Office of the Chief Information Officer &
High Performance Computing and Communications

Peer Review Plans

 

Title and Description:

The 2015 Arctic Report Card

The Synthesis Product was first published in 2006. The Arctic Report Card is an annual, peer-reviewed, Web-based publication http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard/index.html. It is a multi-disciplinary document composed of topical essays in the physical and biological sciences. This synthesis product presents already published data for 2015 in the Arctic that have not been previously been assembled. Issued annually, the Arctic Report Card is a timely source for clear, reliable and concise environmental information on the state of the Arctic, relative to historical time series records. Material is prepared by an international team of scientists. The audience for the Arctic Report Card is wide, including scientists, students, teachers, decision makers and the general public interested in Arctic environment and science. The Report Card is cited on a wide range of websites. Example of use for decision-making: reductions in sea ice mean that Arctic shipping routes become more feasible. Also, the Arctic Report Card is closely tied to climate change issues, which affect (see State of the Climate reports).

ID:329 Info. Type:  ISI
Estimated DIssemination Date: 11/30/2015
Contact Person: Tammy Adams NOAA Locator

Date First Posted in Peer Review Agenda: 11/20/2015
Estimated Peer Review Start Date: 10/22/2015

Review type:
Letters.

Number of reviewers:
More than 10.

Peer reviewers will be designated by an outside organization, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program.

Will the public, including scientific or professional societies, be asked to nominate potential peer reviewers? no

Will there be opportunities for the public to comment on the work product to be peer reviewed? yes

How and When?

After the final document is placed on the NOAA Arctic web site.

Will the agency provide significant and relevant public comments to the peer reviewers before they conduct their review? no.

Primary disciplines or expertise needed in the review: Arctic Scientist.

Comments on Peer Review:

Charge to reviewers

Final peer review report

Final work product