Special to USAfrica magazine (Houston) and USAfricaonline.com, the first Africa-owned, US-based newspaper published on the Internet.
Amarike Akpoke Contributing Analyst to USAfricaonline.com
In May 2023, over 40 leading scientists resigned en masse from the editorial board of NeuroImage, a top science journal, in protest against what they termed ‘greed’ of publishing giant, Elsevier. This mass resignation included esteemed professors from institutions such as Oxford University, King’s College London, and Cardiff University. The collective departure was sparked by Elsevier’s refusal to reduce publication charges, a decision that epitomizes the excessive profit margins that plague academic publishing. The academic publishing industry has long been criticized for its exorbitant profit margins, which surpass those of tech giants like Apple, Google, and Amazon. Elsevier, in particular, has been at the centre of these critiques. Exactly one year after the radical move of NeuroImage editorial board members, 38 editors (comprising the entire editorial board, associate editors and executive editors) of Philosophy & Public Affairs, a Wiley-owned journal, announced their resignations en masse on Wednesday, 22 May 2024. The statement outlined their unanimous decision to resign from their roles at Wiley and launch a new diamond open-access journal published by the Open Library of Humanities (OLH). Their primary reason was that scholarly journals serve important purposes; ironically, these purposes are not well-served by commercial publishing, which Wiley’s ‘for-profit publishers’ stands for.
The mass resignations from NeuroImage earlier and now Philosophy & Public Affairs, not only mark a pivotal moment in the struggle against the exploitative practices of major academic publishers, but equally represent a powerful statement against the greed, exorbitant publication fees, and profit-driven models that have come to define the industry in contemporary times. Shortly after the mass resignation from the Wiley-owned journal, Philosophy & Public Affairs, Arash Abizadeh, in his article entitled, ‘Academic journals are a lucrative scam – and we’re determined to change that,’ observed that “giant publishers are bleeding universities dry, with profit margins that rival Google’s,” which explains why they decided to start their own. This bold move by Abizadeh and his colleagues to create an independent, scholar-led journal marks a significant step towards reclaiming control over academic publishing. Abizadeh underscored the stranglehold of commercial publishers. The academic publishing landscape is dominated by the “big five” commercial publishers: Elsevier, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, Springer Nature, and SAGE. Together, these giants rake in annual revenues in the billions, with profit margins that can reach up to 40%, surpassing those of even the most profitable tech companies like Google. Meanwhile, the very lifeblood of their enterprise – the research and intellectual labour – is supplied largely free of charge by the academic community. Researchers conduct studies, write articles, and peer-review submissions without compensation, yet must often pay exorbitant fees to access the very journals they contribute to. A Report by 2005 Deutsche Bank captured this as a ‘bizarre’ ‘triple-pay’ system, wherein ‘the state funds most research, pays the salaries of most of those checking the quality of research, and then buys most of the published product’. For Prof Chris Chambers, “Elsevier preys on the academic community, claiming huge profits while adding little value to science. All Elsevier cares about is money and this will cost them a lot of money. They just got too greedy. The academic community can withdraw our consent to be exploited at any time. That time is now.” Echoing similar sentiment, a former editor-in-chief at Neuroimage, Stephen Smith, noted, “Academics really don’t like the way things are, but individuals feel powerless to get the huge publishers to start behaving more ethically.” This has led to a growing sentiment of intellectual imperialism, where the academic community is exploited for profit, stifling accessibility and equity in knowledge dissemination.
The traditional academic publishing model creates significant barriers to access. Universities and research institutions, particularly in low and middle-income countries, struggle to afford subscriptions to these high-cost journals. This restricts access to cutting-edge research, impeding academic progress and reinforcing global inequalities in education and knowledge production. Furthermore, the pressure to publish in high-impact journals for career advancement perpetuates this exploitative cycle, as scholars feel compelled to submit their work to these publishers despite the costs. In some Nigerian universities for instance, the appraisal metrics for promotion and career advancement compel upcoming scholars to publish in those Impact Factor journals ‘syndicated’ by the ‘big five’ mercantile publishers. In some evidence-based cases, a Senior Lecturer on a monthly salary of roughly N300,000 (about $200 at N1,500 exchange rate) is constrained by the ‘publish-or-perish’ mantra to present at least 8-10 papers published in journals indexed by Thompson Reuters (now Clarivate Analytics), SCOPUS, SNIPS, stipulated in the ‘Red Book’ appraisal provisions, as part of minimum requirement for promotion to the rank of a professor. How the struggling young academic manages to carry out self-funded researches and get the outputs published after rigorous peer-review processes and shelling out thousands of US dollars to these transactional publishers is immaterial. This cash-n-carry denominated publishing model not only restricts access to vital research but also perpetuates global inequalities in knowledge dissemination. Arash Abizadeh’s bold stand against the commercial grip on academic publishing sets a powerful example. The decision of an entire editorial board to resign from a prestigious journal in protest against exploitative practices is a testament to the deep frustration within the academic community. But the question remains: can scholars from low-income sub-Saharan African states, such as Nigeria, muster the courage and resources to follow in these footsteps and reclaim control over their intellectual output?
The editorial boards of NeuroImage and Philosophy & Public Affairs chose to stand up against an exploitative system, demonstrating that change is possible when scholars unite and take a principled stand. This move can serve as a source of inspiration for scholars in sub-Saharan Africa. The challenges faced by sub-Saharan scholars are formidable, but not insurmountable. With the right strategies, support, and determination, scholars in Nigeria and other low-income countries can initiate a similar revolution in academic publishing. This bold stand against exorbitant publication fees and profit-driven models underscores the urgent need for a systemic overhaul in how academic excellence is measured and rewarded. For universities in low-income states of sub-Saharan Africa, such as Nigeria, this moment presents a unique opportunity to develop and adopt home-grown metrics that reflect their specific contexts and priorities. These metrics should aim to promote inclusivity, relevance, and equitable recognition of academic contributions. Key principles for developing such metrics include contextual relevance, inclusivity, accessibility, collaborative efforts, and capacity building. Metrics should be designed to evaluate research outputs based on their relevance to local and regional issues. This approach would encourage scholars to focus on topics that directly impact their communities, fostering research that is both meaningful and impactful. New metrics should recognize a wide range of scholarly activities, including community-engaged research, policy contributions, and interdisciplinary work. By valuing diverse forms of academic output, universities can create a more inclusive and holistic evaluation system. Emphasize the importance of open-access publishing and the dissemination of research findings through accessible platforms. This would ensure that knowledge is widely available and can be utilized to address local challenges. Encourage collaborations between universities, local organizations, and international partners. Metrics should recognize the value of collaborative research that leverages diverse expertise and resources to address complex issues. Invest in building local research capacity through training, funding, and infrastructure development. Metrics should account for efforts to mentor and support emerging scholars, thereby strengthening the overall research ecosystem. The successful implementation of home-grown metrics requires a coordinated effort among universities, funding agencies, and policymakers. The compelling imperatives that flow from this strategic perspective include forming alliances and collaborations, leveraging digital technology, advocacy for policy change, building community support, and securing diverse funding sources.
To conclude, the commercial stranglehold on academic publishing is a global issue, but its impact is felt most acutely in low-income regions like sub-Saharan Africa. The bold actions of the editorial board members of NeuroImage and Philosophy & Public Affairs serve as a powerful reminder that change is possible when scholars unite and effect a radical paradigm shift. The global movement against exploitative academic publishing practices presents a crucial opportunity for universities in sub-Saharan Africa to rethink how academic excellence is measured and rewarded. By developing and adopting home-grown metrics, these institutions can promote research that is locally relevant, inclusive, and impactful. It is time to break free from the constraints of traditional metrics and create a system that truly reflects the unique strengths and priorities of African scholarship. Through collaborative efforts, policy reforms, and capacity building, sub-Saharan African universities can lead the way in redefining academic excellence for a more equitable and sustainable future. By leveraging strategic initiatives aforementioned, scholars in Nigeria and the rest of sub-Saharan African states can break free from the chains of commercial publishing and reclaim control over their intellectual and scientific culture. It is time for the academic community in sub-Saharan Africa to muster the courage, rise to the challenge, and lead the way towards a more equitable and accessible future in academic publishing.
