peer-review

Is this really how harvested forests are left? Australian Rural & Regional News looks into recent statements that highlight continuing conflicting and confusing information in the public domain about connections between forestry operations and bushfires and whether prescribed burns reduce bushfire risk.

Two hundred years ago, a university was judged on the quality of its teaching, today it is on its research output. While there are many dedicated academics who produce useful research, the “publish or perish" syndrome can also lead to undesirable outcomes. I heard recently that a retired scientist published 400 peer-reviewed papers, as well as two books in a 40 year career. I calculated that a paper was produced, on average, every five weeks.

Frank Batini’s article (The role of academics in influencing the perceived threat from climate change) highlights how data can be misused to achieve an end. The ‘peer review’ process is intended to ensure that scientific findings are credible and justifiable. But with the frenzy to publish for academic standing and the proliferation of journals wanting to accommodate them, the peer review process often fails under the pressure ...ARR.News asked a few questions of Jack.

Some academics are happy to comment in areas where they have no expertise or local knowledge. In contrast, the views of locals with years of practical management experience are mostly ignored.