Haseeb Irfanullah is a biologist-turned-development facilitator, who often introduces himself as a research enthusiast. Over the last 26 years, Haseeb has worked for different international development organizations, academic institutions, donors, and the Government of Bangladesh in different capacities. Currently, he is an independent consultant on environment, climate change, and research system. He is also involved with the University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh as a visiting research fellow of its Center for Sustainable Development (CSD) in Dhaka. Currently, a Council Member of European Association of Science Editors (EASE), associate editor of Learned Publishing, and associate of INASP, Haseeb advocates for sustainability, climate action, and resilience of scholarly publishing ecosystem. Haseeb has a PhD in aquatic ecology from the University of Liverpool, UK.
Today, we “Ask the Chefs” to consider what they might do differently with their open access strategy if they knew then what they know now.
For Peer Review Week 2026, we asked the Chefs two questions: What is one uncomfortable truth about peer review that the scholarly publishing community doesn’t talk about enough? And, beyond recruiting more reviewers, what conversation about peer review capacity are we overlooking?
The US Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in the copyright infringement litigation between The New York Times and OpenAI and Microsoft, et. al., largely siding with the AI companies and strongly favoring the notion of LLM training as fair use. We asked the chefs for their thoughts.
Four Bangladeshi academics touch upon different aspects of academic publishing by linking them with the SDGs: accessing research; equity in co-authorship; editorial leadership; and SDG framing.
Today, we ask the Chefs how they (or their organizations) are responding to the proposed changes to how US federal research grant funds can be used.
Today, we take an emotional journey through scholarly publishing and aim to understand how emotions impact authors’, reviewers’, and editors’ experiences in the scholarly communications lifecycle.
Is there an inertia slowing efforts by scholarly publishers toward achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)?
We talk a lot about AI in scholarly communications and publishing, but today, we ask the Chefs: What’s your favorite AI hack?
In honor of International OA Week, The Scholarly Kitchen Chefs ponder the theme: Who owns our knowledge?
To kick off Peer Review Week, we asked the Chefs, What’s a bold experiment with AI in peer review you’d like to see tested?
A summary of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) debate session, where Haseeb Irfanullah argued in favor of a motion declaring that journal editors do not need to worry about preventing the spread of misinformation, while Are Brean argued against it.
In today’s post, three Scholarly Kitchen Chefs — Haseeb Irfanullah, Phill Jones, and Alice Meadows — report on the recent European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Conference (Oslo, May 14-16).
While our understanding of climate change is shaped by academia, the climate crisis also shapes academia’s research and teaching in numerous ways. In this article, I explore the current climate change-academia relationship and touch upon some envisaged changes.
The NIH has answered the lingering questions about the future of the Nelson Memo. Not only is it still in effect, it’s being accelerated by six months. We asked the Chefs for their thoughts.
I think human-dependent peer review has lost its human element, thus its relevance, so what we can do to install a new system by abandoning the present one?