You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
This issue sees changes in the Latin American Editorial Board. Jorge Ahumada, who has served as Editor for Latin America first with Horacio Etchegoyen and then on his own, now makes way for Elias Mallet da Rocha Barros. Juan Francisco Jordán-Moore becomes Deputy Editor. Dr Ahumada would like to thank all those who have worked with him on the IJPA.
It is not really possible to overestimate the importance of the role Jorge Ahumada has played in the development of the Latin American Editorial Board. When, after his appointment as sole Editor following the recommendation of the Search Committee in 1993, I suggested to him that it was time that this Board became a fully functioning peer review board, just like the other Boards, with appointments solely on academic merit, he agreed readily. He put a great deal of effort into winning support for the changes and into making it a success. He has been tireless in his efforts to be constructive and creative so that many Latin American authors have cause to thank him for his editing skills. We have been able to publish a significant number of papers, which have earned international respect, and the Board itself has gone from strength to strength. It met for the first time in São Paulo in 1995 and went on to have further meetings on its own and with the other boards. Peer review issues were discussed and standards of evaluation considered with Jorge then taking on the daunting task of running a series of open workshops in Brazil, Uruguay and Chile, all of which have been reported as an unqualified success. His work was a major contribution to the development of the Journal's peer review policy that has recently been published (IJPA, 1998, 79: 431-448).
The task of an editor is not easy. If publication in the Journal is to mean something it requires trying to set standards and hence quite regularly having to issue bad news. It means making judgments and giving reasons while at the same time holding on to the degree of m