There is no uniform approach to assessing scholarly publications in legal research. Peer review is still the most accepted form, but the popularity of bibliometrics, such as the impact scores of journals and the citation scores of individual articles is increasing. However, there is no ranking of European law journals and none is likely to materialise any time soon. Comparing the UK, Belgium and the Netherlands, we will demonstrate why both peer review and the use of metrics have serious shortcomings. We believe it is necessary to think about such alternatives as more attention for methodological justification in legal research, more clarity from editorial boards about the quality criteria being used to approve or reject submissions, and more emphasis on standards for different forms of legal scholarship. Last but not least, we call for a Europe-wide debate on the pros and cons of different systems of research assessment, rather than let every country reinvent the wheel.
CITATION STYLE
van Gestel, R., & Vranken, J. (2011). Assessing legal research: Sense and Nonsense of Peer Review versus Bibliometrics and the Need for a European Approach. German Law Journal, 12(3), 901–929. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200017144
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.