"The Grantham Prize rewards expensive, time-consuming, out-of-the mainstream journalism whose importance will be most recognized in 20 or 30 years, when the world asks itself, "What were we thinking back then?'' A prestigious prize for environmental reporting makes such good sense."
Glenn Kramon, Assistant Managing Editor for Enterprise Reporting
The New York Times
The integrity and transparency of the Prize selection process are critical to the journalistic credibility of The Grantham Prize. The jurors, individually and collectively, recognize a need on their part to be judicious in avoiding real or perceived conflicts of interest in fulfilling their responsibilities.
They will recuse themselves from consideration of individual prize entries where such a conflict may exist. Examples justifying an individual juror's recusal include, but are not limited to, cases involving entries from current or past professional or personal associates or students; from individuals representing interests fairly considered to be partners or competitors; and from those in which the juror has a financial interest.
Jurors are expected to confer openly and early with their fellow jurors concerning any such potential recusals. Consistent with the highest professional standards of journalism ethics, they will err on the side of recusal in “gray” areas potentially raising concerns of a conflict.