Call for Papers: ZFHE 21/3

Posted on 2026-03-23

Call for Papers: ZFHE 21/3

Digital Sovereignty and Governance. On the Relationship between Media Education and Higher Education Development

Editors: Alessandro Barberi, Svenja Bedenlier, Gabriele Zehetner, Barbara Zuliani

Publication date: September 2026

About the thematic focus

In the context of digitalisation, higher education institutions are, as organisations and institutions, embedded in diverse governance structures, societal expectations and forms of political control. In doing so, they respond to broader societal and political developments and demands. In the information age, these are in turn shaped by processes of mediatisation, and in recent years particularly by the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI), which makes various visions of the future conceivable for society, higher education institutions and individuals. Digital infrastructures and AI systems not only intervene in administrative processes but also alter the conditions of scientific knowledge production and, consequently, the (media education) prerequisites, models and theories of media didactics and education.

The Journal of Higher Education Development (ZFHE) has already addressed media education aspects of digitalisation in the context of teaching development in various recent issues – for example, digital competences or artificial intelligence (AI) in teaching. Likewise, new models of innovative structures, adaptivity and strategic behaviour have been examined, as well as the European University Alliances, which place particular demands on university governance. This special issue builds on the ideas outlined and findings published in these previous issues – but seeks to broaden the focus to underlying socio-technical and media structures, as well as to the self-conceptions of actors both within and outside the university, thereby, following Müller et al. (2022a, 2022b), to the understanding of sovereignty as power, freedom or prudence under the media conditions of a datafied and algorithmised university and society (Förschler, 2021; Jarke & Breiter, 2019; Prinsloo, 2020).

The concept of digital sovereignty links sovereignty with the digital in its various forms (Glasze et al., 2022) and enables media education to engage with the topic at different levels. Pohle et al. (2025) state the following regarding digital sovereignty:

“the concept is now often used as a shorthand for an ordered, regulated, and secure digital sphere—a digital sphere, in which the multifaceted problems of individual rights and freedoms, collective and infrastructural security, political and legal enforceability and fair economic competition are finally resolved” (p. 666).

Originally borrowed from political science discourse (Glasze et al., 2022), digital sovereignty is also playing an increasingly important role in media education contexts, focusing here primarily on the individual level (Müller et al., 2022a, 2022b; Repetto, 2025).

Here, digital sovereignty does not appear as an isolated competence, but as an expression of personality and subjectivity that unfolds through the interplay of personal dispositions and media frameworks. It refers to personal resources such as digital self-efficacy, autonomy orientation and reflective judgement, which enable individuals to position themselves in datafied and AI-supported contexts in a way that is capable of action, responsible and self-determined. Building on self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) as well as recent work on digital self-efficacy and digital identity, digital sovereignty is thus understood as a relational capacity and media competence that emerges within the tension between individual self-determination and institutional-technological framing.

In the education sector, too, individuals operate within structural frameworks that are shaped not least by providers of digital services – platforms operated by individual companies shape the scope for didactic action (Pangrazio, 2025) and, in their arguments, suggest a sovereignty that works in their favour (Grohmann & Costa Barbosa, 2025). Finding ways to deal with the opacity of algorithm-based systems (Herzig et al., 2022) or addressing questions of power relations within educational institutions (Berns, 2024) are challenges that can be discussed from the perspective of digital sovereignty in an educational context.

However, higher education has not yet been the focus of the various disciplinary discourses; consequently, this issue of the ZFHE addresses a topic in media education that is explored at the intersection of socio-political developments, higher education governance and individual agency, and is made applicable to higher education development. In the information age, the relationship between the individual and structure, or between autonomy and heteronomy, the various forms of subjectification, and the question of self-determination, co-determination and solidarity (Klafki 2007) are central to the field of media education.

Possible research questions within the thematic focus

We define digital sovereignty in a broad sense and focus on different levels that are, or may be, interwoven. Research questions of interest are therefore situated at the macro, meso and micro levels. Whilst impetus for engaging with digital sovereignty in an educational context is provided primarily from a media education perspective, various disciplines are concerned with the concept and contribute their own focus and priorities.

Macro level

At the macro level, the focus is primarily on questions situated at the interface between higher education and society, such as:

  • What does digital sovereignty mean for higher education institutions in a global and comparative perspective, given the rise of information and communication technologies (ICT)?
  • Under what social and economic conditions can higher education institutions act with digital sovereignty?
  • Where are the limits of higher education institutions’ digital sovereignty?
  • What is the nature of the relationship between state regulation and economic interests?
  • What does digital sovereignty mean for democracy?

Meso level

At the meso level, questions arise that concern the university as an organisation and institution, addressing its actions and behaviour, with a particular focus on the area of governance. For example, the following questions may be raised:

  • To what extent are universities able to become or be digitally sovereign
  • Which groups of stakeholders determine a university’s digital sovereignty through their actions?
  • How do universities develop AI and data governance structures?
  • What role do procurement policies, cloud strategies or open-source approaches play in institutional sovereignty?
  • How are data protection, data ethics and algorithmic transparency institutionally embedded?
  • How do AI systems alter decision-making processes within universities?
  • How are conflicting objectives between innovation, efficiency, data protection, academic freedom and organisational controllability negotiated in digital transformation processes?

Micro-level

At the micro level, too, the focus is on a relational understanding of digital sovereignty that systematically intertwines individual prerequisites with media-related conditions. Based on this understanding, guiding questions can be developed that explore how individual dispositions and media-related contextual factors interplay in specific higher education settings, thereby enabling or limiting digital sovereignty at the level of the individual.

Possible questions:

  • To what extent do digital self-efficacy and individual digital attitudes influence the manifestation of digital sovereignty among students and lecturers in a higher education context and within the framework of current media technologies?
  • How do higher education structures and digital learning and working environments affect processes of digital identity formation and individual self-determination?
  • What characterises digital sovereignty given the current state of media education in higher education development?

We invite authors to submit papers who wish to contribute to the discussion of the exemplary research questions outlined here through empirical and theoretical contributions.

References

Berns, C. (2024). The Governmentality of Algorithms. Springer Nature.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Förschler, A. (2021). The growing political influence of private (EdTech) actors in the context of digital educational monitoring and control. Efforts towards a ‘data infrastructure-friendly ecosystem’. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 67(3), 323–337. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:28767

Glasze, G., Odzuck, E., & Staples, R. (2022). Introduction: Digitalisation as a challenge – sovereignty as the answer? Conceptual background to calls for ‘digital sovereignty’. In G. Glasze, E. Odzuck & R. Staples (Eds.), What does digital sovereignty mean? Discourses, practices and prerequisites of ‘individual’ and ‘state sovereignty’ in the digital age (pp. 7–28). Bielefeld: transcript. https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-8376-5827-9/was-heisst-digitale-souveraenitaet/?number=978-3-8394-5827-3

Grohmann, R., & Costa Barbosa, A. (2025). Sovereignty-as-a-service: How big tech companies co-opt and redefine digital sovereignty. Media, Culture & Society, 48(2), 416–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437251395003

Herzig, B., Sarjevski, E., & Hielscher, D. (2022). Algorithmic decision-making systems and digital sovereignty. merz| medien+ erziehung, 66(6), 97–108.

Jarke, J., & Breiter, A. (2019). The datafication of education. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1573833

Klafki, W. (2007). New Studies on Educational Theory and Didactics. Beltz.

Müller, F., Petschner, P., Tischer, M., & Thumel, M. (2022a). Thinking about digital sovereignty relationally. On the analysis of sovereignty in human-media constellations. merz | medien + erziehung, 66(6):107–117. http://doi.org/10.21240/merz/2022.6.10

Müller, J., Tischer, M., Thumel, M., & Petschner, P. (2022b). Unboxing digital sovereignty: A scoping review on digital sovereignty of individuals. Medienimpulse, 60(4), 37 pages. https://doi.org/10.21243/mi-04-22-19

Pangrazio, L. (2025). From a ‘patchwork of platforms’ to the platformised school? The changing nature of data infrastructures in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 00, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.70014

Pohle, J., Nanni, R., & Santaniello, M. (2025). Unthinking Digital Sovereignty: A Critical Reflection on Origins, Objectives, and Practices. Policy & Internet, 16(4), 666–671. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.437

Prinsloo, P. (2020). Of ‘black boxes’ and algorithmic decision-making in (higher) education – A commentary. Big Data & Society, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720933994

Repetto, E. (2025). Concept ‘Stretching’ or Concept Innovation? A Review of the Usages of Sovereignty in the Digital Sovereignty Literature. Policy & Internet, 17(3), e70011. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/poi3.70011

Information about the journal

The ZFHE is a peer-reviewed online journal for academic articles with practical relevance to current issues in higher education development. The focus is on didactic, structural and cultural developments in teaching and student studies. In particular, the journal addresses topics that can be described as innovative and whose design options are still open.

The ZFHE is published by a consortium of European researchers. Further information: https://www.zfhe.at.

Submission guidelines

Papers may be submitted in three different formats, in either German or English:

A research paper should meet the following criteria:

  • addresses a systematic research question within trans-, inter- or intra-disciplinary contexts;
  • takes a research gap as its starting point;
  • demonstrates a thorough engagement with the academic discourse;
  • employs a robust methodological approach;
  • includes a reflection on the author’s own work;
  • outlines the research methodology;
  • uses a method that is highly suitable for answering the research question;
  • presents the academic discourse in a reflective manner;
  • offers clearly recognisable added value or a contribution to answering the research question or to the research discussion;
  • consistently follows relevant citation rules (APA 7 style, current edition);
  • comprises between 20,000 and 33,000 characters (including spaces, as well as the cover page, bibliography and author details).

A research-led development paper should meet the following criteria:

  • offers a higher education development perspective with a sound research foundation;
  • discusses and analyses a systematic problem in teaching development;
  • is a scientifically grounded ‘institutional research’ paper;
  • is supported by a literature review;
  • clearly addresses the communication between academia and practice and/or the connection between the two poles of ‘research and development’;
  • consistently follows relevant citation rules (APA 7 style, current edition);
  • comprises between 20,000 and 33,000 characters (including spaces and the cover page; bibliography and author details).

The development paper should meet the following criteria:

  • addresses a specific issue relating to university development within the author’s own institution;
  • practical relevance;
  • is embedded within the academic discourse and literature (though without claiming to provide a comprehensive literature review);
  • offers suggestions for teaching and higher education development, where appropriate with recommendations for action;
  • follows a systematic and transparent structure (e.g. no obscure references to specifics and details within a practical field);
  • identifies generalisable aspects and factors with a view to theory formation;
  • clear considerations regarding transferability;
  • Research gaps are identified;
  • consistently follows relevant citation rules (APA 7 style, current edition);
  • comprises between 20,000 and 33,000 characters (including spaces, as well as the cover page, bibliography and author details).

Timetable

15 June 2026 – Deadline for submission of the full paper: Please upload your papers to the ZFHE journal system (https://www.zfhe.at) under the relevant section (Research Paper, Research-Guided Development Paper, Development Paper) of issue 21/2 in anonymised form; to do so, you must first register as an ‘author’ in the system.

Mid-July 2026 – Feedback/Reviews: All articles will be assessed using a double-blind review process (see below).

Mid-August 2026 – Revision deadline: Where necessary, contributions may be revised by the authors up to this point in accordance with the criticism and recommendations from the reviews.

September/October 2026 – Publication: In September/October 2026, the finalised contributions will be published at https://www.zfhe.at and will also be available as a print publication.

Review process

All submitted articles will be assessed for their academic quality via a ‘double-blind’ peer-review process. The editors of each issue propose the reviewers for the respective thematic focus and assign the individual articles to the reviewers; they also decide on the acceptance of the articles. The selection of reviewers and the review process are overseen by a member of the Editorial Board for each themed issue.

Formatting and Submission

To save valuable time when formatting articles, we ask all authors to use the template available for download from the ZFHE website from the outset:

https://www.zfhe.at/userupload/ZFHE_20-3_TEMPLATE_de.docx

https://www.zfhe.at/userupload/ZFHE_20-3_TEMPLATE_en.docx

The texts must be editable and available, for example, in Microsoft Word (.doc), Office Open XML (.docx), Open Document Text (.odt) or plain text (.txt) formats; please do not submit PDF files. Contributions must initially be submitted in anonymised form to ensure the double-blind review process. Please remove all references to the authors from the document (including in the document properties!). Once the review has been approved, this information will be reinserted.

Any questions?

For questions regarding content, please contact:

Alessandro Barberi (office@zfhe.at), Svenja Bedenlier (svenja.bedenlier@fau.de), Gabriele Zehetner (gabriele.zehetner@ph-linz.at) and Barbara Zuliani (barbara.zuliani@ph-linz.at).

For technical and organisational enquiries, please contact Alessandro Barberi (office@zfhe.at)

We look forward to receiving your submission!

Alessandro Barberi, Svenja Bedenlier, Gabriele Zehetner, Barbara Zuliani