In the current academic journal publishing system, a handful of corporate publishers control over 50% of the scholarly literature. Corporate publishers have outsized influence over how scholarship is produced and distributed and they have raised journal prices to unsustainable levels. As a result, many research institutions and scholars are unable to afford access to key journals.
As we transition towards OA publishing, there are mounting concerns that if corporate publishers remain in control of the majority of research they could dominate how open systems are devised and use article processing charges (APCs) to maintain their high revenue streams. Should APCs continue rising at the current rate, OA publishing fees extracted from the academic community could soon rival the cost of serials. Such high publishing costs and centralized control over research would augment inequities in academic publishing both in terms of authorship and shaping the future OA publishing landscape. As a result, many argue more academic-led publishing initiatives are needed to counter the imbalance of power over journals and challenge inequitable publishing practices.
This OA Week, we at Scholastica are looking at the role of academic-led publishing in fostering an equitable OA landscape. We’ll be hosting an open Twitter discussion throughout the week about the relationship between academic-led publishing and equitable OA using the hashtag #AcademicLedOA.
Below is a preview of some of the questions we’ll be discussing:
We’ll be posting #AcademicLedOA questions via Twitter throughout OA Week to encourage free-flowing discussion. We hope you'll take part in the conversation!