Articles

African Studies Review (ASR) adopts the double-anonymous review process for articles, which means that the identities of the peer reviewer(s) and the author(s) are hidden from each other.

All manuscripts are submitted through ScholarOne, where the managing editor receives them and checks for completion and adherence to the journal guidelines.

Papers that pass the preliminary check by the managing editor are forwarded to the editor-in-chief.

The editor-in-chief reads each submission to determine suitability for the journal.

Manuscripts determined to have the potential to contribute to African studies are then shared with the editorial collective who also weigh in on the submission.

At this stage, editors decide on whether the manuscript appeals to ASR’s interdisciplinary audience and whether it speaks to the broader field of African studies.

Manuscripts that receive majority support from the editors proceed to peer review while others receive desk rejection at this stage.

At least two peer reviews are required to reach a decision on each article. The decision can range from Accept, Revise and Resubmit, to Reject. Rarely do we accept articles after the first round of reviews and most reviewed articles receive a request to revise and resubmit.

 Revised and resubmitted articles are sent to the original reviewers for an additional round of peer reviews.  Following the reviews, the editorial team decides whether to accept the revised article, request further revisions, or reject the manuscript.

Accepted articles move through the production process with additional edits at the copyediting and proof stages before they are published in the journal.

 

State of the Field Essay, Distinguished Africanist Essay, and Keyword Essay

These are submitted through ScholarOne and follow the same peer review process as the articles with one major difference. The difference is that the author(s)’ identities may be known to the reviewers because these essay types often emerge from presentations at the annual meeting of the African Studies Association (ASA).

While the author(s) may be known to reviewers from the original presentations at the ASA, the identity of the reviewers is never disclosed to the authors.This is single-anonymous.

At least two peer reviews are required to reach a decision on these submission types.

Neglected Voices Series

Prospective authors interested in this series must first submit a brief proposal/abstract that identifies the proposed subject and why their work fits the series.

After the initial review by the editor-in-chief, authors of accepted proposals are invited to submit their manuscripts for publication consideration.

Essays in this series must be submitted via ScholarOne and are subject to the same review process as the articles. 

They undergo double-anonymous review, with at least two reviews required to arrive at a decision.

 

Commentary

A commentary is a short scholarly essay that engages succinctly with a pressing issue, theme, or question in African studies. At approximately, 3,000 words, they are much shorter than the traditional article.

Commentaries are not peer-reviewed. They are read and discussed by the editorial collective who decide whether to accept, reject, or request the resubmission of a revised manuscript.

Book Reviews

The African Studies Review (ASR) has become a premier platform for online book reviews in African studies. In line with its commitment to decolonizing knowledge production, the journal casts a wide net to identify books from African presses and actively seeks reviewers based on the continent.

Book reviews are not mere summaries; the strongest reviews analyze and evaluate a book’s argument, methodology, and style, highlighting both its contributions and shortcomings.

Working with a team of Book Review Editors (BREs), ASR manages reviews through ScholarOne. A periodically updated list of titles—posted on the ASA website with corresponding ScholarOne stubs—invites potential reviewers to request books of interest. Each title is assigned to an editor, who selects a reviewer from the request list.

Invited reviewers may accept or decline the opportunity. Upon acceptance, they provide contact details so the managing editor can arrange access to the title (with electronic copies provided when possible, given supply chain challenges).

Reviewers receive periodic reminders, and books left unreviewed for one year are removed from the system.

Completed reviews are submitted via ScholarOne, where the responsible editor evaluates the piece, requests revisions if necessary, and prepares accepted reviews for production in coordination with the managing editor.

 

Review Forums

Each year, ASR publishes Review Forums (RFs) that spotlight influential works in African studies through collective critique and dialogue. Typically featuring three to five reviews alongside a response from the author, RFs often build on Author-Meets-Critic panels at the African Studies Association Annual Meeting.

The lead Book Reviews editor commissions RFs from this list of panels, and submissions are done in ScholarOne.

RFs follow the same review and editorial process as standard book reviews.

 

Scholarly Review Essays

Scholarly Review Essays (SREs) provide in-depth analyses of the state of knowledge on a given theme in African studies. Commissioned by the Book Reviews team, these essays typically engage three to five books published in the past two to three years. Rather than providing mere summaries, SREs situate the works within a broader thematic frame, showing how they collectively advance empirical, theoretical, methodological, or normative debates.

As with book reviews and review forums, each SRE is assigned to a Book Reviews Editor, who evaluates the submission, requests revisions where necessary, and prepares accepted essays for production in collaboration with the managing editor.

 

Film Reviews

Film reviews are a cornerstone of critical engagement with cinema, offering nuanced evaluations of a film’s artistic, technical, and thematic dimensions. ASR commissions reviews by identifying newly released or culturally significant African and diasporic films and inviting scholars with relevant expertise to assess them.

Reviews are not mere synopses; the most compelling examples interrogate narrative structure, directorial vision, cinematography, sound design, and performance, while situating the film within broader cultural or historical contexts.

ASR film review team curates a list of titles, often drawn from recent releases, retrospectives, or festival circuits. Editors then assign each film to a reviewer, who is invited to accept or decline the opportunity.

Upon acceptance, reviewers receive access to the film—typically via digital screeners—and are given a timeline for submission.

Reviews are submitted through the journal’s ScholarOne platform and undergo assessment by the assigned editor, who may accept, decline, or request revisions.

Accepted reviews are edited in collaboration with the managing editor and advanced to production.

 

Film Review Forums

Film Review Forums (FRFs) can be published maximum twice a year and provide a collaborative space for critical dialogue around landmark films or cinematic movements. Typically featuring three to five reviews on a same film, FRFs aim to capture the spirit of public panels, such as those held at film festivals or academic conferences. They are designed to foster multi-vocal engagement and deepen scholarly discourse around cinema.

The lead film editor commissions FRFs based on high-profile screenings or thematic retrospectives.

Contributors are selected by an assigned editor for their diverse perspectives and disciplinary backgrounds.

Once submitted, FRFs follow the same editorial process as individual reviews, with an assigned editor overseeing revisions and coordinating the inclusion of the filmmaker’s response.

Film Review Essays

Film Review Essays (FREs) offer a thematic synthesis of multiple films, often grouped by genre, region, or critical issue. FREs go beyond description, weaving together comparative analysis, theoretical framing, and contextual insight.

Authors are invited by the members of ASR Film Review Team to analyse bundles of three to five films released within the past few years, with the aim of assessing how they collectively advance debates in film theory, aesthetics, or cultural politics.

Each essay is assigned to a member of the editorial team, who evaluates its scholarly merit and relevance to the journal’s scope. The responsible editor may request revisions to enhance clarity, coherence, or argumentative depth.

Once accepted, the essay is edited and prepared for publication in collaboration with the managing editor.

Film Festival Reviews

Film Festival reviews (FFRs) can be published twice a year and are written by scholars attending major film festivals. These reviews capture immediate reactions to premieres and assess films within the context of festival programming, audience reception, and industry trends. Festival reviews contribute to the broader understanding of cinematic innovation and cultural discourse, offering a snapshot of contemporary filmmaking in real time.

FFRs are commissioned by the Film Review Team and reviewers are expected to submit pieces during or shortly after the festival.

Soon after submission to the ScholarOne platform, the assigned editor provides rapid feedback to ensure relevance and quality.

As with other kinds of review, the assigned editor may request revisions. Once accepted, the essay is edited and prepared for publication in collaboration with the managing editor.