magnify
Home Editorials Essential EJIL Statistics for 2011

Essential EJIL Statistics for 2011

Published on April 2, 2012        Author: 

Last year we published quite extensive statistics for EJIL over the last 20 years. Here is an update of our vital stats for 2011. The stats relate both to submissions during 2011 and articles published. The published articles will, by the nature of things, include many submitted the preceding year. Synchronizing would be very time consuming. I do not think that leaving the numbers as is distorts the overall picture. I want to remind our readers that we practise no form of affirmative action, in respect of either solicited or unsolicited manuscripts.

Gender

Of the total number of manuscripts submitted, 79% came from men and 21% from women. Of these, manuscripts accepted for publication were 71% by men and 29% by women.  In 2011 67% of published articles were by men, and 33% by women.

Regional origin

48% of articles submitted originated in EU countries, 8% originated from Council of Europe countries outside the EU, 8% came from the US and 36% from the rest of the world. Of this cohort of submissions, the percentage eventually to be published will be as follows: EU 65%; CoE other than EU 2%;  USA  11%;  Rest of the World 23%. Of articles published in 2011 65% were EU origin, 3% CoE other than EU, 18% USA, 14% rest of the world. 

Linguistic origin

42% of submissions came from English-speaking countries and 58% from non-English-speaking countries.  In 2011 54% of articles published came from non-English-speaking countries and 46% from English-speaking countries.

Print Friendly
Filed under: Editorials, EJIL
 

One Response

  1. Readers interested in affirmative action might enjoy a new posting called “If you need quality, you need affirmative action.” Maybe it could **positively** affect your submissions?!

    It begins:

    “New research demonstrates that when affirmative action programs are used, the quality of the applicants increases.”

    It focuses on affirmative action for women, but opens the door to similar research on other kinds of affirmative action programs.

    Check it out at http://bit.ly/H9oEWA