Special Issues and Debates

If you are interested in submitting a Special Issue proposal, please check the status of our open call for papers on the Aims and Scope page.

Unlike Special Issues, EPS hosts a permanent open call for Debate proposals.

All proposals should be sent to: eps@ecpr.eu


Special issues and debates are an important feature of EPS and bring together a group of scholars to address a common research agenda.

These collections need to be led by a Guest Editor(s) who takes responsibility from the outset in terms of preparing an initial proposal through to the final submission of papers and the copy-editing process. Throughout this process you will be supported by the EPS editorial team.


Proposal submissions should include:
• Title
• Rationale and argument for the special issue/debate
• An outline of the contribution of the proposed work to the journal and the discipline
• Abstracts of the proposed articles in the special issue/symposium
• Biographies and affiliations of the proposed authors
• An indicative timeline for delivery of the completed collection
• Estimated word count


The Editors will evaluate and provide feedback on special issue/debate proposals within two weeks. A decision to commit to the proposal does not, however, guarantee publication as all articles will be subject to the normal rigours of peer review.

The following points outline the key tasks and responsibilities that are associated with serving as a Guest Editor for a Special issue/debate. This guideline should help you manage the process of bringing your Special issue/debate to publication smoothly.

1. Commission and gather articles which review concepts and research findings associated with the theme of the special issue/debate. It is important that Guest Editors oversee the work of the authors that they are coordinating.

2. Reject poor quality submissions, or those that do not meet the objectives of the issue. Liaise closely with the journal editors, who will make the final decision regarding quality of articles based on peer review advice.

3. Ensure that articles are written coherently, follow journal style, and are presented in a manner that reflects the standards associated with the journal. Authors whose first language is not English should, where appropriate, consider having their articles proofread by a native English speaker.

4. Best practice is for Guest Editors to organise one round of internal review before the special issue/debate is submitted to EPS. We encourage papers of this nature to be initially presented at a panel or a workshop where they can be developed based on feedback. Guest editors are responsible to guide their authors through advice provided by external reviewers.

5. Guest Editors will inform all authors that articles will undergo rigorous peer review and that no guarantee of publication can be given in advance of peer review.

6. Write an introductory article to the Special issue/debate that covers the aims and scope of the issue, introduces each article, highlights key points, and summarises future direction of research. The introductory article should be written in the same style and format as the other articles, e.g. including an abstract, keywords and conclusion. The length of the introduction should be in the region of 3,000 words.

7. Once manuscripts have been accepted, they are copyedited before being sent to the Publisher who will prepare the final proof, which will be sent to the author shortly thereafter. It is primarily the authors’ responsibility to check article proofs and to address the copyeditor queries.

8. We strongly encourage cross-referencing of debate and special issue articles to enhance the coherence of the article collection. If an article within the Special issue/debate cross-references another article within the same Special issue/debate, authors should ensure they inform the production team at proofing stage to ensure they update the reference with the cited article’s DOI once it is created.