Foreign Fictions: ‘Research’ about Ethiopian Legal Reform in a Top-Tier Academic Journal

Abstract

Top tier academic journals claim to publish the most rigorous, peer reviewed research. This evidence based found therein is utilized to support decision making for sustainable development. In parallel, many journals that are published in the Global South are accused of CFJOH MPXFS RVBMJUZ PS EJTSFHBSEFE BT kQSFEBUPSZl 5IJT BSUJDMF FYQMPSFT BO FYBNQMF PG B kGPSFJHO GJDUJPOl written about Ethiopia and published in a top tier academic journal. The
narratives and evidence from that top tier journal are contrasted with research published in
Ethiopian journals. This case study shows that Ethiopian scholars have produced important
research and contributed evidence, but have largely been ignored, or silenced, perpetuating
foreign fictions. This is important because policy and law seeking to enable development are
informed and influenced by the research produced in top tier journals. Based upon this, this
BSUJDMF DSJUJRVFT BTTVNQUJPOT BCPVU mUPQ UJFSn KPVSOBMT BT XFMM BT UIPTF BCPVU &UIJPQJBO
journals, and further about the continued colonial power imbalances that exist within
knowledge production systems. This has implications for universities and scholars, which
continue to privilege a particular set of journals that are largely based in the Global North
and wherein contributing authors are also largely based in the Global North. The
reproduction of colonial relationships within global knowledge production systems calls for
much broader critical reflection about whose voices are privileged as authentic conveyors of
knowledge and how these privileges are institutionalized.