An appeal for quality The publication of the editorial policy statement

in the January 1981 issue of ES & Τ marked a funda­mental change in the directions of this journal. Many of our readers may not have noticed this shift in the policy statement, but judging from the many favorable comments I have received, the resulting new format and content in ES& Τ has been recognized and wel­comed. For those who missed the earlier presentation, I direct your attention to the policy statement that appears at the introduction of the Current Research section of this issue.

Beginning in 1980, the editors, staff, and manage­ment of ACS embarked on a study of the strengths and weaknesses of ES&T. As part of this study, the Decker Company conducted an extensive market analysis. Important findings from this study included the following: (a) scientific quality in the magazine section should be strengthened and inappropriate emphasis on one-shot stories based on single processes or companies should be avoided; (b) circulation and promotion should be designed to represent more ap­propriately the content and strengths of ES&T; (c) ES&T should strive for a sharpened editorial focus to establish its own niche in the panoply of environ­mental publications; (d) the Current Research section of the journal enjoys a strong reputation for quality research papers. Apart from correcting inaccurate circulation and promotion material, the editors found from these findings that the greatest need was to in­crease scientific quality. This would not only improve the "front end" material, but would also sharpen ES& T's image as "the place" to read and publish high quality scientific discussion on environmental issues.

The Decker report specifically recommended that ES& Τ should be a magazine that ". . . speaks to the professional interests of environmental scientists as an identifiable professional group; allows the critical scientific discussion of important issues in an editorial

environment free from the pro-industry stance of business magazines and the anti-industry bias of en­vironmental activist media; . . . leads the way in identifying new problems and new methods for use in solving those problems."

The goal, then, is quality. The means to achieve it are another matter. After discussion with the Advisory Board members, the editors decided to increase the number of ways the scientific community can con­tribute to the journal as well as increase its guidance to the ES&Τ staff on subjects to be covered by staff-written articles. What does this mean to you? First, you can enjoy the vastly improved staff work that is already appearing in the ES&T magazine section. Second, you can help contribute to the quest for quality by submitting manuscripts in any of the fol­lowing different categories:

Feature articles. This format is designed for dis­cussion and opinion on important research directions in environmental science. Please notice in the policy statement that the review criteria are substantially different for feature articles than for current research papers.

Critical reviews. These must be thoroughly docu­mented peer review assessments of environmental science research areas that identify critical research needs.

Current Research. Nothing has changed here with regard to format, although the editors are seeking increased input of high quality atmospheric science articles.

Guest editorials. This column is available for sig­nificant opinion that the editors believe should be shared with our readers. Anyone interested should contact the editor directly.

0013-936X/82/0916-005A$01.25/0 © 1981 American Chemical Society Environ. Sci. Technol., Vol . 16, No. 1, 1982 5A

ES&T EDITORIAL