Staff update

The Danish newspaper Information published an article yesterday, April 23, 2025, criticizing the handling of a research paper that was not published as a DCA research report – you can read the article here (in Danish). This is a matter I have taken very seriously and have also discussed on an ongoing basis with parts of the department's management team. However, I do not find anything unusual in the academic process as described by Information.

In order for a report to be published as a DCA report, a number of steps must be followed to ensure academic integrity and the necessary quality. This process includes peer review (by individuals independent of the author) under the guidance and final decision of the editor-in-chief, which for DCA reports is the head of the department. The practice is characterised by dialogue and discussion aimed at enhancing the quality, until a final manuscript is either approved or rejected by the editor.

The core of the matter is that in this case, the peer reviewers had not been approved by the head of department. Unfortunately, it was not made clear in advance that the reviewers had to be approved by the department head. This requirement is described in the procedures for reports commissioned by public authorities. However, in this case, the report was intended to be published as part of a research project. I assessed that the selected peer reviewers did not sufficiently cover the full academic scope of the report and did not possess the necessary independence from the author. I therefore concluded that this DCA report could not be published in its current form.

It is important to emphasise that the kind of academic assessment and rejection mentioned in the article is a natural part of scientific practice. The editor of a journal – or in this case, a DCA report – is responsible for the scientific quality. My employment contract states that I am responsible for ensuring the quality of the department’s research and knowledge dissemination. This is about ensuring that the reports we publish live up to the academic and institutional standards we are accountable for as a university.

The Practice Committee has identified several points of critique, which we are addressing and will incorporate into a clarification of the procedures for publishing reports under the DCA. You are welcome to read more in the committee’s decision here (in Danish).

I will briefly address the above at the department meeting on Tuesday, April 29, 2025.

Best regards,
Jørgen E. Olesen