Changing of the Guard

At the Journal of Environmental Engineering, we have a practice of having the Editor, upon completing his or her term, continue to serve the Journal as an Associate Editor for another 2 years. One might say that would be like George Bush going into Congress after having served 2 terms as President! Another practice is to have the past editor, as one of the last major tasks for the Journal, identify a successor to the present editor. This is all good practice in that the past editor can be a great help to the present editor, it provides continuity, and takes another responsibility off the shoulders of the present editor who we all know has a full plate. I want you to know that it is Mark Rood that you need to thank for putting up with me as editor of the Journal for the next 2 years.

When Mark first approached me about taking on the job, I hesitated. Of course I was honored that my colleagues thought enough of me to believe that I could and would take on this responsibility. But the sinister side of me thought, “How many people turned him down before he got to me?” Those of you in academics understand what I mean. When you are offered a position as Chairperson of your department, you instantly believe it’s because no one else wanted the job. You are typically offered “Congratulations” and “Condolences” in the same breath. (Of course, I am joking!) In my case, at least in part, I decided to say “yes” to Mark as a way of saying we need to overcome those myths, as real as they may be. I understood that there is no direct compensation for serving as Editor, something anathema in the business world where I reside. I also realized that the workload might be crazy at times, and the appreciation might be negligible at other times. But even in the business world, we recognize the importance of certain activities, such as the Journal, and the need to contribute to its continued success without the expectation of remuneration. We are all familiar with the term “pro bono.” It exists for a reason. I do believe we all have a responsibility to contribute to the profession, and after thinking about it, I felt that this is one way to contribute my talents effectively. I hope that doesn’t sound schmaltzy or self-serving, but the concept of service to the profession is one that we should consider more often. Thank you, Mark, for giving me the opportunity to serve.

This job of editor is typically reserved for someone in academia. I suppose I am something of a hybrid. I spent nearly 10 years as a faculty member at Princeton University and then at Lafayette College where I was Head of the Department of Civil Engineering. I loved it. For the last 16 years or so, I have been a full time consultant having left Lafayette to start my own business which subsequently was acquired by TRC. I also have a year in government service as a Project Engineer for the USEPA construction grants program in Region II. I hope the breadth of my experience will allow me to continue the fine traditions of the Journal, and also add something new.

Kathy Banks has done a wonderful job steering this ship for the past 2 years, and we owe her a tremendous debt of gratitude for taking the time to keep the ship afloat. I want to thank Kathy for placing her confidence in me and for making the transition as smooth as possible. I also want to thank the Associate Editors, past and present, who put in the many hours of service necessary to ensure the quality of the manuscripts published in the Journal. We presently have a great slate of AEs. But we are always looking for recommendations for new AEs, not just to relieve the burden on the current AEs but also to replace those whose terms expire in any given year, and to cover for those who may need temporary leave of their duties for sabbatical or other reasons. I seek your recommendations. I also look forward to hear from those of you who might be willing to periodically provide peer review of submitted manuscripts. We are always looking for good reviewers.

As you might expect from any incoming editor, I have identified some priorities. As a general theme, I would like all of us to think about how we can make the Journal the “go to” journal for environmental engineering. We can talk about impact factors and other ratings schemes until we are blue in the face, but at the end of the day we want the Journal to be the one that professionals go to first when they are looking for or want to publish state-of-the-art information in environmental engineering. Once we do that, the ratings will follow. Our professional community includes researchers, teachers, consultants, regulators, students and more. There are many journals they can choose to publish their work in or educate themselves. Individual priorities will vary depending on one’s immediate need for information. The Journal must attempt to satisfy the needs of all of its users. You will see some changes in the Journal over the next 2 years. We hope to elevate our status and reputation in the professional community we serve. I welcome thoughts from anyone on this topic.

Over the next 2 years, ASCE has committed to improve the method of processing manuscripts. In this electronic age, the process should not be complicated, difficult, or slow. My predecessors have made significant attempts to improve the processing of manuscripts. But, there’s always more to be done. We must constantly remind ourselves that without manuscripts, we do not have a journal. I am hopeful that by the time you read this editorial, we will be working on implementing ASCE’s new web-based system for manuscript processing. Again, any thoughts are welcome.

As a student and later as a professional, I have been turning to the Journal for more than thirty years. I am proud of the Journal. There has been a long line of dedicated professionals who have made it prosper, most recently Mark Rood and Kathy Banks. I look forward to serving you and continuing that fine tradition.