Abstract
ESEP Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics Contact the journal RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections ESEP 8:109-119 (2008) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00093 AS I SEE IT Crises on coral reefs and in coral reef science in the 21st century: the need for a new peer-review system Paul W. Sammarco Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium (LUMCON), 8124 Hwy. 56, Chauvin, Louisiana 70344, USA *Email: psammarco@lumcon.edu ABSTRACT: Coral reef biota have suffered mass mortality globally in the last 30 yr. Causes include: (1) coral disease, (2) coral bleaching, (3) coastal nutrient enrichment, (4) over-fishing, and (5) mass mortality of grazing echinoids. In this paper, I examine data from a US funding agency, a global funding agency, and abstracting indices, and demonstrate why the peer review system has become dysfunctional under these circumstances. Research funding and the number of funded projects have not kept pace with increases in environmental problems, the increased researcher population and researcher demand, resulting in a chronic support gap. This has undermined trust, mutual support, and free-flow of information, and resulted in a poorly functioning review system. I examine the advantages and disadvantages of masking and the double-blinded review system, and recommend a more transparent review system—the reverse-blind review system (RBRS), utilizing (1) Lack of identity of authors/proponents to reviewers, to promote objectivity, (2) identification of reviewers to the authors/proponents, to promote accountability, (3) utilization of expert ‘panel’ members in grant proposal review, similar to the editorial system of scientific journals, each making direct recommendations to funding agencies, (4) elimination of grant panel meetings to help eliminate input by non-experts and confounding group interactions and assign greater responsibility to funding bodies, and (5) allowing researchers to appeal decisions based on inaccurate or misleading information. Such a system would be fairer to the researchers, enhance research, and increase information exchange. KEY WORDS: Coral · Peer review · Proposals · Manuscripts · Publishing · Funding · Panel · Appeal Full text in pdf format NextCite this article as: Sammarco PW (2008) Crises on coral reefs and in coral reef science in the 21st century: the need for a new peer-review system. Ethics Sci Environ Polit 8:109-119. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00093 Export citation Mail this link - Contents Mailing Lists - RSS Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in ESEP Vol. 8, No. 2. Online publication date: October 08, 2008 Print ISSN: 1863-5415; Online ISSN: 1611-8014 Copyright © 2008 Inter-Research.
Highlights
(1) coral disease, (2) coral bleaching, (3) coastal nutrient enrichment, (4) over-fishing, and (5) mass mortality of grazing echinoids
The purpose of this paper is to examine some possible reasons for the slow rate of progress in coral reef research, to address these problems, and to examine how scientists and government funding agencies may themselves have contributed to the slow rate
It would be interesting to know whether funding patterns in coral reef science either slowed or advanced the observed ecological trends; it is not possible to determine this from the available data
Summary
Through the 1970s, much coral research might have been considered ‘pure science’, attempting to understand geological, physiological, and ecological processes in these complex ecosystems. In the early 1980s, mass mortalities of Diadema antillarum, a key grazer in the Caribbean (Sammarco 1980, 1982a,b), occurred (Lessios et al 1984), causing mass mortalities of corals, population increases in benthic macro-algae, and the progression of benthic communities from one stable point, a healthy coral reef, to another — an algal ridge (Hughes et al 1985, 1987, 1994a). Since the beginning of the last quarter of the 20th century, environmental problems on coral reefs have grown, and questions regarding possible causes and solutions have increasingly drawn the attention of researchers. The purpose of this paper is to examine some possible reasons for the slow rate of progress in coral reef research, to address these problems, and to examine how scientists and government funding agencies may themselves have contributed to the slow rate. I examine review systems for research grants and the publication of scientific papers, and make recommendations for an alternate system that may be more appropriate for the field, in light of today’s funding climate and large researcher population
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call