, authors will be asked to fill an online "copyright assignment form". By submitting an article for publication, authors confirm that they are the corresponding/submitting author and that the RAJ may retain your email address for the purpose of communicating with you about the article. The authors agree to notify the RAJ immediately if the authors’ details change.