A group of authors based in Europe recently argued in “Replacing Academic Journals,” an article in Royal Society Open Science, that scholars have been calling out problems with journals as the primary means for communicating science for two decades and it’s now time for radical change. The authors describe the interlinked crises of replicability, affordability and functionality that have broken journals as a viable mode of sharing research. It takes more time at greater cost to publish unverifiable research locked into platforms controlled by private interests which are monetizing user data. The alternative they propose:
“…a decentralized (i.e. federated), resilient, evolvable network, based on open standards that allow seamlessly moving from one provider to another, under the governance of the scholarly community.”
They describe a federated scholarly information network comprised of a repository infrastructure provided by academic libraries which hold outputs (data, software, methods/protocols) and narratives (research articles, multimedia, policy advice). This information network relies on open standards and the active involvement of those producing the research. Solutions are in place and the technical advantages are many. The challenges lie in the nuances of exceptions to what should be openly available, procurement processes, market failures and reward structures. However, antidotes to these challenges currently exist.
The authors conclude that the time is ripe for journal replacement. Redirecting funding to community-owned networks and content is pivotal, as is enabling research that rewards quality of the work over prestige of the journal. Their arguments are not new, but they bring the evidence and rationale together in a strong call for change, now.
