Abstract
Benefits accrue to scientists, resource managers, companies, and policymakers when environmental scientists publish in peer-reviewed journals. However, environmental scientists and practitioners face challenges, including the sometimes low value placed on journal articles, institutional vested interests in outcomes, and the changing priorities of employers and project sponsors. Confidentiality agreements can also lead scientists to assume publication is not an option. Case studies may be viewed by potential authors as too routine for peer-reviewed journals. On the basis of 30 years of experience, we suggest that publishing hurdles can be overcome and that environmental scientists have a range of options. The topics of manuscripts can include not only results from case studies and perspectives based on them but also byproducts of assessments, including definitions, plans, monitoring methods and models, and decision frameworks. Environmental scientists have unique opportunities to move science forward with their practical knowledge if they can move across the institutional, logistical, data-related, and content-related hurdles.
