General Please note that I will place a number out of 10 at the beginning of each answer indicating the degree to which I am positive about what is said. By the way I do give 10s. 1) In your own words, please provide a short outline of the project. This book proposal emanates from a successful PhD thesis involving ... Read morein depth interviews with 19 refugees from basically Christian/Muslim backgrounds who have settled in Australia. The interviews appear to have been conducted at one time, requiring the time dimension of the project to be reliant on memory rather than assessments taken at different points in time. This research makes a contribution to the understanding of the process of migrant settlement for refugees from the Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia and Iraq. It carefully attends to differences in the 'home contexts', the refugee process and settlement experiences of these 19 persons. The focus is on the ways religion was or was not 'useful/helpful' in the process. Most reported that religion was of help and many found their religious practice intensified. 2) Does this proposal offer a useful and/or original contribution to the field? Is it addressing any new/emerging areas? Yes (6/10). It provides a window on a process that is very much at the fore in current social policy debates and concerns for social cohesion and the plight of refugees. The role of religion is often overlooked. In so far as these 19 cases are representative (and there is no way of assessing this) this is a substantial contribution to a neglected area of research which needs to be made. The secularist presupposition of social researchers in this area has long blinded them to this aspect of major social and personal processes. 3) Does it adequately engage with recent scholarship? Does it take existing scholarship forward? Yes (7/10), it is adequately grounded in the current literature and scholarship 4) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal? You may wish to consider structure, organization, coherence and presentation of material; scope, coverage and breadth of appeal or degree of specialization; whether there are any obvious omissions; timeliness and likely shelf-life of the research; what proportion of the work, if any, will require substantial re-working; and whether any suggested improvements fundamental to the project's success or discretionary matters which might be addressed after the project has been accepted. (7/10) The strengths of this proposal rest in the careful and detailed interview material which is thoroughly mined to provide insights into the role of religion in the process of refugee settlement. It tells an intrinsically interesting story. The material is reasonably well written and in a style that is well on its way to monograph style from thesis style, but needs some further work and editing. It is a very good piece of qualitative research which is strengthened by the author's sensitivity to and capacity to interpret religious behaviour. The weaknesses include the problem of whether the 19 cases represent anything more than themselves; the enormous detail of the analysis to be grounded in such a limited sample; the limitation of religion and spirituality to Christian and Islamic practices (this could also be seen as a 'strength' of being focussed) to the exclusion of other religious traditions and to a consideration of 'spiritual' as something other than readily recognised church/mosque related activities (that is the religion/spiritualtiy difference is referred to but underdeveloped - the obvious answer is to remove references to 'spiritual'. The references to 'theories' is well made, but they can only play an interpretive role and the data cannot be seen to be a test of them, but simply as indicative examples. But such is virtually ever the case with good qualitative research. It cannot be said that theories informed the design of the research but only the interpretation of data. I am not convinced that the research base of the proposal warrants the policy suggestions. The framework proposed is only a marginal advance on a data summary. 5) Do you feel the author/editor is suitably qualified to produce a high quality book on this topic? Yes (7/10). The author has great experiential depth in the area that would be impossible for others to replicate having worked very closely with migrants and refugees for more than two decades. This experience has shaped the project and gives it that additional credibility which only genuinely 'being there' for extended periods can. The data themselves are only part of the authority of this contribution. 6) If you are aware that the book is being considered for inclusion in a specific series, please comment on its suitability for that series. N/A Market and Competition 7) Is this book likely to have interdisciplinary and/or international appeal? Yes (8/10) The issues confront most nations and particularly Western nations which are the destination targets of many refugees. 8) How does this proposal compare to the main competing titles in this area in terms of quality of writing and content? (10/10) I know of no direct competitors. It does open a field, it will start a conversation that needs to occur. Recommendation 9) Would you recommend: a) we publish this book as it stands or after minor revisions I recommend that the manuscript be carefully revised and edited (for example, there are occasions of strange to me uses of prepositions). I think the proposal more than adequately presents the intent and capacity of the manuscript so that revising it would serve little purpose. The critical issue is the readiness to publish intensive case study material. The fact that this book has the capacity to open a set of debates by focussing on a neglected area is the most positive case for publishing. Given that, the front-end and conclusion need to be re-written to drive that argument. The fact that religion is a factor at least for some is the case that is made and needs to be made more clearly the focus. It will sit comfortably in your selection of books dealing with Migration and Refugees. b) revising the proposal and resubmitting c) rejecting the proposal d) In the event that we proceed with publication, would you be willing to provide an endorsement 8/10 perhaps Show Less