How a manuscript becomes a book — and the standards we hold ourselves to.

Academic publishing only works if everyone involved — the publisher, the author, the readers, the librarian who will eventually shelve the book — can trust that the work was done honestly. This page sets out, in plain language, both the process by which we evaluate and produce a manuscript, and the ethical principles that govern that process.

What we evaluate manuscripts on

When the editorial office receives a proposal or a complete manuscript, the director and the relevant series editor consider four things: whether the work falls within our scope (Social Sciences and Humanities, with a particular interest in Central Asia and the Turkic world); whether the scholarship is sound and the citations responsible; whether the writing is clear and the structure coherent; and whether the manuscript represents an original contribution that other scholars and libraries will want to engage with.

For original scholarship, we additionally look for clear evidence that the author has engaged with the relevant secondary literature. For our reprint series, we look at the historical importance of the source and the feasibility of producing a clean, faithful reissue.

The five stages

Timeline, in plain language

From a complete manuscript submission to a printed book, our process typically takes between six months and a year. Edited volumes with many contributors, or works requiring extensive revision, take longer. We do not promise faster turnaround in exchange for a fee, and we do not maintain a "fast track." Our pace is the pace at which we can do the work properly.

A book that goes out under our imprint should be a book the author is proud to have on the shelf, and one that a librarian is willing to accession into a permanent collection. That is the simple test we apply.

The principles below govern our relationship with authors and contributors. They are informed by widely accepted standards in academic publishing, including the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Originality & plagiarism

Authors must submit only their own original work. All sources, ideas, and direct quotations from other authors must be properly cited. Manuscripts found to contain unattributed material from other works will be returned to the author for correction or, in serious cases, declined outright. Where plagiarism is discovered after publication, we will issue a public correction, errata, or in extreme cases retract the work and notify libraries that hold deposit copies.

Authorship & acknowledgment

Everyone listed as an author of a work must have made a substantial intellectual contribution to it. Other forms of contribution — research assistance, technical support, financial support — should be acknowledged in the appropriate section, not by listing the contributor as an author. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all listed co-authors have approved the final manuscript before submission.

Conflicts of interest

Authors should disclose any financial, personal, or institutional relationships that might reasonably be seen to influence their work. Editors and external readers should similarly recuse themselves from any decision in which they have a direct stake. We do not expect academic work to be conducted in a vacuum, but we do expect honesty about the conditions in which it was produced.

Simultaneous submission

A manuscript under our consideration must not be simultaneously under consideration by another publisher. Submissions previously declined by another publisher are welcome, but the author should disclose the prior submission and the reasons for declining (where known) in the cover letter.

Use of sources, archives, and copyrighted material

Authors are responsible for obtaining any permissions required for the use of copyrighted images, archival documents, or extended quotations from other works. The publisher will assist where possible but cannot take responsibility for permissions that should have been secured by the author. Reprint volumes in our critical reprint series are issued only for works in the public domain, or with appropriate permissions from rights-holders.

Confidentiality of the review process

External readers' identities are kept confidential. Readers' reports are shared with the author in anonymized form. Authors should not attempt to identify their readers, and readers should not discuss the contents of a manuscript outside the review process.

Corrections, errata, and retractions

Where significant factual errors are discovered after publication, we work with the author to issue an erratum or corrigendum. Where the integrity of the work has been substantially compromised — through proven plagiarism, fabrication of data, or fundamental misrepresentation — the publisher will issue a retraction notice, withdraw the work from active distribution, and notify libraries that hold deposit copies.

Complaints & appeals

Authors who believe a decision on their manuscript was made unfairly, or readers who have concerns about the conduct of a particular review, may write directly to the director. Complaints will be acknowledged within ten working days and addressed in writing. Where appropriate, an independent reviewer outside the original process will be consulted.