Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T16:29:15.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International ranking of law journals – can it be done and at what cost?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Dan Jerker B. Svantesson
Dan Jerker B. Svantesson*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Law, Bond University, Queensland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper discusses issues associated with international ranking of law journals. Some catalysts for the development of international journal ranking are highlighted, reasons for ranking are discussed and a range of ranking methodologies are analysed. The paper illustrates the problems associated with international journal rankings and the negative consequences that inevitably flow from such exercises.

The paper was prompted by the Australian Research Council's (ARC)'s recent Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) scheme which, as one of its components, requires international journal ranking. While examples are drawn from the ERA scheme, the paper's discussion is general and much broader in scope. That is because schemes like the ERA will come and go, but the issues of international journal rankings will remain.

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , December 2009 , pp. 678 - 691
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See the website available at http://lawlib.wlu.edu/LJ/.

2 Korobkin, R ‘Symposium: ranking journals: some thoughts on theory and methodology’ (1999) 26 Florida State University Law Review 851 at 851.Google Scholar

3 See, eg, Brophy, A ‘the emerging importance of law review rankings for law school rankings’ (2007) 78 University of Colorado Law Review 35,Google Scholar

4 See the website available at http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/research-infrastructures-including-erih.html.

5 See the website available at http://www.arc.gov.au/era/default.htm.

6 Announced 26 February 2008.

7 As is suggested by the data of the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise in the UK, scholars in larger jurisdictions may still have a sufficient domestic audience to engage in more home jurisdiction focused research.

8 Such as articles written on issues of purely domestic interest (to the extent there are any such articles).

9 Chapion, G and Husté, A ‘Open, fair, and free journal ranking for researchers’ (2006) 56 BioScience 558 at 558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Korobkin, above n 2, at 854–855.

11 Ibid, at 860.

12 George and Guthrie ‘In defense of author prominence’, above n 3, at 894.

13 See the website available at http://www.arc.gov.au/era/indicators.htm.

14 Campbell, K et al ‘Journal publishing, journal reputation, and the United Kingdom's Research Assessment Exercise’ (1999) 26 Journal of Law and Society 470 at 476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Ibid, at 479.

16 See the website available at http://aah.org.uk/photos/A-HUG%20to%20AHRC.doc.

17 See the website available at http://www.hero.ac.uk/rae/overview/.

18 See the website available at http://www.rae.ac.uk/pubs/2009/ov/.

19 ‘A citation-based ranking of chemistry journals published in 1927 by Gross and Gross, is generally considered to be the first formal journal ranking’: Nisonger, above n 3, at 1004.

20 Ibid, at 1004.

21 George and Guthrie ‘An empirical evaluation of specialized law reviews’, above n 3.

22 George and Guthrie adopted a author-prominence scale developed by Robert M Jarvis and Phyllis G Coleman. For further details about this scale, see Jarvis, R and Coleman, P ‘Ranking law reviews: an empirical analysis based on author prominence’ (1997) 39 Arizona Law Review 15.Google Scholar

23 George and Guthrie ‘An empirical evaluation of specialized law reviews’, above n 3, at 827–829.

24 Ibid, at 827–829.

25 Korobkin, above n 2, at 862.

26 George and Guthrie ‘An empirical evaluation of specialized law reviews’, above n 3, at 825.

27 Korobkin, above n 2, at 866.

28 Ibid, at 866 (internal footnotes excluded). See also Farrar, J ‘Doctrine and reputation’ (2003) 15(2) Bond Law Review 71 at 81.Google Scholar

29 Campbell, K, Goodacre, A and Little, G ‘Ranking of United Kingdom law journals: an analysis of the Research Assessment Exercise 2001 submissions and results (2006) 33 Journal of Law and Society 335 at 344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 Ibid, at 344.

31 Ibid, at 347.

32 Ibid, at 349.

33 See the website available at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/).

34 The selection of these particular journals amongst all the available Australian University flagship journals is completely arbitrary.

35 Study carried out 17 February 2009.

36 Study carried out 17 February 2009.

37 See the website available at http://aah.org.uk/photos/A-HUG%20to%20AHRC.doc.

38 Ibid.

39 Campbell et al, above n 14, at 485.

40 See the website available at http://www.arc.gov.au/era/tiers_ranking.htm.

41 See, eg, Senator Chris Evans' media release: Australia's brain drain biggest on record 7 October 2008, available at http://www.minister.immi.gov.au/media/media-releases/2008/ce08098.htm.

42 Australian Feminist Law Journal (ranked A), Feminist Criminology (ranked B), Feminist Legal Studies (ranked A), Feminist Review (ranked A) and Yale Journal of Law and Feminism (ranked A).

43 American Journal of Law and Medicine (ranked A), Health and Human Rights: An International Journal (ranked B), Health Economics, Policy and Law (ranked C), Health Law Bulletin (ranked C), Health Law Journal (ranked C), Health Law Review (ranked C), Health Matrix: Journal of Law-Medicine (ranked C), Issues in Law and Medicine (ranked C), Journal of Health and Biomedical Law (ranked C), Journal of Health and Life Sciences Law (ranked C), Journal of Health Care Law and Policy (ranked B), Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law (ranked B), Journal of Law and Medicine (ranked B), Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics (ranked A), Journal of Legal Medicine (ranked B), Journal of Medicine and Law (ranked C), Medical Law International (ranked C), Medical Law Review (ranked A), Medical Trial Technique Quarterly (ranked C), Medicine and Law (ranked B), Medizinethik (ranked C) and Michigan State University Journal of Medicine and Law (ranked C).

44 See, eg, Z Corbyn ‘Philosophers in ranking protest’ Times Higher Education 28 August, 2008, available at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=403321&sectioncode=26 and M Newman ‘Editors demand an opt-out from journal rankings’ Times Higher Education 2 October, 2008, available at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=403795&sectioncode=26.