On 8 January 2003, the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty issued a report on the book The Skeptical Environmentalist and its author Bjorn Lomborg, newly appointed director of the Danish Institute for Environmental Assessment. The Committee, part of the Danish Research Agency, found that The Skeptical Environmentalist is a scientifically dishonest work. They also found that while the book is "clearly contrary to the standards of good scientific practice," the Committee could make no decision on Professor Lomborg's intent or on whether or not he was negligent.
The decision of the committee was based in part on a critique of The Skeptical Environmentalist by four scientists published in January 2002 by Scientific American. These four assessments were focused on four subjects addressed in Lomborg's book: global warming, energy, biodiversity, and population. These four experts (Stephen Schneider, John P. Holdren, Thomas Lovejoy, and John Bongaarts) and others cite serious problems with Lomborg's objectivity and methodology. These problems include the fabrication of data, the selective and misleading use of statistics and sources, a misunderstanding of some of the natural processes discussed (Lomborg is a statistician), personal attacks on researchers, and the grouping of environmental scientists and activists together. The Committee considered each of the many allegations and found that The Skeptical Environmentalist constituted a "perversion of the scientific message in the form of systematically biased representation."
The committee also addressed the question of whether The Skeptical Environmentalist is a scientific book or a "debate-generating" book intended for a more general audience. The Skeptical Environmentalist was published by the social sciences branch of Cambridge University Press and was not peer reviewed. The "manifest one-sidedness," wide breadth of topics, and general lack of scientific approach were suggested as reasons why it should not be judged as a science book. The Committee cited the presentation and format of the book and Professor Lomborg's use of his academic credentials during book promotion in their decision to consider the text as a science book.