Scholar-Led and Community-Driven Publishing
Intro The main takeaways from this article are: 1 Scholar-led and community-driven publishing are promising alternatives to publishing with a commercial publisher and make a valuable contribution to bibliodiversity. 2 Scholar-led and community-driven journals are characterised by particular potential for experimentation and critical questioning of scholarly publishing. 3 Scholar-led and community-driven journals face particular challenges when it comes to funding, positioning themselves within the respective scientific community, and activating important stakeholders. Definition The challenges of scholarly publishing are diverse. There are various formats and access possibilities, complex quality assurance processes, and several administration and governance models. The monopoly over the distribution of knowledge enjoyed by large commercial publishers is being increasingly confronted by researchers who are successfully mastering these challenges and publishing and distributing their research results themselves. The idea of quality-assured publishing by scientists themselves is actually not new. Rather, it goes back to professional associations and scholarly societies, which have always promoted and guided scholarly publishing. In the current open access ecosystem, two alternatives to the commercial publisher model can be distinguished: community-driven and scholar-led publishing. This distinction is purely descriptive and does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the quality or relevance of publishing projects. The two models are simply subject to different circumstances and dynamics and, thus, possibly to a different action and values system (see Steiner, 2022 ). In addition, the dividing lines between the two models vary depending on the context (see Steiner, 2023 , on the divergent use of the terms in different publication cultures). At the same time, both models have great science policy relevance and contribute to important bibliodiversity in the scholarly publishing system. Further reading: Statements by science policymakers German Science and Humanities Council paper entitled "Recommendations on the Transformation of Academic Publishing: Towards Open Access" (January 2022). EUA Open Science Agenda 2025 (February 2022). The Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI): 20th Anniversary Recommendations (February 2022). Action Plan for Diamond Open Access (March 2022). Thesen zur Zukunft des wissenschaftsgeleiteten Open-Access-Publizierens [Theses on the Future of Scholar-Led Open Access Publishing] (September 2023). Community-driven Publishing Non-commercial publishing projects and initiatives that operate outside the realm of large publishers are subsumed under the term “community-driven publishing”. They usually avoid author-side publication charges (article processing charges [APCs], book-processing charges [BPCs]), which are commonly levied by commercial publishers, and instead give preference to consortial funding models. Primary responsibility, (trademark) rights, and organisational sovereignty are retained by the scientific community – that is, the scientific editors, the scientific institutions (universities, centres, scholarly societies, professional associations), or research infrastructures. Technical responsibility (i.e., the hosting of the web offerings, technical production, and distribution) is assumed by non-commercial infrastructures and service providers, and increasingly also by university presses and small and medium-sized publishers (see Schlosser, 2019 ). Scholar-led Publishing Besides this understanding of academic-led publishing as “community-driven publishing” (see Wrzesinski, 2023 ), various publishing projects and initiatives have established themselves as "scholar-led publishers". As a matter of principle, these publishers see themselves as non-commercial and independent. In addition, they often have a DIY character and organise the entire publishing process themselves. Not only do scholars take on the content-related work, but they also contribute the technical, practical, and administrative expertise needed to publish quality-assured contributions (see Moore, 2019 ). In this way, these self-administered projects avoid as far as possible participation by a superordinate publisher, a research institution, or institutional societies or associations. Practices and Principles: Suggestions and Tips for Publishers and Editors Scholar-led or community-driven journals are subject only to a limited extent to the constraints that apply to journals in the hands of commercial publishers. As they do not have to make a profit, they can be flexible and unconventional, for example when it comes to trying out new ways of publishing and disseminating scholarly content. In addition, thanks to their own form of governance, they can question certain basic assumptions of scholarly publishing. In what follows, we have compiled some suggestions and tips for publishers and editors of scholar-led and community-driven journals. Publishing Practices There are various areas in which scholar-led and community-driven journals try out new models. For example, they look for new publication formats that can be used instead of or in addition to the classical research article to disseminate scientific results. This includes, for example, the publication of preprints , research materials (e.g., field journals, notes, sketches) or other supplements. With these more experimental formats, greater transparency can be created for the actual research, reproducibility can be made easier, and the participation of third parties can be guided, and thus scientific discourse as a whole can be promoted. Other scholar-led and community-driven journals are trying out new and inclusive processes of quality assurance . Under the headings "open review" and "collaborative review", they are trying to open up the traditional anonymous peer-review system both in terms of naming and recruiting. Would it be possible to try out such a process of quality assurance for your journal? If so, your journal would contribute to transforming the review culture into one that puts collegial exchange and productive criticism centre stage. The diversity of formats and quality-assurance processes is reflected also in editorial workflows . Do you see possibilities for adapting your workflows to a diverse editorial team at various locations? This is becoming increasingly possible through the deployment of digital tools that are already widely used by scholar-led and community-led journals. They include editorial management systems (e.g., Open Journal Systems ), collaborative writing and editing tools (e.g., CryptPad, Etherpad), and cloud services (e.g., mostly local, institutional solutions). Last but not least, many scholarly publishing projects are actively involved in promoting digital sovereignty – that is, self-determination and autonomy over own data (see Pohle & Thiel, 2020 ). Within your journal, you can support and promote this desire for independence, for example by giving preference to open source services and tools that enable control over the (meta)data of persons and publications. In addition, you can critically question the widely used systems for measuring and evaluating relevance (e.g., the Impact Factor ), use alternative models (e.g., altmetrics ), or participate in new forms of measurement. The greatest possible openness and transparency of reuse also contributes to this. Are the contents of your journal licensed as freely as possible (e.g., under a "free licence", or a " licence approved for free cultural work ", which makes sense for scholarly literature)? Are the possibilities for reuse clearly communicated (e.g., easily findable on your website)? Practice Tip In the Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society series "Wissenschaftsgeleitete Zeitschriften: Workflows, Finanzierung und Governance" (Scholar-Led Journals: Workflows, Funding, and Governance), there are webinars on the topics "Nachhaltige Finanzierung und Organisation von Zeitschriften" (Sustainable Funding and Organisation of Journals) and "Workflows von Zeitschriften - von der Einreichung bis zur Kommunikation" (Journal Workflows – From Submission to Communication). Principles of Journal Administration Scholarly journals need a robust concept of organising and assuming responsibility. In the case of purely scholar-led or community-driven journals, these principles are based more on the scientific ethos of cooperation and collaboration than, for example, on competition for authors, citation frequencies, or consistent growth. These forms of publishing are also guided more strongly by values such as reliability and the common good. This identification of common ground or a common goal makes it easier in practice to involve your scientific community (see Moore & Adema, 2020 ). For example, you could consider whether your journal could become (more) actively involved in journal networks. The scholar-led.network in Germany or the international Free Journal Network offer their members a space for exchange and networking. In addition, alliances with other stakeholder groups in the wider environment of your journal may be useful. Do you have links to your scholarly society? To regional and supraregional scholarly libraries? To foundations that are sympathetic to your journalistic values and goals? And finally, various scholar-led and community driven journals are already showing how good and sustainable financial management is currently possible. You could examine in your respective context whether different sources of funding can make your journal more independent (see Waidlein et al., 2021 ). Can you integrate consortial models (see KOALA ), micro-funding (see Quartz OA ; SciPost ), association structures, or publishing partnerships into your business model? This succeeds all the better if synergies can be created and used through collaborative work, for example by building joint research infrastructures (see Bosman et al., 2021a ). In Germany, efforts are being made to build up and strengthen publishing infrastructures (see CRAFT-OA ). Particular Challenges As a scholar-led or community-driven journal, you will encounter particular challenges, especially compared with journals published by a publishing house and with commercial actors (see Fokusgruppe scholar-led.network 2021 ). These challenges start, first, with funding: there are financial, infrastructural, and non-material gaps in the funding landscape, which are being filled only hesitantly and often as a result of intensive efforts on the part of the journals themselves (see above). Second, you will also have to make an active effort to strategically occupy your place within the research community and the other publishing projects. This relates both to the content and the administrative and technical set-up of your journal. And finally, third, you will encounter responsibility deficits in disciplines and institutions. Especially as a new and interdisciplinary journal, you will have to invest more time in order for essential stakeholders to feel committed to you. Ultimately, it is the task of the research institutions, the research infrastructures, the research funders, and the scholarly societies to build up capacities for scholar-led and community-driven publishing (see Bosman et al., 2021b ) and to strengthen their effectivity and economic efficiency. Links https://graphite.page/scholar-led-manifesto/ https://open-access.network/vernetzen/open-access-projekte https://diamasproject.eu/ The scholar-led.network Manifesto The focus group scholar-led.network has published a manifesto that summarises its central critique of the current system of scholarly publishing in the German-speaking area and identifies fields of action for fair, systematic, and diverse publishing. Pratice Tip The following publication provides practical tips for scholar-led publishing: Wrzesinski, M. (2023). Wissenschaftsgeleitetes Publizieren. Sechs Handreichungen mit Praxistipps und Perspektiven [Scholar-Led Publishing. Six Guides With Practice Tips and Perspectives] . Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8169418 References Bosman, J., Frantsvåg, J. E., Kramer, B., Langlais, P.-C., & Proudman, V. (2021a). OA Diamond Journals Study. Part 1: Findings . Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4558704 Bosman, J., Frantsvåg, J. E., Kramer, B., Langlais, P.-C., & Proudman, V. (2021b). OA Diamond Journals Study. Part 2: Recommendations. Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/record/4562790 Fokusgruppe scholar-led.network. (2021). Das scholar-led.network-Manifest. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5521553 Moore, S. (2019). Open *by* whom? On the meaning of ‘scholar-led’. ScholarLed Blog, 24 . October. https://blog.scholarled.org/on-the-meaning-of-scholar-led/ Moore, S., & Adema, J. (2020). Community governance explored . Community-Led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM). https://doi.org/10.21428/785a6451.20a5c646 Pohle, J., & Thiel, T. (2020). Digital sovereignty. Internet Policy Review , 9 (4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.4.1532 Schlosser, M. (2019). Academy-owned? Academic-led? Community-led? What’s at stake in the words we use to describe new publishing paradigms. Library Publishing Coalition Blog . https://librarypublishing.org/alpd19-academy-owned-academic-led-community-led/ Steiner, T. (2022). Pluralities: Scholar-led publishing und Open Access. Open-Media-Studies-Blog. https://zfmedienwissenschaft.de/online/open-media-studies-blog/pluralities-scholar-led-publishing-und-open-access Steiner, T. (2023, 4 July). Lost in translation? Revisiting notions of community- and scholar-led publishing in international contexts. ScholarLed Blog . https://blog.scholarled.org/lost-in-translation-revisiting-notions-of-community-and-scholar-led-publishing-in-international-contexts/ Waidlein, N., Wrzesinski, M., Dubois, F., & Katzenbach, C. (2021). Working with budget and funding options to make open access journals sustainable . Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4558790 Wrzesinski, M. (2023). Wissenschaftsgeleitetes Publizieren. Sechs Handreichungen mit Praxistipps und Perspektiven . Alexander von Humboldt Institut für Internet und Gesellschaft. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8169418 Further Reading Adema, J., & Moore, S. A. (2018). Collectivity and collaboration: imagining new forms of communality to create resilience in scholar-led publishing. Insights 31 (0), 3. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.399 Adema J., & Moore S. A. (2021). Scaling Small; Or How to Envision New Relationalities for Knowledge Production, Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture 16 (1), 27-45. doi: https://doi.org/10.16997/wpcc.918 Hopf, D., Dellmann, S., Hauschke, C., & und Tullney., M. (2022). Wirkungen von Open Access. Literaturstudie über empirische Arbeiten 2010–2021 . Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB). https://doi.org/10.34657/7666 Ottina, D. (2013). From Sustainable Publishing To Resilient Communications. TripleC, 11 (2), 604-613. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v11i2.528 Shearer, K., Chan, L., Kuchma, I., & Mounier, P. (2020). Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly Communications: A Call for Action. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3752923 ,...