THE Edinburgh professor whose research paper was condemned after it claimed that the “neverendum” was damaging UK investment in Scotland has blamed proindependence academics for the criticism.
The National showed last week that stories in the pro-Union newspapers based on Professor Colin Jones paper on investment in Scottish commercial property were wrong and out of date.
READ MORE: Investigation: 'Neverendum' news story busted by experts
We also revealed that the paper published in Property Management was rejected by a more prestigious publication after peer reviews which criticised Professor Jones’ analysis and methodology.
Professor Jones told The National: “All the academics quoted in your article I believe belong to a formal group who support Scottish independence so their comments have to be seen from that perspective.
“I am not a member of a political party, nor have I had any involvement in campaigning on the independence issue.
He stoutly defended his paper, referring to the “vagaries and limitations of the refereeing system”.
He added: “Everyone who works in academic life knows about the vagaries and limitations of the refereeing system. Some of my most cited papers were rejected by at least two journals before being published.
“Normally if rejected an author will take on board comments, if possible, and submit to another journal so the final published paper could be very different from the original.
“The refereeing system has a range of problems including vested interests who dismiss papers because of their own biases. The point about the paper was the independence referendum did not affect the Scottish economy unlike Brexit but it still had an impact on investment and capital values because of perceived political risk. The paper explains that the Scottish economy was growing in the study period but UK investors were withdrawing.
“What the Sunday Times articles strangely does not mention is the growth in international investment in real estate.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel