NUPI Submission Guidelines: Publishing with the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs

Key Takeaways

• NUPI operates several publication channels with different rules: in-house series (reports, working papers, policy briefs), the Norwegian-language peer-reviewed journal Internasjonal Politikk, and English-language journals hosted at the institute.
• Channel choice decides review process, language, length, and readership. It matters more than formatting.
• Editors of institute series usually respond to a short pitch faster than to a complete manuscript. A one-page outline with a research question, evidence base, and proposed length is enough to open the conversation.
• Confirm current specifications with the series editor before drafting. Word limits, reference styles, and language requirements differ per series and get revised between editions.
• NUPI fits work with Nordic, European, or transatlantic policy relevance, and development or security research built on a specific empirical case.

1. Introduction

The Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) has published research on foreign policy, security, development, and international economics from Oslo since 1959. Authors who try to publish with NUPI meet a practical obstacle early: the institute functions as a group of publication channels, each with its own editors, review practices, languages, and readers. A manuscript shaped for a policy brief gets rejected by a working paper series on structural grounds. A full journal article sent to an in-house series may fall outside that series' remit even when the topic is a perfect institutional match.

The confusion is understandable. Searches for "NUPI submission guidelines" return a mix of journal author instructions, series descriptions, and general advice about academic publishing, with no single page tying them together. Researchers submitting from outside Norway face an extra layer of uncertainty about language expectations, external authorship, and whether a working paper counts against later journal submission.

This article maps NUPI's publication channels, explains what each one expects from a submission, and sets out a working process you can follow from pitch to publication. It also compares NUPI's outlets with other think tanks and journals, including how each one treats early-career authors, regional specialists, and time-sensitive policy work, so you can judge where a specific piece belongs.

2. What NUPI publishes, and which channel fits your work

NUPI's channels split along two axes: how much review a text receives, and who reads it. Institute series serve policy and project audiences. Hosted journals serve academic audiences. Placing your manuscript on the wrong side of that line causes most rejections.

Three rules follow from that table.

First, a policy brief is an argument, not a summary. Briefs that restate a report's findings in shorter prose get read once. Briefs that state a decision, name who has to make it, and give the cost of each option get cited in ministry memos. If your material supports a clear recommendation, the brief is the highest-leverage format NUPI offers. If it does not, a working paper is the honest home for it.

Second, working papers and journal articles serve different purposes and can coexist. A working paper establishes priority and gives you a citable object while a journal review runs its course. Disclose the earlier version when you submit to a journal and check that journal's preprint policy first, since policies differ on whether an institute working paper counts as prior publication.

Third, series pages carry the binding specifications. Page ranges, reference styles, abstract requirements, and language rules sit on the individual series pages and get updated. Treat any summary, including this one, as orientation rather than the final word.

NUPI also publishes Norwegian-language material aimed at schools and the general public, where the writing task is explanation rather than original research. Those outlets reward plain prose and concrete examples, and they reach readers who will never open a working paper.

3. A submission process that avoids the common failures

The single most useful step is to pitch before you write. Series editors at NUPI, like their counterparts at other European institutes, decide fast when they can see the shape of a piece, and a finished manuscript that misses the series format wastes months for everyone.

A workable sequence:

1. Pick the channel and read its current series page. Note the length range, reference style, and whether the series accepts external authors.
2. Write a pitch of 150 to 250 words. State the research question, the evidence you will use, the argument in two sentences, and the proposed length. Attach a one-page outline if the piece is longer than a brief.
3. Send it to the named series editor rather than a general inbox. NUPI staff pages list research areas, so you can identify the editor whose portfolio matches your topic.
4. Ask two questions in the same email: who is the intended reader, and what deadline would fit the series calendar.
5. Agree on the deliverable before drafting. Length, language, and whether the text carries a policy recommendation should all be settled at this stage.
6. Submit the draft with a short cover note listing any prior versions, related publications, and funding acknowledgements.
7. Expect one round of editorial comments at minimum. Institute series review is usually lighter than journal peer review, which means the author carries more responsibility for structure.
8. Handle revisions promptly. Series calendars are often tied to funding cycles and event schedules, and a late revision can push a paper into the next publication window.

For peer-reviewed journals hosted at NUPI, the process runs differently. You submit the full manuscript through the journal's platform, an editor screens it, and anonymous referees report. Timelines stretch to several months, and the referee reports will address method and engagement with existing literature rather than policy framing. Budget for at least one substantial revision.

A caution about language. A text written in Norwegian and then translated into English reads as translation. If your target channel publishes in English, write the English version as the primary text, or budget for a professional edit before submission. Editors notice this, and it slows review.

4. Writing for two readerships

NUPI's audiences split into a Norwegian policy readership and an international research readership, and the two want different things from the same evidence.

Norwegian policy readers want to know what Norway should do, who decides, and what it costs. They read the summary and the recommendations, then stop. A first paragraph that opens with a Norwegian or Nordic decision point holds their attention. A first paragraph that opens with a literature gap loses it. Citations should be sparing, and every claim about a current situation needs a date attached.

International research readers want to know what your case adds to an existing debate. They read the method section first, then the findings. For journals such as Cooperation and Conflict, International Affairs, or the Journal of Common Market Studies, you need to position the argument against named works and explain your case selection. Norway, or a Nordic case more broadly, works as evidence when you show what it demonstrates about a general mechanism, not when it appears as an end in itself.

Authors writing for both audiences often publish twice: a short policy piece for the domestic debate, and a longer article for the research record. That is standard practice, provided you disclose the relationship between the two and avoid publishing the same text in two places.

Regional and topical fit matters as much as format. NUPI's research portfolio covers security policy, Russian and Asian affairs, development, energy, international economics, diplomacy, and the multilateral system. A strong manuscript on a topic outside that portfolio will struggle regardless of quality. Checking the institute's current research groups before pitching takes ten minutes and prevents the most avoidable rejection.

5. How NUPI compares with other outlets

NUPI is one option among several, and the right choice depends on your career stage, topic, and how quickly you need the text in public.

Career stage changes the calculus. A PhD candidate on the job market gets more from a peer-reviewed article than from three working papers. A researcher on a ministry-funded project with a delivery date gets more from a report and a brief, because the funder and the ministry read those formats. Senior scholars with an established record can use commentary outlets to react within weeks, while the journal article on the same topic works through review.

Topic urgency matters too. Governance of AI, export controls, and sanctions regimes move faster than journal cycles. Authors in those areas often publish a short commentary first and a full article later, citing the commentary.

6. FAQ

Q1. Does NUPI accept submissions from researchers outside Norway?

Yes. NUPI's series and its hosted journals accept external authors, and many published contributions come from researchers based elsewhere. The practical filter is topic and framing. A manuscript that treats Norway as a background detail and never explains why the case matters beyond its borders faces a harder review than one that connects a Nordic case to a wider argument. Co-authorship with institute staff helps most when it reflects genuine collaboration rather than an access request.

Q2. Can I publish the same work as a NUPI working paper and later in a peer-reviewed journal?

Usually yes, with two conditions. Disclose the working paper version when you submit to the journal, and check that journal's preprint policy before you post anything. Policies vary: some journals treat institute working papers as prior publication, others explicitly allow them. Editors react badly to discovering an undisclosed earlier version during review, and that is the failure mode worth avoiding.

Q3. Do I need to write in Norwegian to publish with NUPI?

It depends on the channel. Internasjonal Politikk publishes in Norwegian, so a manuscript in English will not proceed there. Most NUPI series and the English-language journals hosted at the institute accept English submissions. The choice has consequences beyond format: Norwegian-language publication reaches ministries, the Storting, and domestic media, while English-language publication reaches international citation networks and reviewers. Some authors target both with two related pieces rather than one translated text.

7. Conclusion

NUPI's submission process rewards authors who choose a channel before they choose a format. Match your material to a series or journal by audience, language, and review depth, pitch the editor with a one-page outline, and settle length and reference style before drafting. Working papers and reports carry project outputs; policy briefs carry recommendations; the hosted journals carry the research record that hiring committees read.

If your work addresses Nordic or European foreign policy, security, development, or multilateral governance, NUPI offers editors who know those audiences and a publication record that ministries and universities both recognize. If your topic sits outside that portfolio, or if you need a decision inside a month, an alternative outlet will serve you better. Check the current series pages for the specifications that apply to your submission, then write to the named editor with the outline in hand.