In the Dark

My marking duties being over, it’s time once more to take up the cudgels against the academic publishing racket, at least in a small way, by sharing an article from the European University Association called Reclaiming academic ownership of the scholarly communication system. I recommend you read the entire piece, which is an extended briefing note. It can be downloaded as a PDF here. One of the points it makes very strongly is how much the Open Access movement has been hijacked by commercial publishers.

I will share a couple of sections with you here. First, some background information about Open Access Publishing:

Now I’ll cut to the chase and share the key points from the end.

1. Accelerate the reform of research assessment. Most of the issues in the current publishing system are rooted in how academic staff are evaluated. Research assessment reform is essential to break the cycle of dependence on high-impact commercial journals and related metrics. Universities should consider broadening the criteria used in academic evaluation, to ensure that recognition goes beyond research to include teaching, innovation, leadership, open science practices, and societal outreach. While institutional, regulatory, and cultural factors can either facilitate or hinder reforms, many universities are already taking the initiative and implementing changes (even in countries with centrally regulated academic career assessment processes).
2. Strengthen institutional publishing services and infrastructures. A robust, sustainable and interoperable scholarly publishing ecosystem requires each university to properly curate their research contributions and outputs, through institutional or shared infrastructure and services (e.g. repositories, publishing platforms, and CRIS systems). Strengthening these institutional capacities may require reallocating resources and cooperation (see points 3 and 4). This should also apply to the various institutional departments (libraries, research management, etc.) and staff needed to support academics and researchers.
3. Cooperate and coordinate with other universities, research performing and funding organisations, as well as researchers’ associations and learned societies. The challenges of scholarly publishing are systemic, and no single institution can tackle them alone. Universities should align their efforts with other academic organisations, funders and research institutions. Cooperation and coordination can be valuable for advocacy, policy development and implementation, as well as for shared or “horizontal” services and infrastructures. Cooperation can also take place within regional, national, European and global frameworks.
4. Critically evaluate expenditure on commercial research publishing and information products and services. As new not-for-profit publishing alternatives emerge and consolidate, universities should regularly evaluate their expenditure on commercial products and services, including journal publication costs and research databases. By promoting cost transparency and cost efficiency, institutions can make informed decisions that support innovation and reinvest funds into institutional publishing services and infrastructure (see point 2). Where feasible, preference should be given to not-for-profit solutions, ultimately reducing costs and ensuring sustainability.
5. Support and promote the use of rights retention by the university community. Rights retention should be used to regain academic ownership of scholarly communication. Universities should actively advocate for legislative reforms that allow researchers to retain their rights and freely share their research. They should also educate and inform their faculty and researchers of the importance of rights retention and provide legal support. Where legally feasible, institutions should implement and enforce rights retention policies to ensure that publicly funded research remains publicly accessible.
6. Ensure researcher engagement. Any transition toward a more equitable and sustainable scholarly communication system must involve the academic community. Universities should raise awareness of the systemic issues in scholarly publishing and create spaces for dialogue, reflection, and co-design to discuss how to address them at institutional level. Engaging researchers early and consistently can help shift perceptions, foster a sense of shared responsibility and build support for longterm cultural change.

I endorse all of these, and have written about some of them before (e.g. here) but I would add to the first that universities should actively lobby their governments to change research assessment methods which in many cases are causing an immense waste of public money by outsourcing research assessment to entities, such as Scopus, who are mere fronts for the academic publishing industry.