Interview with anca pusca

Interview:  Anca Pusca

Could you briefly introduce yourself and share a bit about your professional path into academic publishing and your role at Palgrave Macmillan?

I’m Anca Pusca, Executive Editor at Palgrave Macmillan, an imprint of Springer Nature. I’ve been studying, teaching and now publishing International Studies for close to 30 years. I did my PhD at the School of International Studies at the American University in Washington DC and then moved to the UK on a Marie Curie Post-Doc at Birmingham University. From there, I got my first academic position as a Lecturer at Goldsmiths University of London, where I taught for 7 years before moving to NYC and moving into publishing. I got my first publishing job at Palgrave as Editor on the International Studies list and I’ve just celebrated my 10-year anniversary this year. It’s been an incredible ride.

What first drew you to academic publishing, and what do you enjoy most about working at the intersection of research, authors, and public knowledge?

The Editor role at Palgrave was the only publishing job I applied for. I initially thought I was going to either stay in academia or take on an administrative role at a university. The role appealed to me because I knew the International Studies list at Palgrave, having published with them myself before, and I thought it would be an interesting change of pace. I really enjoyed the interview process, especially the strategy task, the global nature of the company – half my team is based in the UK, so I just made the jump and never looked back. The job taught me so much, initially about myself and how to use my skills in a new capacity – not as a knowledge producer myself but more as a curator of knowledge; and later about the critical role that publishing plays in the knowledge creation process.

It’s quite a privilege to be able to decide what aspects of International Studies you’re going to focus on, which new book series to launch, what new authors to publish and promote, and how to curate a certain image for the list and the press in the community. I see my role as a key connecting point between publishing and academia, but also between academia and practitioners for example. We’ve been intentionally publishing a lot of people with one foot in academia and one foot in government, think tanks, international organizations or other types of research institutions. I’ve also worked hard to create a supporting environment for Early Career Researchers (ECRs), helping to translate their work into English via our auto-translation services, navigate the challenges of writing while looking for a job, working at a teaching intensive institution or transitioning into non-academic careers.

We have been working with you on the forthcoming Palgrave Handbook of Science Diplomacy. From your perspective as a publisher, what makes this topic particularly timely or relevant?

Palgrave Macmillan has been known to publish cutting edge Diplomacy research for quite some time, and science diplomacy is increasingly a big part of it. This Handbook starts with the presumption that we are living in an age of great disruption – something that I think we are all increasingly feeling and experiencing – and tries to embrace this disruption by first of all categorizing some of the main trends that we see, and second by instilling a sense of hope and positive possibilities. It speaks to topics that we’ve been circling around for some time now while giving them a new edge with the rise of AI: the increased securitization of science, the growing role of private tech and the rise of non-traditional actors, and emerging frontiers: space diplomacy, sea/climate diplomacy, the new role of art-science collaborations. As someone who believes in the importance of bridging the gap between academia and practitioners, the Handbook also ticks a very important box in this respect, bringing together contributors from across the academic, diplomatic and practitioner spectrum, and intentionally speaking to this wider audience.

This year, DWIH New York’s annual theme is “Science for Society.” How do you see academic publishing contributing to the broader relationship between science, society, and public dialogue?

Academic publishing is a key connecting point in this dialogue between science and society, acting as both a catalyst of knowledge creation, vetting point for quality, connector of ideas – particularly across disciplines, and global promoter across multiple platforms: from libraries to bookstores, to third-parties like Amazon, and beyond. Publishers have the power to instigate knowledge in areas that would otherwise go underexplored, encourage and promote a more diverse set of voices, connect knowledge points across disciplines, connect people with new ideas and find creative ways to translate academic knowledge to bridge the gap between science and society. With the rise of AI, publishing in general is undergoing a significant transformation, and a large part of that will increasingly be shaped by a re-thinking of who our audience is, how knowledge is consumed, as well as how knowledge is created and vetted. The debate over ‘trust in science’ will increasingly be fought in this wider ‘public dialogue’ domain, something that will, I think, require a significant adjustment for academic publishers in particular who for a long time have been used to mainly speaking to an academic audience.

Science communication is changing rapidly, especially with new digital tools and technological disruption. From your perspective, what developments are currently shaping the way academic knowledge is produced, shared, or accessed?

AI is probably one of the biggest disruptors for the foreseeable future. It also has implications for things that have been an issue for a while now, like paper mills. Large academic publishers, especially large commercial academic publishers, I think are going to be facing these challenges more head-on but are also the ones that are better placed to turn this disruption into an opportunity. The key will be to learn how to embrace innovation and new technologies, while still maintaining the close connection to the academic community, that is at the heart of our business. My hope is basically that we can embrace and experiment with these innovations together, and that no one feels left out, or pushed in directions they are not comfortable with. Open communication will become increasingly important in that respect.

AI auto-translations have already changed the way in which we work with academics from the non-English speaking world, opening up opportunities and spaces for conversation that were simply not possible before. New AI powered products are allowing us to cut across disciplines and connect knowledge points in more impactful ways, while new AI platforms help curate, deliver and track the impact of scientific knowledge with a different kind of precision. The speed of development in this space is, however, challenging, and requires a kind of fluid thinking, decision-making and knowledge building that we are simply not yet used to. That, I think, will continue to be a challenge.

DWIH New York works at the intersection of the transatlantic research and innovation communities. In your view, what role can transatlantic collaboration play in making academic knowledge more visible and impactful?

Academia and the process of knowledge creation in general have always benefited from collaboration across cultures, communities, and countries. Just like in the natural world, hybridization of knowledge is key to its expansion, and the technologies available today make it hard to even conceive of innovation in isolation. The rise of global challenges, whether it be climate change, conflict, pandemics, migration, food and water security, energy, and the list goes on, demands collaborative research and innovation. Now is a great time to not only prioritize collaboration, but also to rethink how we organize and promote it. I’ve always been a strong supporter of inter-disciplinarity and have seen the power of, for example, bringing scientists, social scientists and humanists together; as well as a supporter of bridging the gap between academia and practice. If it were up to me, I would focus on these two key intersections.