Daniele Besomi wrote:
>The connection of the journal ranking, research assessment exercises
>and refereeing process was mentioned earlier in this thread. Perhaps
>it is worth re-reading in this light the article by B. S. Frey,
>Publishing as prostitution? - Choosing between one?s own ideas and
>academic success. Public Choice, 116, 2003, pp. 205-223. (a draft can
>be downloaded from http://ideas.repec.org/p/zur/iewwpx/117.html ).


You've got to love any article with the term 
"intellectual prostitution" as a keyword. One 
thing about the current system is that it leads 
to a more homogenous (that is, boring) product. 
Publishing the referees' comments would certainly 
make the journal more interesting, and likely 
make the comments more thoughtful. The use of 
"property rights" as a tool of analysis brings up 
another possibility, that of the "sponsored 
article." One or more "established" scholars 
could sponsor an article and be listed as such, 
perhaps even with brief comments. This might be 
especially useful in the case of young scholars. 
It might be objected that it merely relocates the 
problem of "intellectual prostitution" from the 
referee to the sponsors. However, the 
master/disciple relationship is an ancient and 
honorable one, and one that occurs naturally.


John C. M?daille