Peer Review Guidelines These guidelines elaborate on key points to be covered in

Peer Review Guidelines
These guidelines elaborate on key points to be covered in each section of the presentation, and should provide the basis for the comments you include in your peer review.
1. Identify the threat or opportunity. Describe the quantitative dimensions of the opportunity, as well as the qualitative motivations as they resonate with the core values of your organization or others who might be evaluating your proposal.
a. Does the material presented quantify the threat or opportunity in an absolute sense, and also in the context of the business, sector, or region? Does the quantification convince the listener that this is a high priority threat to address or opportunity to take, relative to the many other threats that could be addressed?
b. Is this quantification based in a rigorous scientific or technical assessment (that is cited, not that the presenters themselves complete)?
c. Is the threat or opportunity linked clearly to the mission of the organization that would undertake it, or to the bottom line of the business?
2. Identify an innovation or change, and describe and assess the costs and benefits.
a. Is the innovation described adequately for you to understand it?
b. Does the presentation provide enough information about the success of the innovation or change in other locations/situations to convince you that it will work in this situation? This information could be more academic research on how this type of technology, institutional change, etc. works under certain conditions, or it could be more specific evidence from another organization or business.
c. Has the presenter clearly identified the costs (financial or otherwise) of implementing?
d. Has the presenter clearly linked the benefits to the definition of the problem? Have they also identified any co-benefits that would accrue to the organization or to society from implementing this innovation/change?
3. Provide project timeline and key outcome metrics.
a. Is the timeline adequate to achieve the promised benefits (e.g. if it is a GHG mitigation action, will emissions be reduced fast enough to contribute to the global push to net zero by 2040)?
b. Are the key outcome metrics linked to the threat/opportunity definition, and to the benefits identified above?