Nature | News

Comment pieces of 2016

Our editors' pick of this year’s influential expert opinions.

Article tools

Rights & Permissions

Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors

Mistakes in peer-reviewed papers are easy to find but hard to fix, report David B. Allison and colleagues.
3 February 2016

The circular economy

A new relationship with our goods and materials would save resources and energy and create local jobs, explains Walter R. Stahel.
23 March 2016

Peer review: Troubled from the start

Pivotal moments in the history of academic refereeing have occurred at times when the public status of science was being renegotiated, explains Alex Csiszar.
19 April 2016

Seven chemical separations to change the world

Purifying mixtures without using heat would lower global energy use, emissions and pollution — and open up new routes to resources, say David S. Sholl and Ryan P. Lively.
26 April 2016

Embryology policy: Revisit the 14-day rule

Studies of human development in vitro are on a collision course with an international policy that limits embryo research to the first two weeks of development, warn Insoo Hyun, Amy Wilkerson and Josephine Johnston.
4 May 2016

Take responsibility for electronic-waste disposal

International cooperation is needed to stop developed nations simply offloading defunct electronics on developing countries, argue Zhaohua Wang, Bin Zhang and Dabo Guan.
3 April 2016

Agricultural R&D is on the move

Big shifts in where research and development in food and agriculture is carried out will shape future global food production, write Philip G. Pardey and colleagues.
14 September 2016

End class wars

Mike Savage calls on sociologists to resolve their differences over definitions of social class to allow better analyses of inequality.
21 September 2016

Where to put the next billion people

Richard T. T. Forman and Jianguo Wu call for global and regional approaches to urban planning.
28 September 2016

Genomics is failing on diversity

An analysis by Alice B. Popejoy and Stephanie M. Fullerton indicates that some populations are still being left behind on the road to precision medicine.
12 October 2016

Journal name:
Nature
DOI:
doi:10.1038/nature.2016.21181

For the best commenting experience, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will see comments updating in real-time and have the ability to recommend comments to other users.

Comments for this thread are now closed.

Comments

Comments Subscribe to comments

There are currently no comments.

sign up to Nature briefing

What matters in science — and why — free in your inbox every weekday.

Sign up

Listen

new-pod-red

Nature Podcast

Our award-winning show features highlights from the week's edition of Nature, interviews with the people behind the science, and in-depth commentary and analysis from journalists around the world.