Conversation #70

Advice is sometimes offered that you should “reflect” upon what you have said or written. Such advice is often acknowledged but not necessarily enacted. In this particular Conversation, each of the editors has been interviewed, and I have encouraged them to reflect upon what we are doing – or trying to do – with the EURA Conversations blog. Without identifying any of the comments from a specific editor, this Conversation is a summation of where we think we are at, and how we might want to take the Conversation forward. A number of contributors to the EURA Conversations blog have been approached to respond to this piece. I would encourage all readers to respond as well. We, the editors, are merely the curators of YOUR blog.

The first question was quite simple: why do you do this role? For the newer editors, the answer was straight forward – I was invited, or, I volunteered. Interestingly, there was also the desire to engage with fellow academics, and to encourage debate on issues that were of interest. The founder editors came from a similar perspective with regard to that debate. It is important to remember, EURA Conversations was set up during the COVID-19 pandemic, when we had little or no idea as to how international academia would continue. There was a mix of relief – in getting involved – and responsibility – in making it work. Throw in worries about the sustainability of submissions and interest from the EURA membership, and you could argue the whole thing was a bit of a gamble. All of the editors speak of the fun and enjoyment in their role.

At a more granular level, I asked the editors to consider the successes over the past year or so, and of things they might do differently. The successes of recent times have included a clear presence at the EURA annual conference, and specifically the presentation at the New York conference in April 2024.There was an opportunity to engage with a new audience, and the hope is to see that engagement flourish with new submissions from US scholars. There was also a broader idea around aligning the blog more closely to the annual conference – more on that later. Linked to this, there were new authors offering Conversation pieces, some of which were quite sophisticated. The challenge here is trying to keep those authors to the word limit!

Beyond that specific Conversation, all of the editors commented on the breadth of topics that we cover, and the themes that we try to promote:

• Democracies and cities
• Educational innovation
• Technological change
• The environment

This breadth of topics, and the global spread of the Conversations, is of importance. EURA is a multi-disciplinary organisation, and that needs to be visible in the Conversations blog.

At the same time, however, there is a concern that we are sometimes not as topical as we might be, or as all encompassing. Those immediate issues or topics, such as Conversation #69 – Hot in the City, which looked at the fallout of the COP29 summit, are sometimes not as visible in the Conversations blog. Part of this is having a number of Conversations in the pipeline. Consideration needs to be given as to how we can encourage topical and pithy submissions.

Another thing to consider, and here input from the readership would be appreciated, is on the use of technology. Should we use technology to create webinar Conversations, or record a podcast Conversation between two or three academics on a given issue? At this point, I feel we should mention João, who is our technical genius in getting the posts, responses, photographs, and more, into an accessible manner for the Conversation web pages – thank you, João.

The final question for the editors was looking forward – what should we be doing in the future? The technological aspects, as mentioned above, came to the fore – especially in relation to accessing new audiences. There was also a discussion around the relationship with the conference. Should we try to get more conference papers written up as Conversation pieces? The best paper award at the annual conference could include room to write up an abbreviated version for the EURA Conversations blog. There is the possibility of increasing the number of Conversations in the aftermath of the conference, where topical papers could be submitted. This would put a bit more strain on the editors for two or three months, but it is something worthy of consideration.

We could also consider our relationship with the journal Urban Research and Practice. Could we tie some of the submissions to the journal to the blog, or vice versa? It could almost be a marketing strategy for both journal and Conversation.

Linked to this workload is the issue of succession management. While we don’t have a guide on how to edit the EURA Conversations blog, there is a lot of tacit knowledge and experience. The editorial team are hugely supportive of each other, and this is something that makes being one of the editors such a joy. But we need to think about the practical aspects of editorship, as opposed to making things up as we go along.

Looking to the future, the editorial team want to seeing new topics being submitted, and for the Conversations blog to be open to new submissions from around the world. Yet the question here is whether we should be pro-active in inviting people to submit blogs, as per the idea from the conference submissions, or whether we should simply sit back and wait for the submissions to appear?

Being one of the co-editors of the EURA Conversations blog is a privilege. It has opened our eyes to such a breadth of topics, all of which started as a virtual voyage into the world as a result of the pandemic.