Commercial Publishers Research Articles

Publishers and production of academic books in Mexico: 2013-2019.

Background: The project Cartografía de la Edición Académica Iberoamericana aims to analyze the production of academic books in Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking countries in the Americas. Following the path opened by similar studies in Colombia and Brazil, we present the results for Mexico. Objectives: To analyze academic books published in Mexico between 2013 and 2019 to examine the entities that published the books and their respective shares in the total output. Methods: A mix of quantitative and qualitative approaches was used to characterize the Mexican publishers of academic books based on data on ISBNs, the International Standard Book Numbers. The data comprised the information provided to the agency that assigns a unique ISBN to each book. We also used the Delphi method and formed discussion groups of experts. The groups were set up on the basis of responses to semi-structured questionnaires that sought to determine the criteria an entity must satisfy to be considered an academic publisher. Conclusions: Of the 196 533 ISBNs issued in Mexico between 2013 and 2019, 117 929 (60%) were issued for books dealing with academic subjects. Commercial publishers accounted for the largest share of those books (63 044 ISBNs, or 53.4% of all the academic books), followed by university presses (29 628 ISBNs, or 25.1%). The group of experts suggested that among the 1289 publishers that requested ISBNs for academic books, only 151 (11.7%) can be considered truly academic publishers; 678 (52.6%) cannot; and 460 (35.7%) were borderline cases, as they meet some but not all the criteria for them to be considered truly academic.

You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone: the changing landscape of UK learned society publishing

This study draws on a longitudinal dataset of 277 UK learned societies covering the period 2015–2023 to provide evidence-based insights into the changing landscape of society publishing. It identifies a rapid decline in the number of self-published societies and an increasingly complex outsourcing landscape. New publishing partnerships are emerging with university presses and other not-for-profit entities rather than commercial publishers, while all but the largest UK societies have seen their publishing revenues decline in real terms since 2015. In general, UK learned society publishers are seeing their influence wane as market conditions favour publishing models focussed on quantity rather than quality. The decline of independent society publishers represents an unintended consequence of the transition to open access, but the trend towards increased outsourcing may be based on flawed assumptions. Analysis of financial data for a subset of 21 societies indicates that self-published societies have achieved sustained growth in their revenues from publishing while societies with publishing partners have seen a significant decline. For those societies with the means and the will to publish journals in their own right, this study bolsters the case for retaining, or even reclaiming, their independence.

Large Language Publishing

The AI hype cycle has come for scholarly publishing. This essay argues that the industry’s feverishーif mostly aspirationalーembrace of artificial intelligence should be read as the latest installment of an ongoing campaign. Led by Elsevier, commercial publishers have, for about a decade, layered a second business on top of their legacy publishing operations. That business is to mine and process scholars’ works and behavior into prediction products, sold back to universities and research agencies. This article focuses on an offshoot of the big firms’ surveillance-publishing businesses: the post-ChatGPT imperative to profit from troves of proprietary “training data,” to make new AI products andーthe essay predictsーto license academic papers and scholars’ tracked behavior to big technology companies. The article points to the potential knowledge effects of AI models in academia: Products and models are poised to serve as knowledge arbitrators, by picking winners and losers according to what they makevisible. I also cite potential knock-on effects, including incentives for publishers to roll back open access (OA) and new restrictions on researchers’ access to the open web. The article concludes with a call for a coordinated campaign of advocacy and consciousness-raising, paired with high-quality, in-depth studies of publisher data harvestingーbuilt on the premise that another scholarly-publishing world is possible. There are many good reasons to restore custody to the academy, the essay argues. The latest is to stop our work from fueling the publishers’ AI profits.

‘Brother Albert’: Albert Erskine, Malcolm Lowry, and the Editing of Under the Volcano

Abstract In this essay, I draw on a range of archival sources to examine the working relationship between the modernist author Malcolm Lowry and the literary editor Albert Erskine. I examine Erskine’s editing of Lowry’s Under the Volcano (1947) at the firm Reynal and Hitchcock and unpack Erskine’s input into the final shape of the novel. Erskine worked with Lowry extensively on the manuscript of Under the Volcano in 1946 and 1947 and oversaw several significant changes to the text. In this essay, I examine Erskine’s approach to literary editing, exploring its origins in the New Criticism of Robert Penn Warren and Cleanth Brooks, and Erskine’s negotiations between the practicalities and demands of commercial postwar publishing and Lowry’s exacting and experimental approach to his work. In doing so, I explore firstly how Erskine’s literary editing was shaped by his training in a particularly American form of New Criticism and, secondly, how these editorial principles were carried out and shaped the final form of Under the Volcano.

‘Special issue-ization’ as a growth and revenue strategy: Reproduction by the “big five” and the risks for research integrity

ABSTRACT The exponential growth of MDPI and Frontiers over the last decade has been powered by their extensive use of special issues. The “special issue-ization” of journal publishing has been particularly associated with new publishers and seen as potentially “questionable.” Through an extended case-study analysis of three journals owned by one of the “big five” commercial publishers, this paper explores the risks that this growing use of special issues presents to research integrity. All three case-study journals show sudden and marked changes in their publication patterns. An analysis of special issue editorials and retraction notes was used to determine the specifics of special issues and reasons for retractions. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse data. Findings suggest that these commercial publishers are also promoting special issues and that article retractions are often connected to guest editor manipulation. This underlies the threat that “special issue-ization” presents to research integrity. It highlights the risks posed by the guest editor model, and the importance of extending this analysis to long-existing commercial publishers. The paper emphasizes the need for an in-depth examination of the underlying structures and political economy of science, and a discussion of the rise of gaming and manipulation within higher education systems.

The undeclared use of third-party service providers in academic publishing is unethical: an epistemic reflection and scoping review.

There is a substantial body of scientific literature on the use of third-party services (TPS) by academics to assist as "publication consultants" in scholarly publishing. TPS provide a wide range of scholarly services to research teams that lack the equipment, skills, motivation, or time to produce a paper without external assistance. While services such as language editing, statistical support, or graphic design are common and often legitimate, some TPS also provide illegitimate services and send unsolicited e-mails (spam) to academics offering these services. Such illegitimate types of TPS have the potential to threaten the integrity of the peer-reviewed scientific literature. In extreme cases, for-profit agencies known as "paper mills" even offer fake scientific publications or authorship slots for sale. The use of such illegitimate services as well as the failure to acknowledge their use is an ethical violation in academic publishing, while the failure to declare support for a TPS can be considered a form of contract fraud. We discuss some literature on TPS, highlight services currently offered by ten of the largest commercial publishers and expect authors to be transparent about the use of these services in their publications. From an ethical/moral (i.e., non-commercial) point of view, it is the responsibility of editors, journals, and publishers, and it should be in their best interest to ensure that illegitimate TPS are identified and prohibited, while publisher-employed TPS should be properly disclosed in their publications.

Diamonds are not just a scientist’s best friend

In this response to Diamond is a scientist's best friend, Oostdam argues that commercial publishers may be needed for solutions towards open access publication.

Open science publishing practices can break commercial publishers’ dominant position in the dissemination of scientific results

Open science publishing practices can break commercial publishers’ dominant position in the dissemination of scientific results

Open Access ‘Unaccomplished’ – Reforming Copyright or Reconceptualizing Science? Access to Scholarly Publications under a (Reinterpreted) Right to Science

ABSTRACT This article identifies the impediments to science created by copyright and suggests ways to overcome these. It focuses on scholarly publishing—primarily of digital content—and queries whether commercial scholarly publishers continue to add value to research in the digital era. The deficits of copyright law, and potential solutions thereto, are assessed in light of the right of everyone ‘to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications’ (‘REBSPA’ or ‘right to science’), as protected in Article 15(1)(b) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966. I find that, while, in the shorter term, existing copyright law needs to undergo certain reforms (which would all be supported by the REBSPA) to accommodate the needs of science, in the longer term, the right to science requires something else—much more, in fact. Firstly, there needs to be a move towards another science, a science reconceptualized so as not to be primarily driven by instrumental and profit motives. Secondly, following from that, science would need to be genuinely open. Among other things, this requires the creation of a true scholarly knowledge commons, necessitating far-reaching changes in the way copyright applies, or potentially its abolition, in science. Thirdly, the envisaged scholarly knowledge commons would have to be globally inclusive in scope—which is to be achieved by recognizing and respecting the mostly ignored international dimension of the right to science. This article questions the traditional role of the commercial scholarly publishers and argues for a paradigm shift in the sphere of copyright and science. Identifying flaws and gaps in the current official interpretations of the REBSPA, the right to science is reinterpreted in various respects here. In making my case, I rely on the notion of a ‘right to research’ under the REBSPA and am aided by the deconstructive concept of ‘adequacy for science’.

A Tryst with Colonial Modernity: Science and Rationality in Devaki Nandan Khatri’s Chandrakanta

In this reading of Devaki Nandan Khatri’s Chandrakanta, the paper proposes to engage with the wonder tale in the context of the emergent commercial publishing and rise of varied literary cultures, in the nineteenth century, on the one hand and the indigenisation of imperial scientific discourses on the other. The rise of literary genres like periodicals, journals, novels, romantic fiction, chapbooks provided a productive platform for debating the emergent discourses on science and its impact on the extant religious and cultural processes. Chandrakanta deployed this platform to forge a unique idiom of Hindi that could train its neo literate readers in contemporary discourses on science and rationality. The procedures embedded in the construction of this scientifically attuned Hindi not simply contested the universality of western power but also constructed a new class of western educated (upper caste) elite, who eagerly sought ways of deploying science as a value system that could enrich the indigenous knowledge traditions of India. Chandrakanta further illustrates how these scientific discourses played a significant role in contesting the extant gendered contexts of the nineteenth century. The language of rational modernity seized the language of gender dynamics, seeking to redefine the networks of hierarchies within it.

Buryatia Scientific Book Publishing in 2017–2021

The purpose of the article is to consider the state of scientific book publishing in Buryatia in 2017– 2021 for to determine the basic directions of its development when compared with the previous period, characteristics of specious diversity presented in the scientific book publishing’ repertoire and to expose basic publishing houses engaged in the release.The work contains a historiographical analysis of publications devoted to the studied problem on the example of Siberia and the Far East, including the national republics of the region: Tyva, Sakha (Yakutia), Buryatia. Statistical data on the release of various types of documents related to scientific publications (monographs, collections of scientific papers, conference materials, abstracts and abstracts of dissertations) are presented. They reflect the dynamics of books issuing by publishing houses of higher educational institutions of the republic, including the D. Banzarov Buryat State University, the East Siberian State University of Technology and Management, the V.R. Filippov Buryat State Agricultural Academy, the East Siberian Institute of Culture, the publishing house of the Buryat Scientific Center of SB RAS, other state and commercial publishing organizations of the republic (“Belig”, “NovaPrint”, “IP Balzhinimaev AB”). The author notes that publishing houses of universities and scientific organizations annually demonstrate high rates of scientific publications. Their publishing repertoire includes various types of works, most of which are monographs, conference materials and dissertation abstracts.At the same time, collections of scientific papers are practically not represented in the documentary stream of publications, and abstracts are completely absent. The peak of scientific publications was in 2018, when 102 publications came out of print. In the subsequent period, we state a decrease in the number of books published.

Copyright and Open Access to Scientific Publishing

The internet has broadened the communication of digitized journals and books among scholars and the perception that academic commercial publishers use copyright law to restrict the free circulation of scientific knowledge. Open access is changing the business model of academic publishing to the extent that copyright law is increasingly being viewed as needing to be balanced against the right to benefit from science. Some have called for copyright law to be revised to promote open access to academic publishing. The question of just how copyright law should be revised to achieve this is today more topical than ever. However, there is a need to clarify and question the role that copyright law should play and there is much to be gained from consideration of the role that competition law can play. Additionally, initiatives to implement open access have been taken by stakeholders (academic authors, publishers, universities, libraries, and research funding agencies) such as open access policies and the new “read and publish” agreements between publishers and universities’ libraries. But the transition towards sustainable universal open access will be a long, complex process since the interaction between these stakeholders can lead to conflicts of interest. This article also evaluates these initiatives and suggests the best approach.

One index, two publishers and the global research economy

ABSTRACT The emergence of a global science system after the second world war was spurred by transformations in academic publishing and information science. Amidst Russian-American technological rivalries, funding for science expanded rapidly. Elsevier and Pergamon internationalised journal publishing, whilst tools such as the Science Citation Index changed the way research was measured and valued. This paper traces the connections between the post-war expansion of academic research, new commercial publishing models, the management of research information and Cold War geopolitics. Today, the analysis and use of research metadata continues to revolutionise science communication. The monetisation of citation data has led to the creation of rival publishing platforms and citation infrastructures. The value of this data is amplified by digitisation, computing power and financial investment. Corporate ownership and commercial competition reinforce geographical and resource inequalities in a global research economy, marginalising non-Anglophone knowledge ecosystems as well as long-established scholar-led serials and institutional journals. The immediate future for academic publishing will be shaped by a growing divide between commercial and ‘community-owned’ open science infrastructures.

KOALA – Building Support for Diamond Open Access

A discussion with Marco Tullney, initiator of the bottom-up initiative KOALA (Konsortiale Open Access Lösungen Aufbauen, i.e. Establishing Consortial Open Access Solutions). Building upon an established role in the organisation of library consortia that negotiate deals with commercial publishers, Tullney and his colleagues have succeeded to acquire small sums from more than a hundred partner libraries to fund journals and books series. Each funding period lasts for three years, with the consortia covering all legitimate costs of running a publication outlet. So far, ten small to medium sized journals have received funding, as well as two smaller book series. Based on his experience from the German-speaking area, Tullney shares several pieces of advice on how to set up similar funding mechanisms in other regions. He also raises the fundamental question about how to make sure that Diamond OA can grow from its current status as a nieche phenomenon in a limited spectrum of disciplines to becoming a sustainable and attractive model for scholars across all fields. First published online: May 3, 2024.

Technological Aspects of Open Journal Systems (OJS)

The traditional scholarly publishing landscape, dominated by large commercial publishers, has come under fire for high costs, limited access, and slow publication times. Open- source platforms are emerging as a powerful alternative, offering transparent, affordable, and accessible solutions for researchers to share their work with the world.Open Journal Systems (OJS) stands out as a powerful and adaptable open-source platform designed for managing and publishing academic journals (Ndungu, 2020)[2]. The architecture of OJS is a critical factor in its widespread adoption and success. Here’s a breakdown of key components

Diamond is a scientist’s best friend

The field of applied linguistics is increasingly adopting open science practices. As open access publication gains traction, ethical issues emerge that need to be addressed by the field. This viewpoint paper addresses the concern that open science is not equally open for everyone. This paper describes how open access publication is increasingly being commercialized and explains how open access publication coincides with systemic inequality. We offer the following viewpoints for the field to consider: We are morally obligated to make our research output accessible. Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publishing lead to systemic inequality in open access publishing, benefiting commercial publishers and those working in research-intensive universities and rich countries. Diamond open access publication removes the systemic inequalities; hence, Diamond open access should be prioritized over Hybrid, Gold, and Green open access publication models. We should move away from publish-and-read agreements and Green open access publishing, because they prevent system change. Through our choices in our work as researchers, editors, reviewers, authors and teachers, we can contribute to the transition towards truly equitable open access publishing practices. Senior researchers are in the position and have the moral obligation to be drivers of these changes.

Are open access fees a good use of taxpayers’ money?

Abstract Butler et al. (2023) reported that five large commercial publishers (Elsevier, Sage, Springer-Nature, Taylor & Francis and Wiley) received $1.06 billion in publication fees between 2015 and 2018. Another three publishers were mentioned (Frontiers, MDPI and PLOS), but were not analyzed. The revenue was underestimated and the number of open access (OA) articles increased over the period of study. The five publishers analyzed charged (on average) $1,989 for gold OA articles and $2,905 for hybrid articles. Peer Review https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_c_00305

New academic journals: an international overview of indexing and access models

Introduction. An international analysis of academic journals newly created in the period from 2011 to 2020 according to type of publisher, place of publication, their relationship with open access, and their indexing in databases. Studies of the issues of concentration of journal publisher ownership, uses of metrics, and access to titles reveal a changing landscape that is nevertheless still dominated by large commercial oligopolies. One notable trend is the creation of new titles in various configurations. Method. To assess the global scenario, we analyse titles created from 2011 to 2020, focusing on indexing and access models. The methodology is multidimensional, predominantly bibliometric and quantitative. The data were collected from Crossref and other databases and processed with the resources of the Information Matrix for the Analysis of Journals. Results. The findings confirm the expansion of the periodical publishing market, of which the academic journal market represents a small fraction (7.29%). Of thdatabases may be considered academic based on indexing in some database, most are open access, indicated by their presence in the Directory of Open Access Journals (55.21%). The analysis of publisher type confirmed the predominance of commercial publishers (44.57%), followed by universities (30.08%). The largest proportion of the titles are in the health field, compatible with the existing distribution of fields, followed by journals in the multidisciplinary and education fields. Conclusion. In the expansion of the publishing market, academic journals represent a small fraction of the total. The main sources of new titles in open access with no processing charges for authors are universities in countries that are not home to large commercial publishers (Indonesia, Brazil, and Spain), all with government subsidies.

Strategies for Negotiating and Signing Transformative Agreements in the Global South: The Colombia Consortium Experience

The article presents the methodology used by the Colombia Consortium to negotiate the first transformative agreements (TAs) in Latin America. These TAs are a strategy to manage costs associated with Article Processing Charges (APCs), facilitate the transition to Open Access (OA) and increase the visibility of Colombian publications. The road map for the design of TAs in Colombia is based on a methodology that considers both qualitative and quantitative aspects, with a key element being the analyses the scientific publication trends in Colombian institutions. This methodological route allowed the Colombia Consortium to sign with three commercial publishers.

Transformed Publication Strategies

This article looks at publication strategies from two perspectives. First, the author describes her own publication strategy. She shows how it evolved over time and explains why she adopted a balanced strategy mixing books and papers, English and French, collective and individual authorship. She then builds on her experience as co-editor of two journals, one French and one international, analyses the consequences of the passage of the first to a big commercial publisher and compares the decision-making processes in the two cases. She finishes by pleading for decision-making procedures that allow more discussions and collegial work than the current systems of editors soliciting reviewers.