Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There?

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There? / Racimo, Fernando; Galtier, Nicolas; De Herde, Véronique; Bonn, Noémie Aubert; Phillips, Ben; Guillemaud, Thomas; Bourget, Denis.

In: Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology, Vol. 14, 15, 2022.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Racimo, F, Galtier, N, De Herde, V, Bonn, NA, Phillips, B, Guillemaud, T & Bourget, D 2022, 'Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There?', Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology, vol. 14, 15. https://doi.org/10.3998/ptpbio.3363

APA

Racimo, F., Galtier, N., De Herde, V., Bonn, N. A., Phillips, B., Guillemaud, T., & Bourget, D. (2022). Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There? Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology, 14, [15]. https://doi.org/10.3998/ptpbio.3363

Vancouver

Racimo F, Galtier N, De Herde V, Bonn NA, Phillips B, Guillemaud T et al. Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There? Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology. 2022;14. 15. https://doi.org/10.3998/ptpbio.3363

Author

Racimo, Fernando ; Galtier, Nicolas ; De Herde, Véronique ; Bonn, Noémie Aubert ; Phillips, Ben ; Guillemaud, Thomas ; Bourget, Denis. / Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There?. In: Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology. 2022 ; Vol. 14.

Bibtex

@article{0691290fdbdb4326a86d85be05063a5f,
title = "Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There?",
abstract = "The academic journal publishing model is deeply unethical: today, a few major, for-profit conglomerates control more than 50% of all articles in the natural sciences and social sciences, driving subscription and open-access publishing fees above levels that can be sustainably maintained by publicly funded universities, libraries, and research institutions worldwide. About a third of the costs paid for publishing papers is profit for these dominant publishers' shareholders, and about half of them covers costs to keep the system running, including lobbying, marketing fees, and paywalls. The paywalls in turn restrict access of scientific outputs, preventing them from being freely shared with the public and other researchers. Thus, money that the public is told goes into science is actually being funneled away from it, or used to limit access to it. Alternatives to this model exist and have increased in popularity in recent years, including diamond open-access journals and community-driven recommendation models. These are free of charge for authors and minimize costs for institutions and agencies, while making peer-reviewed scientific results publicly accessible. However, for-profit publishing agents have made change difficult, by co-opting open-access schemes and creating journal-driven incentives that prevent an effective collective transition away from profiteering. Here, we give a brief overview of the current state of the academic publishing system, including its most important systemic problems. We then describe alternative systems. We explain the reasons why the move toward them can be perceived as costly to individual researchers, and we demystify common roadblocks to change. Finally, in view of the above, we provide a set of guidelines and recommendations that academics at all levels can implement, in order to enable a more rapid and effective transition toward ethical publishing.",
author = "Fernando Racimo and Nicolas Galtier and {De Herde}, V{\'e}ronique and Bonn, {No{\'e}mie Aubert} and Ben Phillips and Thomas Guillemaud and Denis Bourget",
year = "2022",
doi = "10.3998/ptpbio.3363",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
journal = "Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology",
issn = "2475-3025",
publisher = "Michigan Publishing",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ethical Publishing: How Do We Get There?

AU - Racimo, Fernando

AU - Galtier, Nicolas

AU - De Herde, Véronique

AU - Bonn, Noémie Aubert

AU - Phillips, Ben

AU - Guillemaud, Thomas

AU - Bourget, Denis

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - The academic journal publishing model is deeply unethical: today, a few major, for-profit conglomerates control more than 50% of all articles in the natural sciences and social sciences, driving subscription and open-access publishing fees above levels that can be sustainably maintained by publicly funded universities, libraries, and research institutions worldwide. About a third of the costs paid for publishing papers is profit for these dominant publishers' shareholders, and about half of them covers costs to keep the system running, including lobbying, marketing fees, and paywalls. The paywalls in turn restrict access of scientific outputs, preventing them from being freely shared with the public and other researchers. Thus, money that the public is told goes into science is actually being funneled away from it, or used to limit access to it. Alternatives to this model exist and have increased in popularity in recent years, including diamond open-access journals and community-driven recommendation models. These are free of charge for authors and minimize costs for institutions and agencies, while making peer-reviewed scientific results publicly accessible. However, for-profit publishing agents have made change difficult, by co-opting open-access schemes and creating journal-driven incentives that prevent an effective collective transition away from profiteering. Here, we give a brief overview of the current state of the academic publishing system, including its most important systemic problems. We then describe alternative systems. We explain the reasons why the move toward them can be perceived as costly to individual researchers, and we demystify common roadblocks to change. Finally, in view of the above, we provide a set of guidelines and recommendations that academics at all levels can implement, in order to enable a more rapid and effective transition toward ethical publishing.

AB - The academic journal publishing model is deeply unethical: today, a few major, for-profit conglomerates control more than 50% of all articles in the natural sciences and social sciences, driving subscription and open-access publishing fees above levels that can be sustainably maintained by publicly funded universities, libraries, and research institutions worldwide. About a third of the costs paid for publishing papers is profit for these dominant publishers' shareholders, and about half of them covers costs to keep the system running, including lobbying, marketing fees, and paywalls. The paywalls in turn restrict access of scientific outputs, preventing them from being freely shared with the public and other researchers. Thus, money that the public is told goes into science is actually being funneled away from it, or used to limit access to it. Alternatives to this model exist and have increased in popularity in recent years, including diamond open-access journals and community-driven recommendation models. These are free of charge for authors and minimize costs for institutions and agencies, while making peer-reviewed scientific results publicly accessible. However, for-profit publishing agents have made change difficult, by co-opting open-access schemes and creating journal-driven incentives that prevent an effective collective transition away from profiteering. Here, we give a brief overview of the current state of the academic publishing system, including its most important systemic problems. We then describe alternative systems. We explain the reasons why the move toward them can be perceived as costly to individual researchers, and we demystify common roadblocks to change. Finally, in view of the above, we provide a set of guidelines and recommendations that academics at all levels can implement, in order to enable a more rapid and effective transition toward ethical publishing.

U2 - 10.3998/ptpbio.3363

DO - 10.3998/ptpbio.3363

M3 - Journal article

VL - 14

JO - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology

JF - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology

SN - 2475-3025

M1 - 15

ER -

ID: 328432873