Ecomusicology Review

Editor: Aaron S. Allen

Associate Editor: Ben Cosgrove

Editorial Board: William Bares, Kevin Dawe, Sonja Downing, Robert Fallon, Sabine Feisst, Tyler Kinnear, Andrew Mark, Mark Pedelty, Michael Silvers, Travis Stimeling, Maja Trochimczyk, Denise Von Glahn

Published as the Ecomusicology Newsletter (2012-15). Selected content also published at the Ecomusicology section of the “Sounding Board” of the Ethnomusicology Review. 

Interested in contributing?  See the Instructions for Authors, below.

 

 

Recently published in the Ecomusicology Review:

VOLUME 5 (2017)

Essays

“Music, Climate, and Therapy in Kallawaya Cosmology (Part 1): Sonorous Meshwork, Musical Performativity, and the Transformation of Pacha. By Sebastian Hachmeyer

“Music, Climate, and Therapy in Kallawaya Cosmology (Part 2): Dysfunction of Seasonal Change, Climatic Reversal, and Musical Worlding.” By Sebastian Hachmeyer

 

A Panel of Papers from the University of Kentucky, curated by Donna Lee Kwon:

  1. Overlapping Ecomusicological Realms: Teaching Ecomusicology to Graduate Students through Collaborative Exploration.” By Donna Lee Kwon
  2. Military Expansion on the ‘Island of Peace’: Protest Through Ritual.” By Tanner Jones
  3. Max Neuhaus’s Sound Works and the Politics of Noise.” By Megan Murph
  4. Thin Green Line: Environmental Politics and Punk Music.” By Ben Norton

 

VOLUME 4 (2016)

Essays

“Reconnecting the Music-Making Experience: Supporting Small-Scale Local Craftsmanship in the Academic Percussion Community.” By Alex Smith

“Music and Coal Activism: Perspectives from the Field.” By Travis D. Stimeling (West Virginia University), Saro Lynch-Thomason (Blair Pathways, Asheville, NC), Nate May (College-Conservatory of Music, University of Cincinnati), and Andrew Munn (Bard College)

“Ecomusicology and Listening Beyond Categorical Limits: A Panel

  1. “An Introduction.” By Tyler Kinnear (University of British Columbia)
  2. “The Naturalization of Built Environments: Two Case Studies.” By Alexandra Hui (Mississippi State University)
  3. “Sibelius Beyond Categorical Limits.” By Daniel Grimley (University of Oxford)
  4. “There’s No Place.” By James Currie (University at Buffalo)

 

Reviews

“Music and Ecology International Multidisciplinary Symposium 2015: A Summary.” By Andreja Vrekalić (Croatia)

 

News & Notices

“Music, Nature and Environmental Crises: A Northern Perspective on Ecocritical Trends in Contemporary Music.” By Juha Torvinen (University of the Arts, Helsinki)

 

Interview

“Experiencing Environmental Crises Through Music.” By Sini Mononen (University of Turku, Finland)

 

Archive

As the Ecomusicology Review:

As the Ecomusicology Newsletter:

 

Instructions for Authors

The Ecomusicology Review welcomes submissions from artists, composers, educators, listeners, musicians, scholars, students, and others interested in any variant of ecomusicology.  Our mission is to be an inclusive and accessible source for ideas and writings on the very broadly conceived field of ecomusicology.  We welcome scholarly contributions that might not find a home in other journals, and we prioritize submissions whose brevity, alternative format, and creative approach contribute to our mission.

To submit, send an email to ecomusicology@gmail.com.  Our publication is formatted for use online; therefore, we welcome the inclusion of rich audio and visual materials.

All material in the Ecomusicology Review is open access.  Authors do not pay any processing or publishing fees, ever.

Guidelines for the various types of submissions follow:

  1. Essays (e.g. articles, teaching/pedagogy, personal reflections, manifestos, etc.) should range from 1000 to 5000 words.
  2. Reviews (e.g. of conferences, books, recordings, performances, etc.) should be no more than 2500 words.  In the case of a review essay (i.e., an essay that reviews multiple items at once within an overarching theme), submit under “Essays” above.
  3. News and notices (e.g. of future events, publications, performances, etc.) should be no more than 1000 words.
  4. Other items that do not fit neatly into the above categories will be considered on an ad hoc basis by the editor.

Types 1 and 2 will be reviewed anonymously by members of the editorial board. In some instances, an external reader may be requested (by the editorial board and/or by the author); the editor will select peer reviewers but will consider requests for the exclusion of any specific reviewer (due, e.g., to conflict of interest).  Types 3 and 4 will not normally be reviewed anonymously.

The editor’s decision on submissions is final. Retraction or revision of published material is possible, when suitable reason is provided, at the discretion of the editor. The Ecomusicology Review will publish correspondence on retractions or revisions.

Submissions must be formatted as follows:

  • Email an attachment of a MS Word document as well as a PDF that includes (in order) title, author(s), biography/biographies (100 words max per author), abstract (for Essays only), and main text. In the text of the email, make clear the type of submission (outlined above.)
  • Submissions should follow the Chicago Manual of Style, 16th ed.; for references use the “Author-Date” system (see chapter 15 and/or http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html and click on the “Author-Date” tab for examples). Keep footnotes/endnotes to a minimum.
  • Indicate where to embed visual and/or audio materials. Images should have a resolution of at least 200PPI.

The views and opinions expressed in the Ecomusicology Review are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the Editors or Editorial Board. Authors are responsible for all necessary permissions on uses of textual, visual, and audio material included in publication. Any funding agency contributions to the authors for research in the article published must be clearly indicated at the conclusion of the article.

Ecomusicology Review operates under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. All publications in Ecomusicology Review may be posted in open access repositories and/or on author’s personal research pages upon after publication on this site.

 

Publication Policies

Ecomusicology Review has the following Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Policies:*

Editors’ responsibilities.

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted will be published.

The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision to publish will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the publication’s scope. The editor and any editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers and/or other editorial advisers as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent.

Reviewers’ responsibilities.

The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

Authors’ responsibilities.

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Authors will submit only entirely original works, and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts which have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by this publication should not be resubmitted to copyrighted publications. However, by submitting a manuscript, the author(s) retain(s) the rights to the published material.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author will also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

All authors should include a statement disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

* These Publication Ethics and Malpractice policies are derived from those of Psych Open Publishing via the journal Shima.

The Ecomusicology Review is a Joint Project of the Ecocriticism Study Group of the American Musicological Society & the Ecomusicology Special Interest Group of the Society for Ethnomusicology.