[DATAGOV Core] NEXT Reading Group proposal

[Sruthi Vanguri]

Hi Giulia,

Thank you for this. I agree, using the next reading group meeting to improve this chapter before the deadline could be a good idea! Hope we can find a slot that’s compatible with Matteo’s NATO schedule to discuss the ethnography readings next time :)

Can we also set up a meeting between Matteo, you and me early next week to get started on these revisions? Would Monday (28th) morning, say 11 AM work for both of you? Happy to have the rest of the team too of course for more guidance!

Best,
Sruthi

From: Core <core-bounces at lists.datagovlab.net> on behalf of Giulia Campaioli via Core <core at lists.datagovlab.net>
Date: Wednesday, 23 September 2026 at 15:27
To: core at lists.datagovlab.net <core at lists.datagovlab.net>
Subject: [DATAGOV Core] NEXT Reading Group proposal


Dear team,

A few days ago I received the response from the editors of the CPDP book. Good news, we got two strong acceptance; bad news, we also got one strong rejection.

This happens. Peer-review is a central aspect of our job and, while it can sometimes be tedious to work again and again on a paper (often with a short deadline) it certainly helps us improve the quality of our research. I have no doubt that, even if the chapter was eventually fully rejected, our work would only come out improved from this process. So I propose that we do what is in our power to fix the chapter and resubmit.

Notice that we have a very strict deadline: October 4th to send the revised manuscript. Difficult, but doable.

However, we do not have much time to meet and discuss how we can improve this text.

So, I would like to propose, if everyone is okay with this idea (and do not feel obligated to say yes): how about we use the next reading group session to read an article to complement the list of references of the chapter, and strengthen the theoretical framework of the paper? - And in general also in sight of the upcoming theoretical working paper.

If anyone does not want to do this, feel free to say it as a response to this email, or answering directly to me, and I will take a step back and cancel this idea.

I just think it would be really help to hear your impressions and ideas around a couple readings to complement this text, especially Carina and Jonas, since you are not going to work on the revision. But of course, again, not necessary if you prefer to touch other subjects (e.g. comparative ethnography, as Matteo was suggesting the other day!)

In case you like the idea, I would suggest the following two readings:


Amoore, L. (2024). The deep border. Political Geography, 109, 102547.

Hussain, N. (2026). Digital Health Inequities: Analysing Barriers to Access Across Demographic Groups in India. Journal of Development Policy and Practice, 11(1), 105-119. https://doi.org/10.1177/24551333251382726

If you have better proposals please bring them on! I thought of these two cause they touch both border technologies and indian healthcare techs, but happy to hear your thoughts, especially if you think it is too much stuff to read for next Monday!

Best,
Giulia

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ghserv.net/pipermail/core/attachments/20260925/b02e908d/attachment.htm>