East Asia Forum Submission Guidelines

Key takeaways

• East Asia Forum publishes short, argument-led commentary on Asia-Pacific economics, politics, security and technology, hosted by the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University.
• Submissions run to roughly 700-850 words, carry no footnotes, and need the argument visible in the first two sentences.
• Editors rewrite openings, tighten structure and set final titles. Authors should expect to turn around a proof within a day.
• Contributors are not paid, and published pieces usually carry a Creative Commons licence.
• The forum rewards authors who compress research into one policy claim. Longer, more technical work belongs at a themed quarterly, an academic journal or a specialist technology outlet.

1. Introduction

You have a working paper on semiconductor export controls, a minister is speaking next week, and you want 800 words in a publication that policy staff in Jakarta, Tokyo and Canberra actually read. East Asia Forum is one of the first destinations that comes to mind. The submissions page tells you the word count, the style, and where to send the draft. It does not tell you what the editor screens for on a first read, how much of your text will survive editing, or whether your piece fits there rather than at a think tank blog or a quarterly.

Those gaps are what this guide covers. It walks through what the forum publishes, how to structure a submission that clears the first read, what happens between submission and publication, and how East Asia Forum compares with other policy outlets that compete for the same 800 words. The advice assumes you already have research or professional experience behind the argument. The task is translation, not discovery.

2. What East Asia Forum publishes, and who reads it

The forum publishes one argument per piece for readers who are not specialists in your field. The editor-in-chief is Peter Drysdale, an economist at ANU, and the editorial line reflects that background: trade, macroeconomics, regional institutions, domestic politics of Asian economies, security, and increasingly technology and supply chain policy.

Readers include finance and foreign ministry officials, business analysts tracking the region, journalists looking for a quotable line, and academics reading outside their own subfield. That mix sets a hard constraint. A piece that assumes familiarity with your literature will lose most of the audience in the second paragraph.

Two formats matter here:

• Daily commentary, the main output, is short and pegged to a live policy question.
• East Asia Forum Quarterly collects longer essays around a single theme, usually by invitation but open to pitches that match the theme.

The forum does not publish literature reviews, methodology sections, institutional promotion, or campaign advocacy. A piece that reads as a summary of your paper will be sent back or ignored. A piece that states a contestable claim about what a government, firm or institution should do differently has a chance.

A useful test before you write: could a trade official in Jakarta who does not follow your subfield restate your claim in one sentence after a single read? If not, the problem is the draft, not the reader.

3. How to write a submission that survives the first read

The opening 50 words decide the outcome. Editors at short-format policy outlets read the first paragraph and the last paragraph, then decide whether the middle is worth their time. Front-load the claim.

A structure that works for most pieces:

1. Sentence one: the claim, stated flatly. "Indonesia's nickel export ban is squeezing its own smelters as much as foreign buyers."
2. Paragraph two: the evidence that makes the claim credible. Numbers, dates, named documents, a specific decision by a named institution.
3. Middle: the mechanism. Explain how the outcome you describe actually happens, and address the strongest counterargument in two or three sentences.
4. Ending: the policy implication. State who should do what. Do not summarise.

Practical constraints from the guidelines and from how the forum is edited:

Three details catch first-time contributors. First, no footnotes at all. If a source matters, name it in the sentence. Second, avoid borrowed authority. "Experts believe" or "observers say" tells the editor nothing, and it reads as padding. Name the person, the institution or the document. Third, the title you send is a suggestion. Editors rewrite headlines for search and syndication, and a short declarative title usually beats a clever one.

Write the bio as two or three lines: current position, relevant expertise, and any funding or affiliation a reader should know about. If you advise a government or a company with an interest in the topic, say so. Disclosure costs nothing and prevents a correction later.

4. What happens after you send the draft

Send the finished piece, not a pitch, unless you are querying whether a topic fits at all. A two-paragraph query is cheap and saves a wasted week. For anything pegged to a live news event, say so in the cover note and give the date the argument stops being newsworthy.

Treat prior publication strictly. A post on your own blog, a university news site or a LinkedIn article usually counts as published, and most policy outlets will not run a piece that has already appeared elsewhere. If you have offered the piece to another outlet, wait for an answer before sending it to a second one.

What editing looks like in practice:

• The opening gets rewritten or cut. Editors move the claim higher and remove warm-up sentences.
• The middle gets compressed. Redundant examples disappear; one strong case survives.
• The title and standfirst are set by the desk, not the author.
• You receive a proof, often with a short deadline. Late replies delay publication or drop the piece from the schedule.
• Corrections after publication go through the editor, not through a comment thread.

Timelines vary with news pressure. A piece tied to a budget announcement or a summit may move within days. A general analysis piece may sit longer, and some accepted drafts are held as evergreen stock for a quiet news week. If you need a decision by a specific date, ask early rather than chasing later.

Payment: the forum does not pay contributors. That is normal across this segment of policy commentary, where the return is reach, citation and a citable line for your CV.

Rights: published material typically carries a Creative Commons licence that allows non-commercial republication with attribution. Commercial reuse and translation usually need permission. Check the current licence statement on the site before you repost, and note that syndication to partner outlets can put your piece in front of readers you never reach directly.

5. Where East Asia Forum sits among policy outlets

Choosing an outlet is a scheduling decision as much as a prestige one. Ask how long your claim stays true. A week-old argument about a tariff decision belongs in fast commentary; an argument that will still hold in a year belongs in a quarterly or a journal.

A practical rule: publish the fast version where the audience is, and save the method for the journal. Submitting the same 800 words to three outlets at once risks losing all three.

6. FAQ

Q1. How long should an East Asia Forum submission be?

Most published pieces sit in the 700-850 word range. Check the submissions page for the current figure, because desks adjust word counts. Going over does not signal thoroughness; it signals that you have not read the guidelines. If your first draft runs 1,200 words, cut the background, not the evidence.

Q2. Does East Asia Forum pay contributors?

No. Contributors are not paid, which matches the norm for think tank commentary and most open-access policy platforms. Factor that into how you allocate time, particularly if an outlet with a smaller audience does pay.

Q3. Can I republish my article after it appears?

Published pieces usually carry a Creative Commons licence permitting non-commercial republication with attribution. Commercial reuse, translation and book chapters generally require permission. Confirm the terms on the site rather than assuming, and ask the editor if a publisher wants a formal licence.

Q4. What topics fit the forum?

Asia-Pacific economics, trade, domestic politics, security, regional institutions, and technology policy with a regional angle. The common thread is a policy choice that governments, firms or institutions face now. A general essay on global trends without a regional decision attached will struggle, however well written.

7. Conclusion

East Asia Forum rewards a single, well-evidenced claim delivered without academic scaffolding. The format constraints that frustrate first-time contributors, the word count, the ban on footnotes, the editing, exist because the readers are busy officials who need the argument in the first two sentences. If your work can survive that compression, the forum gives you reach that a journal article will not match for a year.

Before you submit, make one decision: is the claim time-sensitive? If it turns on this month's decision, file the 800-word version now and keep the longer analysis for later. If it will still hold in twelve months, send it to a quarterly or a journal and let the forum piece wait for a news hook. Authors who skip that step tend to send the same draft everywhere and hear nothing back.