Publish or perish. That's the conventional wisdom at least. Publishing shorter articles is a terrific way for junior academics to promote yourself and your research, and making forthcoming and accepted articles available electronically is a shrewd way to get comments.
If you cite important scholars in your field, its also a good idea to send them an email/letter letting them know you have a forthcoming article, and that you agreed or disagreed with their position.
I've added a link at the right where you can view papers from contributors to the Legal Research Society on the Social Science Research Network. If others have articles available on SSRN, please let me know and we can add more links.
You can read my forthcoming article which will be published in the Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal titled "Why Federal Criminal Penalties for Dealing in Illicit Cultural Property are Ineffective, and a Pragmatic Alternative". Here is an abstract:
I hope to contribute to the increasing legal scholarship involving cultural property. There have been many articles on this subject in recent years, and I add to the discourse in two important ways. First, I attempt to unpack the values at work in US federal criminal penalties for buying and selling illicit cultural property. The illicit trade in cultural property may be the third largest behind narcotics and weapons. I look at the various stakeholders which formulate cultural property policy and look at why their fundamental differences of opinion are producing an ineffective regulatory framework. A number of recent articles have dealt with this subject, however the discussion about what the law should be doing has prevented a discussion of the practical effect of the status quo. I hope my analysis will further the debate by showing that the current criminal penalties are not producing satisfactory results.
Second, I show how a pragmatic approach to cultural property has worked well in the United Kingdom and how such an approach could be adopted in the US. This would give real effect to the federal criminal regulation of cultural property. The art and antiquities market lacks transparency at present. Until this trade begins to effectively distinguish between licit and illicit cultural objects, the theft, looting and destruction of historical sites will surely continue. I hope my discussion of the UK experience can bring attention to the illicit trade in cultural property and the criminal response in the US.
Our colleague Jernej also has an article which he has co-authored with Matej Avbelj, The Conundrum of the Piran Bay: Slovenia V. Croatia - The Case of Maritime Delimitation, forthcoming in the Journal of International Law & Policy. Here's the abstract:
Drawing borders between countries has historically been a very demanding task, often underpinned by deeply-rooted emotions that suppress the argumentative dialogue and reasoning and in too many cases has led to long-term general deterioration of relationships which may devolve into war. As the title suggests, the focal point of this paper will be a legal assessment or a legal prediction of the outcome of the maritime border delimitation dispute between Slovenia and Croatia in the northernmost part of the Adriatic Sea, namely in the Piran Bay. The paper will be structured into four parts. In the first part the authors will present the factual context of the dispute, followed by a presentation of the legal arguments that both countries have laid on the table so far. In the third hermeneutical part, these legal arguments will be applied to the factual context assessed in light of valid international law and especially the existing jurisprudence on international juridical and non-juridical bodies, including the practice of other states in similar cases. In the last part the authors will predict the outcome of the case as if they were the arbitrators or the judges of a tribunal to whom the dispute between Slovenia and Croatia will most likely eventually be referred to.