Revisions of paper submitted!

A little over a month ago, we got our "Top 10" paper back with comments from the editor.  The comments were very helpful; in the process of addressing them we really crystallized how we selected papers, and were inspired to do a better job of integrating the designer and social scientist viewpoints into our list.  I just submitted the revisions to Restoration Ecology last night.

Ultimately, we have a list of 10 papers that we no longer think of as a "Top 10," per se... but now think of as "10 pivotal papers" which are informing where restoration ecology is headed.  The selection process was much more free-form than a "Top 10" might imply - with so many contributors, it is hard to agree on a kind of hierarchical ranking for all the papers we read.  We did, however, agree on the importance of the papers - hence, "pivotal."  I've updated the link on the right with the new paper list.

On the one hand, one might view the process of collaborating across so many disciplines (ecology, geography, planning, and design) as frustrating and time-consuming.  But on the other, I think people are realizing that to address our current challenges in ecological restoration we need to communicate between these different groups. 

My personal experience in leading the group writing this paper was deeply rewarding.  You do have to have more patience, you have to be willing to wait for a larger number of people to get back to you on various decisions, and it is more work to keep everyone informed of what's going on and to reach out to groups which might otherwise go unrepresented.  But in the end, I found that people were interested and invested in collaborating, as long as they felt their voices were heard, and as long as we all worked for mutual respect and understanding, we made good progress.  I am delighted with the work  our group did, and look forward to future dialogues with them.  I know my thinking has been expanded through the process, and I highly recommend it to others.  I believe our "10 pivotal papers" are much better for the collaborative attention they received.

What kinds of collaborative projects have you been involved with?  What worked?  What didn't work?

No comments:

Post a Comment