Tue. Jul 14, 2020 10:45 AM - 12:15 PM Ch.1

convener:Michiyo SHIMAMURA(Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology), Yasuhiro Yamanaka(Faculty of Environmental Earth Science, Hokkaido University), Kiyoshi Suyehiro(Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology), Brooks Hanson(American Geophysical Union), Chairperson:Michiyo SHIMAMURA(Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology)

Scientific indices such as the number of citations or impact factor have been widely adopted in Japan and elsewhere to gauge scientific outputs without sufficient deliberations on their relationships to the true value of science and researchers' efforts or the harm and perverse incentives that result. If such disconnect exists, overreliance to these indices may lead to biases in research including in aiming for shorter-term goals. They are often requested by the solution-seeking stakeholders as well.

In the field of geoscience, a wide latitude of research styles exists and forms our community, from a focus on urgent societal needs to intellectual curiosity about our Earth. Such characteristics vary among fields making general comparisons across fields not straightforward. The adoption of simple evaluation indices as above may hinder the truly useful assessment of research. This trend influences gravely the research environment and thus the behavior of early-career researchers. What is the right direction for science and how should science be assessed?

In this session, we invite the members of the geoscience research community to discuss "ideal" science, recognize its diversity and identify the needs for changes. We welcome reports from different parts of the world and novel ideas to evaluate our own research activities that may lead to creating a culture that fulfills accountability to society. We envision this session to have infuse lively discussion and invite the audience to interactive exchanges.