Khaled Moustafa

University rankings offer some benefits but also come with significant drawbacks. While they can encourage healthy competition, they often lead to unethical practices and prioritize short- term gains over long-term educational purposes. Relying on biased metrics like citations and journal impact factors is a major flaw, potentially misrepresenting the true value of scholarly work. The foremost focus of universities should be on educating proficient students, advancing dependable knowledge, and addressing societal needs. Annual rankings based on one year's criteria and output prove impractical, as research outcomes and educational impact require more time to materialize. It is crucial to consider abandoning or reevaluating ranking systems to prevent biased, financially-driven approaches from causing harm. An internal assessment, gauging satisfaction levels within the university community and the quality of education provided, could offer a more effective approach to ranking universities. Acknowledging the negative impact of journal rankings took decades. It is imperative to avoid subjecting educational systems to similarly detrimental effects from university rankings. The most effective method for ranking universities is through an internal system that takes into account the satisfaction levels of university community members regarding their work conditions and overall institution, as well as whether students are acquiring the education and skills they seek.

Climate change is a multi-hazard challenge for life on earth in all its aspects. Wildfires, pollution, drought and heatwaves are just a few examples of exacerbated environmental crises propelled by climate change effects. To mitigate such effects, urgent actions are required to cutoff greenhouse gas emissions by all the means across all the sectors. Every additional kilogram of greenhouse gases produced unnecessarily should be avoided. One source of greenhouse gas emissions that may not be top of mind for the public and policymakers - and which can be taken into account in preventive environmental policies- is the industry of administrative and identification documents (papers) with short validity dates that involves intensive production (mass printing) and frequent renewals (mass reprinting) while the carbon footprint is too high. The validity of, for example, identity cards, passports, banking cards, driving licenses, etc., is often short ranging from ~ 3 to 10 years, depending on each type of document and issuing country. Short validity dates, however, should raise critical questions regarding the environmental sustainability, societal and carbon impact, and depletion of natural resources used in their production and frequent renewals. Identification documents are not food products that spoil over time or medications that lose their functional activities, so their validity should be unlimited by time in order to avoid the high environmental costs of mass printing/reprinting and high rates of greenhouse gas emissions associated with their production. The production of plasticized ID-type cards can emit up to 100 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per card. Manufacturing one administrative document per person and renewing it five times could produce up to 4 million tons of carbon dioxide globally. If individuals have five administrative documents that need renewing five times, which is often the case, gas emissions would be five times higher, or approximately 20 million tons of CO2 equivalent. To save such important amounts of gas emissions, a modernization and flexibilization of administrative documents industry is required toward removing validity by date. This simple change could save substantial amounts of energy and natural resources, such as trees and water, while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions by million tons, especially in the pressing context of climate change. It should be time to initiate a paradigm shift in the administrative document industry. Eliminating validity periods is a straightforward yet effective solution that would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote sustainable environmental practices.

Racism, xenophobia, and discrimination are harmful behaviors that impact science and society on multiple levels. Racism has a devastating impact on individuals and communities. It can lead to lower educational and employment opportunities, poor health outcomes, and increased risk of violence. It can also erode trust and social cohesion. Racism is a multifaceted issue influenced by historical, cultural, economic, and political factors, alongside individual beliefs and attitudes. It can take implicit or explicit forms, including individual, institutional, and structural racism.