Gec Writing Style

---
name: gec-writing-style
description: Use when drafting or polishing the prose of a Global Environmental Change (GEC) manuscript so it reads for an interdisciplinary, policy-relevant audience within the word and abstract caps. GEC values clarity and rigor that travel across disciplines. Polishes the writing; it does not draft the analysis.
---

# Writing Style (gec-writing-style)

A GEC paper must be **rigorous and readable across disciplines**. Reviewers and readers come from
environmental social science, governance, economics, geography, and the natural sciences, and many read
for policy relevance. Write so each of them can follow the argument — within the length caps.

## When to trigger

- Drafting the introduction, abstract, or discussion
- A reviewer said the paper is "hard to follow," "jargon-heavy," or "buries the contribution"
- Cutting to meet the word cap (Research Articles up to ~8,000 words; abstract ≤ ~250 words — verify)
- Writing the abstract and the plain-language framing

## What GEC prose does well

1. **Front-load the contribution.** The introduction states the human/policy problem, the gap, the
   framework, and the contribution within the first page — not after a long literature tour.
2. **Define terms once, use them consistently.** Contested concepts (vulnerability, resilience,
   governance, transition) get one definition and stick to it.
3. **Minimize discipline-specific jargon.** Explain unavoidable technical terms; an interdisciplinary
   reader should not need a glossary. Spell out acronyms on first use.
4. **Connect to scale and stakes.** Remind the reader why the result matters across scales and for
   societies — without overclaiming.
5. **Discussion that earns the conclusion.** Interpret results against the framework, state scope
   conditions and limitations honestly, and set up the policy implications (`gec-policy-relevance-and-implications`).

## The abstract (≤ ~250 words — verify on the live page)

- State the **problem, approach, key finding, and significance** for the human/policy dimension.
- Avoid undefined jargon; an editor from another field decides desk-fate partly on the abstract.

## Length discipline (verify caps)

- Research Articles **up to ~8,000 words** (excl. references); cut method minutiae to supplementary
  material rather than diluting the argument.
- Every section should advance the contribution; if a paragraph does not, cut or move it.

## Anti-patterns

- A long literature review before the reader knows the contribution
- Jargon or acronyms unexplained for an interdisciplinary audience
- Inconsistent use of a key concept across sections
- Overclaiming policy impact the evidence does not support
- Going over the word/abstract cap (front-page issue at submission)

## Output format

```
【Contribution stated by】page/paragraph (front-loaded? Y/N)
【Jargon check】terms defined; acronyms spelled out? [Y/N]
【Abstract】word count (≤ ~250) + states problem/approach/finding/significance?
【Length】within ~8,000 words (excl. refs)? [Y/N]
【Limitations】stated honestly? [Y/N]
【Next】gec-policy-relevance-and-implications
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — reference managers and typesetting
- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — word/abstract caps and style notes