Submissions

This journal is not accepting submissions at this time.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
The submission file is in Microsoft Word.
The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end (unless there are good reasons for a different approach).
The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the APA 7th styleguide.
The names and email addresses of potential independent peer reviewers have been included.

Author Guidelines

Articles must be submitted to the Editors by email to: jonathan.boston@vuw.ac.nz or Policy-Quarterly@vuw.ac.nz.

The journal welcomes contributions of about 4,000 words, written on any topic relating to governance, public policy and management. Articles submitted will be peer reviewed.

Although issues will not usually have single themes, special issues may be published from time to time on specific or general themes, such as marking significant events. In these cases, and on other occasions, contributions may be invited from particular people.

Below is the guidance provided by the editorial team to PQ reviewers:

Policy Quarterly: Peer Review Rubric[1]

PQ expects peer reviewers to provide constructive, narrative feedback for each of the following aspects of a submission. A full explanation of each rating for each category of criteria is available in a second table below.

Reviewer rubric

Criteria	Quality Rating (Excellent / Very Good / Adequate/Poor)

1. Statement of problem or purpose
2. Relevance of topic to journal [add link to journal mission and purpose]
3. Contribution to topic
4. Quality of argument
5. Handling of evidence
6. Written expression and structure
Comments for the author

Quality Rating Explanation

Additional explanation for the “poor” quality rating is not included. The assumption is that a “poor” submission does not meet the standard of “adequate” and should not be considered for publication.

Criteria	Excellent	Very Good	Adequate
1. Statement of problem or purpose	Excellent statement of the theoretical or practical problem or challenge	Good statement of the theoretical problem or challenge	Adequate statement of the theoretical problem or challenge
2. Relevance of topic to journal	Highly relevant to the mission and purpose of the journal	Somewhat relevant to the mission and purpose of the journal	Relevant enough to the mission and purpose of the journal
3. Contribution to topic	Provides significant original contributions to literature on the topic	Provides important original contributions to literature on the topic	Provides adequate original contributions to literature on the topic
4. Quality of argument	Excellent organisation of ideas and supporting points that builds a clear argument	Good organisation of ideas and supporting points that builds a clear argument	Adequate organisation of ideas and supporting points that builds a clear argument
5. Handling of evidence	Provides and an excellent summary of the major points /evidence from relevant, accurate sources	Provides a good summary of the major points /evidence from relevant, accurate sources	Provides a fair summary of the major points /evidence from relevant, accurate sources
6. Written expression and structure	Few to no errors in usage, spelling, punctuation, and reference format. Sequencing of ideas is very clear.	Some errors in usage, spelling, punctuation, and reference format. Sequencing of ideas is good.	Common errors in usage, spelling, punctuation, and reference format. Sequencing of ideas is adequate.

[1] Rubric has been adapted from the Peer Review Rubric from the Journal of Contemporary Studies (https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/peer_review_rubric.pdf ) and the Peer Review Form from The American Archivist (http://files.archivists.org/periodicals/Peer_Review_Form.pdf)

Copyright Notice

Permission: In the interest of promoting debate and wider dissemination, we encourage use of all or part of the articles appearing in PQ, where there is no element of commercial gain. Appropriate acknowledgement of both author and source should be made in all cases. Please direct requests for permission to reprint articles from this publication to Policy-Quarterly@vuw.ac.nz.

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.