A journal with real impact: responsive, reliable, and thought-provoking

Welcomes and farewells

As Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology (ESWRT) moves into its fifth year, we have some changes ahead: some sad, some exciting. First, we say goodbye to our inaugural Editor-in-Chief, David Cwiertny, whom I am replacing. Dave has been a champion of the journal, with a clear vision for what we should be and a real desire to serve as many in the field as possible. I am extremely grateful for Dave's leadership and guidance, and look forward to continuing to involve him and use his expertise as we move forward. We are also saying goodbye to Tamar Kohn, one of our founding Associate Editors. Tamar has done a fantastic job over the past four years and has been a wonderful sounding board and tireless supporter of the journal. With these farewells, however, also come welcomes. We welcome Krista Wigginton and Kathrin Fenner as new Associate Editors. I'm thrilled to have these two talented engineers/scientists on board and know that they will continue to improve ESWRT, also improving our ability to serve you: our readers, authors, and reviewers.

As Dave and I have been preparing for this transition, I've been thinking a lot about journals in general, the role that they play in our careers and what we want or need from them. From this, I've come to the conclusion that the best journals should be responsive, reliable, and (hopefully) thought-provoking. As I step into my new role as Editor-in-Chief of ESWRT, I would like to make these the three characteristics that immediately come to mind when you think of ESWRT.

Responsive

We have tried to make responsiveness a cornerstone of the journal since its inception. In my mind, responsiveness means that we handle your manuscripts quickly, our process is transparent, and we are open to inquiries and discussion. As an Associate Editor I was happy to discuss the rationale behind my decisions with authors and was also happy to reconsider that decision if appropriate. I value the fact that our authors know who is making decisions and are able to ask for clarification or disagree with us. Our latest statistics show that our time to first decision sits at a respectable 42 days. With an increased number of Associate Editors on board and the Royal Society of Chemistry's excellent team, I hope to be able to decrease that to a rapid 35 days. I also continue to welcome your feedback and hope to be responsive to your needs as we move into Year five of ESWRT.

Reliable

Reliability of course means that the review process is predictable and uniform, but, more importantly, it means that ESWRT can be relied upon for high quality content that is reproducible and novel. We work to ensure that we publish high quality content and will continue to do so. We're certainly proud of the traditional journal metrics that ESWRT has acquired, including our impact factor of 3.649. But personally, I feel more pride when I receive positive feedback about ESWRT from colleagues. We hope that you will keep sending us your best original research and critical reviews, while we pledge to maintain high standards and create timely and insightful digital collections and themed issues that you can rely upon to help you move your own research and career forward.

Thought-provoking

The best papers are those that stimulate your creativity, make you think, or inspire you. Papers or Editorials that make one see a technical/scientific system in a new way or see one's place in society differently are the ones that stick with me. Along those lines, I am excited to roll out a new feature and also to highlight an existing, but underutilized one of the journal. First, we plan to start printing invited Editorials. These will be short Editorials (600–1000 words) designed to make you think: where is the field going? What research is needed to make an impact? Where are the next challenges and opportunities? What aspects of society can and should be changed to truly realize “innovation for sustainable water”? Second, we hope to increase the number of frontier reviews that we publish. These reviews are designed to be short (3–5 pages), focused, and highlight only the most recent advances—those over the past 2–3 years. These reviews should be highly critical and selective in referencing published work. While they should not include unpublished original research, they should ideally include 1–2 paragraphs of speculation about future developments. We would like to increase the number of these reviews that we publish, again providing them as a way to stimulate your creativity and ideas and deliver the thought-provoking content that we believe our readers deserve.

2019

I am excited to see where the next four years takes ESWRT. I look forward to hearing from you, reading about your latest findings (in the pages of ESWRT of course), and ultimately being inspired by you.

As Dave would say, “Until next time.”

---