My three-year contract as the editor is at its end and it is time to draw some conclusions. As I outlined in my first Editorial, I have paid attention to certain themes, in particular: structure of the papers, clarity of writing and that the text is in line with the research aims and questions. In my work, I have honoured the good practices of the previous editor, Janne Kivivuori. The editor has the power and the responsibility to formulate the identity of the journal. Towards the end of my period, I gained courage to do more desk rejections to speed up the process and to be able to concentrate on the most potential manuscripts. At first, there was quite a lot of time wasted with poor submissions that faded away after critiques by the editor and the reviewers with or without a straight rejection verdict. Looking back, I can be rather content with the quality of the articles that have been published during my term.
The situation of JSSCCP is relatively healthy. There is a steady stream of manuscripts representing various methodological approaches and versatile topics. The constant flow of submissions also enables rejections – this is not self-evident in national journals limited to law, for example. However, the rejection rate is nowhere near the more prestigious international journals. At the same time I was the editor, I served in the Awards Committee of the American Society of Criminology, in the Division of Developmental and Life-Course Criminology (DLC). I had the opportunity to witness the very impressive development that has taken place in criminology at the highest level. The contrast to Nordic countries is striking, so there is much room for development for the Nordic criminology. At least in Finland, it has been discussed how the university sector could attract more foreign students and scholars. Raising the quality of research and publishing more in English would be the best advertisement for our universities.
To enable truly anonymous reviews and make good use of the best experts, I have sought for reviewers also outside the Nordic countries. Although this was time-consuming, it was inspiring to interact with criminologists worldwide. Reviewers do not receive enough acknowledgement of their important pro bono work. The reviewers most concretely help the editor in the quality check of the manuscripts. It was interesting to note the differences in the performance and the verdicts of the reviewers. Although there were some referees who disappeared or wrote only a couple of lines, most were helpful and devoted. Some of the best I have used even more than once – special thanks to them! I would like to thank all these reviewers who accepted my invitation and delivered useful reviews:
Mikko Aaltonen, Geir Aas, Susanne Alm, Lars Højsgaard Andersen, Anne Sofie Tegner Anker, Thomas Baker, Amber L. Beckley, Arjan Blokland, Zheng Chang, Sam Cole, Olivier F. Colins, Karl Dahlstrand, Petri Danielsson, Jannick Demanet, James Densley, Nadine Deslauriers-Varin, Ross Deuchar, Janne Flyghed, Brian Francis, Christine Friestad, Marie Väfors Fritz, Manne Gerell, Martin Gill, Esther van Ginneken, Pär-Anders Granhag, Helene Ingebrigtsen Gundhus, Jaana Haapasalo, Timo Harrikari, Maija Helminen, Evelien Hoeben, Katrin Hohl, David Holleran, Lars Holmberg, Morten Holmboe, Päivi Honkatukia, Wim Huisman, Helinä Häkkänen-Nyholm, Heleen Janssen, Berit Johnsen, Johan Kardell, Mia Kilpeläinen, Aarne Kinnunen, Janne Kivivuori, Christian Klement, Willem Koetsenruijter, Arja Konttila, Lars Korsell, Riikka Kotanen, Britta Kyvsgaard, Juha Kääriäinen, Paul Larsson, Hannu Lauerma, Julie Laursen, Nina Lindberg, Henrik Linderborg, Heidi Mork Lomell, Patrick Lussier, Edward Maguire, Juan Medina-Ariza, Sakari Melander, Andrew Millie, Johanna Niemi, Henk Nijman, Anders Nilsson, Roddy Nilsson, Per Åke Nylander, Matti Näsi, Dietrich Oberwittler, Natalia Ollus, Jussi Perälä, John Pratt, Pekka Räsänen, Mikko Salasuo, Julia Sandahl, Sveinung Sandberg, Victor Lund Shammas, Torbjørn Skardhamar, Starr Solomon, Wouter Stol, Thomas Friis Søgaard, Henrik Tham, John Todd, Michael Tonry, Marie Torstensson Levander, Daniel Uhnoo, Sirpa Virta, Minna Viuhko, David S. Wall, Pawel Waszkiewicz, Andrew Wooff, Michelle Wright.
Besides the reviewers, I am grateful to all authors for actively offering and revising manuscripts and the staff at Taylor & Francis for always having been there when I needed assistance in some technical issues. I would also like to wish best of luck to the Nordic criminology and the new editor! Lastly, I think the journal would benefit from a punchier name, such as Scandinavian or Nordic Journal of Criminology. As to crime prevention, it is an intrinsic part of modern criminology, anyway.
Editor
[email protected]