http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?

sectioncode=26&storycode=419680&c=1

08 May 2012

Innovation boss in duplication row

Like 81

38

19 April 2012 By Paul Jump Paper sprouts fresh charges against Thai official found to have plagiarised PhD. Paul Jump writes

Concerns have been raised that a leading university and an academic journal in Thailand have failed to act against a senior

Credit: Alamy New crop: asparagus paper queried government official, who was found by a university investigation to have plagiarised his PhD thesis and who has also been accused of plagiarising an academic paper about organic asparagus production. Supachai Lorlowhakarn is the director of the National Innovation Agency, an agency of Thailand's Ministry of Science and Technology. He was awarded a PhD from Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok in 2008, despite already being the subject of plagiarism allegations. Times Higher Education understands that an internal investigation by the university concluded in April 2010 that 80 per cent of Dr Lorlowhakarn's thesis was plagiarised from several sources, including a United Nations technical assistance report and a field study in organic asparagus production commissioned by his agency. Dr Lorlowhakarn did not respond to requests by THE for comment. Chulalongkorn's governing council is reported to have appointed another committee in January 2011 to consider whether Dr Lorlowhakarn's PhD should be revoked, but the university has released no information on the subject and did not respond to THE enquiries. It is also alleged that an article published in 2008 in the Scopus-indexed Thai Journal of Agricultural Science, "Organic Asparagus Production as a Case Study for Implementation of the National Strategies for Organic Agriculture in Thailand", on which Dr Lorlowhakarn is listed as first author, was also plagiarised from the same sources, as well as from an article previously submitted to another journal by the authors of the UN report.

5/8/2012

8:23:32 AM

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=419680&c=1

PhD students at Chulalongkorn are required to publish a paper in an international peer-reviewed journal in order to graduate. Wageningen Academic Publishers, which holds the copyright of the original article - eventually published as a book chapter - has demanded that the Thai journal retract the paper. However, the company's editor, Lieke Boersma, said she had been "unpleasantly surprised by [the journal's] unwillingness to approach the situation in a serious way". The journal's editor-in-chief, Irb Kheoruenromne, a soil scientist from Bangkok's Kasetsart University, told THE that he would not retract the paper unless he were presented with a court document proving that it constituted a breach of copyright. He said there were many reasons for this, chief among them being the fact that the paper was published "before any other documentation that shows the copyright". He also said that one of the authors of the UN report and of the paper allegedly plagiarised, agricultural consultant Wyn Ellis, was also the original source of the plagiarism accusations and a fellow PhD candidate of Dr Lorlowhakarn at Chulalongkorn. Mr Ellis declined to comment. Apirux Wanasathop, a former member of the National Innovation Agency board, said that Chulalongkorn must punish Dr Lorlowhakarn if it wanted to live up to its slogan of being "the pillar of the kingdom". He described the case as "a shame to the country, the ministry and the university". paul.jump@tsleducation.com.

Readers' comments
Carl Hogan 19 April, 2012 This is absolutely shocking! It can only be wondered if the Thais' really understand the wider implications of this case? Apart from a veritable institution such as Chulalongkorn not taking decisive and firm action, it has to be wondered why the Thai government hasn't become involved and done something? Surely it must realise that if one of its senior officers', particularly the head of the National Innovation Agency, is deeply involved in plagiarism, what message does that send out? If it thinks that standing on the sidelines is enough, it is very much mistaken. Unless something is done now, external investors will have second thoughts about investing in a country that treats intellectual property rights and the stealing of ideas,by the head of one of its own agencies, as something to be ignored. Wake up Thailand! Soraj Hongladarom 19 April, 2012 This story has been a saga within the university. I would like to assure you that, as a faculty member of Chulalongkorn University, the faculty at large is totally opposed to plagiarism and violation of copyright law (which is also law of Thailand). Faculty members stand for the value of academic integrity and never condone such incidences. it remains for the University Council to explain why the university has not publicly acted on this case. laws 19 April, 2012 The authorities have to do something about intellectual property rights in the UK. Till then the UK cannot lecture Thailand or anyone else on this issue. Colin Westacott 19 April, 2012 Plagiarism is stealing. Just like robbery or theft from a business, plagiarism is wrong and leaves the injured party significantly worse off. Over and above the personal trauma that such instances of theft cause the inventor, or in this case the creator of an idea, such outrageous actions reflect badly upon the perpetrators and of course the organisations they represent. Lorlowhakarn as the director of the National Innovation Agency, an agency of Thailand's Ministry of Science and Technology, is not only bringing shame on himself, but also on the whole Thai government. If the government of Thailand is not willing to protect the intellectual rights of individuals, will they, or in fact can they protect the intellectual and patent rights of businesses considering investing in their country? Moreover, Lorlwhakarn is in danger of deeply damaging the reputation of one of Thailands leading universitys - Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. It is imperative for such academic bodies to have strong governance in this area and they must be able to guarantee the quality of their research.

5/8/2012

8:23:32 AM

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=419680&c=1
Plagiarism is simply not acceptable. Any question whatsoever of published works being copied, in part or as a whole, must be investigated thoroughly and firm action taken if wrong doing is proven. This is a truly disturbing and worrying story and the Thai government and Chulalongkorn University must act quickly and decisively to resolve the problem and regain what is left of their credibility. Julie Meese 19 April, 2012 @laws "The authorities have to do something about intellectual property rights in the UK. Till then the UK cannot lecture Thailand or anyone else on this issue." Touch, monsieur! jonfernquest 20 April, 2012 Carl Hogan: "It can only be wondered if the Thais' really understand the wider implications of this case?" They would, perhaps, if they were even allowed to read about it. There is another dimension to this case, namely defamation suits and the suppression of journalistic freedom to investigate as the Bangkok Post Erika Fry case as reported in the Columbia Journalism Review clearly shows: http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/fry_in_thailand.php?page=all The possibility of criminal defamation suits and financially crippling lawsuits puts a damper on the possibility of running investigative journalism pieces, something that is sorely needed for informed citizenship. Danthong Breen 20 April, 2012 In Thailand corruption debilitates the body politic, Hospitals sell their 'cold' medicine stocks to illegal drug manufacturers, Streets are lined with stalls selling counterfeit products, And its most prodigious university has no response to plagiarised thesis accusation. Authoritarianism, Conservatism, Traditionalism prevail in a land where wealth accumulates and men decay Anna Roberts 21 April, 2012 I gather that this case has been rumbling on for some years, with some murky attempts at suppression of the facts through intimidation along the way, and it's good to see the THE giving it the publicity it deserves. Hopefully this will help put pressure on Chulalongkorn university and the Thai authorities to act at last in defence of intellectual property rights within their country. Acharn 28 April, 2012 Chulalongkorn Universitys Vice President, quoted in Chularat Saengpassa Worldclass standards and boosting, The Nation, 21 February 2011. "We categorise Chula as world-class in the 'national university' division, not world-class in an 'international' university division So, we wont spend a huge amount of money to import excellent foreign lecturers and recruit too many international students to reach a higher rank because doing so doesnt benefit the nation We are in the same category as the University of Tokyo, Peking University and Seoul National University, which mainly serve local students. We look up to their benchmarks and we will see how we can improve CU" These remarks, made by a very senior university representative, have made foreign students and academics seem less welcome at Chulalongkorn. If this is the prevailing mindset, its head-in-the-sand handling of the current plagiarism scandal is not surprising.I feel so ashamed and don't understand why they would protect him.. It's sad but Chula seems set for another well-deserved drop in its global ranking. It's time Chula revoked the degree and thereby salvage what's left of its reputation. Irb Kheoruenromne 30 April, 2012 People who had given adversary comments on this case should really investigate about Wyn's ulterior motive on the matter. I am the Chief Editor of the journal where paper related to this case was published. We never want to have this plagiarism in publication. The paper was published before Wyn started this.

5/8/2012

8:23:32 AM

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=419680&c=1
The paper was published because 1. It passed the review fro two reviewers. 2. The authors signed the publishing agreement that the work belonged to them. So, it has a legal binding. Other publications related with this were generally after that paper was published. I met with Wyn few times and had talked with him on the phone. I already suggested him to take the matter to court to get the court verdict so that I can revoke their right on belonging and take the paper out. This suggestion is still on. Also, I had answered questions regarding this to some of our Board of Editors clearly. I had just posted up my comments on the other related website and I do not believe Wyn should do anything else except taking the case to court. jonfernquest 30 April, 2012 Irb Kheoruenromne wrote: "People who had given adversary comments on this case should really investigate about Wyn's ulterior motive on the matter." What does this have to do with the issue of plagiarism? Either the author plagiarized or didn't plagiarize. The motive of the exposer of plagiarism is irrelevant. Is a murderer any less a murderer if the exposer is his wife's boyfriend? An internal investigation by Chulalongkorn already concluded that that 80 per cent of the thesis was plagiarized, so if the thesis was online (as it well might be one day and probably should be) we could scroll down our browser ourselves and inspect the plagiarisms and see the truth for ourselves. Honestly, if you as the editor of an academic journal do not take active steps to ensure and protect that journal's scholarly integrity (as most western academic journals do) what do you think is going to happen in the long-run to the reputation and credibility of that journal? Furthermore, why would an academic journal defer to a court of law, plagiarism is a matter of faulty scholarship and lack of scholarly integrity, not a matter of rule of law. A legal case would most likely go to the side with the biggest pockets who could endure the decades it will most likely take to reach a legal decision and effectively vindicate a plagiarist. Tom Tuohy, a foreign teacher in Thailand and frequent writer on educational issues is worth quoting (wish i could link to the online writing i am quoting from, because citation and providing sources is what scholarly integrity is about, but it will take one google search to find it): "As someone who regulary writes on educational topics within Thailand, I am both apalled and saddened that nothing is ever done, and these people who get into positions of power and influence are rarely if ever punished for this kind of unethical behaviour. Is it any wonder then that Thailand ranks at the bottom of so many league tables and where corruption, plagiarism, and cheating in exams is rife? If the people in power are behaving in this way, what examples are they setting for those in lower seats of learning: undergraduates and postgraduates?" Arthur Dent 1 May, 2012 Irb Kheoruenromne: Editors of international journals are expected to act with professional decorum and demonstrate scrupulous fairness to parties in dispute. I find it extraordinary and abhorrent that any academic and editor of an international journal should resort to slurs, innuendo and unwarranted personal attack. A classic case of discrediting the whistleblower, if ever I saw one Since I dont know the facts, Ill resist the temptation to speculate on your own motives (ulterior or not) for such a crude and intemperate venting of spleen. Moreover, your rationale for not acting on the available evidence seem strangely disconnected from best practice in international academic publishing. Normally, a university investigation finding 80% plagiarism would give ample justification for immediate suspension of an offending article, no questions. In this light, your attack on Wyn Ellis does you no credit, to say the least, and simply raises the question of whether you are protecting a plagiarist by refusing to apply immediate sanction? Shame on you, Irb, and shame on TJAS. Wyn Ellis 1 May, 2012

5/8/2012

8:23:32 AM

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=419680&c=1

Irb Kheoruenromne: Peter Fernquest said it better than I possibly could. Ill leave it to others to judge whether the tone and content of your posting are worthy of an esteemed academic and Editor-in-Chief of an international scientific journal. I will simply say that my motives are no concern of yours; after all, exposing academic fraud is your duty and mine, and to do so should require no further defence. Your posting also contains some factual errors: allow me to set the record straight. First, I am plain Mr, not Dr. Second, my PhD thesis topic has nothing to do with asparagus, organic or otherwise. Otherwise, my thesis topic is a private matter in which you have no legitimate business to intrude. Again, I ask you to please stick to the facts you know, and respect my personal boundaries. I fully support Peter Fernquests suggestion to remain focused on the single key issue in this dispute whether or not the TJAS paper was plagiarized. Should the balance of available evidence support the allegation, I submit TJAS has both an ethical and legal duty as publisher to retract the paper NOW without further wrangling. Retraction is no disgrace: indeed, to the contrary, it demonstrates the journals commitment to stamp out the growing crisis of academic fraud, adding to its credibility. So what of this supporting evidence? Well, there is quite a bit. There are the three court verdicts and the report of the Chulalongkorn University investigation, which all ruled on the provenance of the reports upon which the disputed TJAS paper was based? Or the March 2010 report of the Ministry of Science and Technology investigation? Last year, Wageningen Academic Publishers and members of TJAS own Editorial Board also demanded that TJAS retract the paper. You've seen the source documents. I simply ask: what more could an unbiased observer possibly need to prove the allegation beyond reasonable doubt? To continue to sit on your hands in the face of this prima facie evidence makes your postion increasingly untenable. To move things forward, I have two proposals which I hope you will find constructive. First (and this has also been advocated by members of TJAS Editorial Board) why not demonstrate your impartiality by asking an independent panel of respected overseas academics to arbitrate? This would protect you from local politics, deliver an authoritative ruling respected by all sides, and allow a dignified closure to this protracted dispute. Second, since some readers may be curious to read the paper, in the interests of transparency would you be willing to post a link to the TJAS paper on this blog (I note you took the rather drastic step of taking the entire journal offline some time ago)? With the consent of the original intended publisher Ill be happy to post a link to the unpublished proof copy of the original article. Readers can then judge for themselves the similarities, and also the academic standard of the TJAS paper, which I also challenge. I hope you will respond constructively to these two challenges; lets at least try to resolve our differences like grown-ups. Disclaimer:All user contributions posted on this site are those of the user ONLY and NOT those of TSL Education Ltd or its associated trademarks, websites and services. TSL Education Ltd does not necessarily endorse, support, sanction, encourage, verify or agree with any comments, opinions or statements or other content provided by users.

5/8/2012

8:23:32 AM