Advancing rigorous, fair and high-impact research practice

I was recently listed in Clarivate’s 2025 Highly Cited Researchers list, which identifies authors with multiple papers in the top 1% by citations for their field and publication year across the past 11 years. The method combines citation thresholds with further quantitative checks and expert review. My work at Scotland’s Rural College (SRUC) and as Director of the Natural Capital Challenge Centre has long focused on the credibility, assessment and use of research evidence, so this recognition sits into a broader conversation about how influence is measured.

I welcome the acknowledgement but remain cautious about citation-based indicators. Citation patterns tend to reflect structural advantages linked to language, institutional resources and international visibility. Researchers like me, based at English-speaking, well-funded institutions are more likely to appear in these rankings. Recognition of this kind, therefore, highlights both sustained scholarly reach and the uneven conditions that shape global research metrics.

These concerns are increasingly shaping my research (see for example, my recent articles on re-thinking impact and re-imagining the language of engagement) and are also influencing my work as a senior trainer with Fast Track Impact. I lead the course on writing high-scoring journal papers, which provides clear guidance on developing concise arguments, appropriately supporting claims with evidence, and writing with precision for target journals. Participants work through practical exercises that improve abstracts, strengthen theoretical framing and clarify methods and findings. The aim is to support higher-quality and more credible manuscripts rather than to chase citation counts. The course is grounded in my research on knowledge production, responsible impact and the factors that underpin trustworthy evidence. This ensures that the training remains focused on substance, transparency and effective argumentation.

For colleagues working on engagement and impact planning, our Inclusive Stakeholder Analysis training complements this approach. It sets out a structured way to identify participants, partners and affected groups, assess interests and influence, and design engagement pathways that reduce bias and broaden representation.

Across both my academic work and training, I return to the same core principle: high-quality research rests on robust argumentation, fair assessment practices and inclusive collaboration. While the citations that underpin this award suggest that this message is being taken seriously by the academics who have cited my work, I hope our training enables many more to write papers and impact plans that make their evidence easier to assess, harder to misinterpret and more useful in practice.