As the climate crisis becomes impossible to ignore, we increasingly put the onus on the public to make good choices for their own health and the planet’s well-being, whether at the grocery store or the ballot box.
That’s a big ask: Sustainability and nutrition are both complex topics, and accurate sources of information are hard to find. Traditional journalism can only afford to scratch the surface of this huge topic, so it leaves many questions unanswered. Content tied to sustainability activism tends to focus — for obvious reasons — on new projects or actions, rather than on illuminating the complicated realities behind sustainability and nutrition. And then there’s the rest of the internet: between misinformation on Instagram, fad diets, corporate greenwashing and lobbies, fake news and well-meaning but uninformed blogs, it’s hard for consumers to find realistic, evidence-based information.
That’s where For All the Fish comes in. We aim to provide the public with accurate, nuanced, evidence-based information on sustainable food and nutrition. We do so by asking the scientists at the front lines of sustainability and nutrition research to share their knowledge and findings, and we ensure this information is as accurate as possible by putting articles through review. Finally, we emphasize clear, accessible and engaging writing, so our audience will choose to read about sustainability even after a long day at work.
We are seeking submissions and reviewers on an ongoing basis.
If this sounds like something you’d love to be part of, please email forallthefish.magazine[at]gmail.com, and let us know if you’d like to review, contribute or both. Please also send us a CV or a link to your academic page, along with a brief summary of your research interests and/or potential topics to contribute or review.
If you’d like to learn some more about us first, see below for more information.
Contributors and reviewers must hold a PhD or be currently enrolled in at least the second year of a PhD program. We will also accept articles from masters or first-year PhD students if they are co-written with a supervisor.
Time Commitment and Deadlines
Time commitment and deadlines are flexible — we understand that you already have a lot on your plate, and we want to work with you to come up with timelines that suit your schedule. The one thing we ask is that you let us know ahead of time if your plans change and you won’t be able to make a deadline. This way we can make sure our content isn’t interrupted.
Articles are capped at 2,500 words. Of course, we’re happy to explore more complex topics through a series of related short articles.
This also means that reviewers are unlikely to be asked to review more than 2,500 words at a time.
We’d love to work with your interests, so you’re more than welcome to suggest an article topic, for example based on your recent papers or your general research themes. Alternatively, we’re happy to provide you with prompts based on your past publications and/or reader interest and editorial aims.
Peer Review Process
This magazine aims to present information that is as accurate as possible. As we write about complicated specialist topics, our articles require more than solely editorial fact checking. This is why we ask researchers in the field to review articles before they go to publication.
All articles written by scholars are put through double-blind peer review. Explainers that are written by the editorial team are still reviewed by a scholar in the field, but in this case double-blind review is, of course, impossible. Interviews are not reviewed, as they are by nature a statement of opinion.
The level of peer review applied to each article is clearly identified on the website. All content is additionally thoroughly fact checked by the editorial team.
As a reviewer, you can choose how many articles you are willing to review, and select the topics you would like to cover.
The editor(s) will work with you to make sure that your article is as clear and engaging as possible for a general audience, putting more emphasis on writing quality and style than in most academic publications. You can choose how involved you would like to be in this process. Some authors may want to personally approve every change, while others would prefer to write their base text and leave all style changes to the editor. We can work with either workflow and anything in between.
If you’d like to contribute or review, or have any further questions, please reach out to us at forallthefish[dot]magazine[at]gmail[dot]com