Load low-bandwidth site?

GISF Terms of References – Peer Reviewers

Achieving safe operations through acceptance: challenges and opportunities for security risk management

Project description:

GISF is launching a new research project on acceptance and access, which will investigate the obstacles to and the evolution of acceptance and security risk management (SRM) in the aid sector.

The project aims at:

  1. Demystifying the practices and policies of acceptance as a SRM strategy.
  2. Exploring specific angles and challenges related to acceptance in the aid sector and analysing how changes in the aid environment or aid organisations affect this acceptance.
  3. Sparking debates and raising awareness about the relevance of acceptance for security risk management and programming.

Publication format:

  • The publication will be a collection of articles written by different authors, with short introductory pieces to create a coherent publication.
  • The publication is expected to include a total of 7-14 articles, single-authored, co- or multi-authored.
  • Expected length of each articles: 3-5 pages (2,500 words max).
  • Expected total length of document: 35-60 pages.

The publication will follow a similar format to GISF’s previous publication: Communications Technology and Humanitarian Delivery: challenges and opportunities for SRM.

Being a peer reviewer:

GISF is looking for individuals with different expertise and background to join a peer review group.  Peer reviewers will provide honest and critical feedback on the content and structure of the articles, to ensure of the high-quality of the final publication.

Being a peer reviewer involves:

  • Reviewing the GISF call for abstract
  • Reviewing the first and the final drafts of 2 or 3 articles depending on availability
  • Provide feedback on the final and general structure of the publication

Time commitment: It is expected that the above tasks should take about 1.5 days of work.

Peer reviewers should draw on their relevant experience and are expected to:

  • Comment on the structure: comments should flag issues and incoherence within the article, and highlight the weaknesses and strengths of the document, to ensure its flow is logical and easy to follow.
  • Comment on the content: spot unclear or unfinished arguments, mistakes in interpretation, and suggest the inclusion of additional points, examples or references to complement the analysis.
  • Make comments in a constructive manner that is respectful of the author’s work and help them to improve their piece.
  • Comments on the style or grammar mistakes are welcomed but not expected, given that GISF works with a copy editor for the final product.

Peer reviewers’ contribution will be acknowledged on the first page of the publication. Peer reviewers will also receive a hardcopy of the final publication, as well as a thank you present from GISF.

Should you have any question, please reach out to gisf-research@gisf.ngo and larissafastphd@gmail.com .