Conflicts of Interest


Note: This draft version 0 is applicable since 01/01/2015 and until 14/09/2017, pending approval by the Board of Directors and the General Assembly. Next version.

Definition:

An Editor, Referee or Jury member is in conflict of interest with the Author(s) of a contribution if she/he can not execute her/his role in a wholly independent and unbiased manner, and thereby might bias (high or low) the outcome. In compliance with the standards in climate sciences, we consider that the following types of relationships between the two parties represent potential conflicts of interest:

  • Are relatives or close friends (including but not limited to brothers, sisters, parents, currently are or have been married, have been school friends);
  • Have been in a relation of supervision one by the other in the past 4 years;
  • Have collaborated together, have shared office or department/work unit within the past 4 years.

In addition, we consider as a conflict of interest any situation where the Editor, Referee or Jury member is unable to give unbiased consideration to a contribution because of the race, ethnic origin, religious belief, political philosophy, citizenship or gender of the Author(s).

Regarding Manuscripts:

Submission of a Manuscript by the Author(s):
Upon submission of a Manuscript to Climanosco, the Author(s) have the right to write the names of members that they know are in conflict of interest with them and would not be able to provide unbiased consideration on their contribution. These names will be left out when choosing the Editor and the Scientific and Non-scientific Referees.

Choice of Editor for a Manuscript by the Administrator:
After acceptance of a Manuscript Submission, the Administrator chooses an Editor from the list of Editors who has possibly the most appropriate scientific expertise for the Manuscript and is not in potential conflict of interest with the Author(s). A randomised search engine is available for this purpose to the Administrator which automatically removes names designated by the Author(s) as in potential conflict of interest. Upon accepting the responsibility of the Manuscript, the Editor attests that she/he can offer an unbiased judgement on the Manuscript, free of conflict of interest in the sense written under the “Definition” above.

Choice of Scientific Referee(s) for a Manuscript by the Editor:
After having accepted the responsibility of a Manuscript, the Editor chooses the required number of Scientific Referees from the list of Scientific Referees who have possibly the most appropriate scientific expertise for the Manuscript and are not in potential conflict of interest with the Author(s). A randomised search engine is available for this purpose to the Editor which automatically removes names designated by the Author(s) as in potential conflict of interest. When the Editor can not find appropriate Scientific Referees from within the Climanosco Community, she/he can invite an external climate scientist to fulfill this role. To be acceptable, the external climate scientist must be eligible as a Scientific Member of Climanosco and shall register either as such or as a Guest Referee (free from subscription fees). Upon accepting to review the Manuscript, the Scientific Referee attests that she/he can offer an unbiased judgement on the Manuscript, free of conflict of interest in the sense written under the “Definition” above.

Choice of Non-scientific Referees for a Manuscript by the Editor:
After having accepted the responsibility of a Manuscript, the Editor chooses two Non-scientific Referees from the list of Non-scientific Referees who have possibly their Subject Area(s) and Geographical Sector(s) of interest in best match with the Manuscript and are not in potential conflict of interest with the Author(s). A randomised search engine is available for this purpose to the Editor which automatically removes names designated by the Author(s) as in potential conflict of interest. Upon accepting to review the Manuscript, the Non-scientific Referee attests that she/he can offer an unbiased judgement on the Manuscript, free of conflict of interest in the sense written under the “Definition” above.

Submitting a Review report for a Manuscript:
Upon submitting Review report for a Manuscript, whether assigned by an Editor or spontaneous, the Referee attests that she/he can offer an unbiased judgement on the Manuscript, free of conflict of interest in the sense written under the “Definition” above.

Regarding Prizes:

Procedure for the Prize attribution:
Before each Contest, the Board of Editors is responsible for forming a Scientific Jury and a Non-scientific Jury that will each issue a rating of the individual contributions submitted to the Contest. The Board of Editors then selects for the Prizes the contributions that received the highest rating by both the Scientific and the Non-scientific Juries.

Conflicts of interest between Editors, Jury members and Author(s) of a Manuscript:
The members of the Jury and the Editors participating to the Contest must evaluate for each contribution if they are in conflict of interest in the sense written under the “Definition” above. If they find themselves in a conflict of interest, they have the obligation to declare it and decline their right to vote on the concerned contribution. By the very act of voting on a specific contribution, the members of the Jury and the Editors attest that they can offer an unbiased judgement on the contribution, free of conflict of interest in the sense written under the “Definition” above.

Sanctions:

It is the responsibility of the Board of Editors and in final instance of the Board of Directors to control that all members comply with these rules on conflicts of interest. Members who are found in breach with these rules on conflicts of interest, can, depending on the gravity, see their rights to fulfill related roles be declined for a period of up to 5 years, or in more severe cases be evicted from the Climanosco Association.

Permalink:
https://www.climanosco.org/rule/conflicts-of-interest/