The Mass Resignation from the Journal of Human Evolution: A Sign of Wider Issues in Academic Publishing
In a significant event highlighting the ongoing tensions within academic publishing, nearly all members of the editorial board of Elsevier’s Journal of Human Evolution (JHE) resigned in protest against changes implemented by the publisher. This resignation, described by the editors as a decision made with “heartfelt sadness and great regret,” signals growing discontent toward corporate practices in scientific publishing and raises essential questions about editorial independence and the future of academic research dissemination.
Background Context
The Journal of Human Evolution, one of the foremost outlets for research in paleoanthropology, has been under the stewardship of dedicated editors for 38 years. The recent mass resignation represents a culmination of frustrations with Elsevier, a giant in the world of academic publishing known for its controversial business practices and high author fees.
According to Retraction Watch, this incident marks the 20th mass resignation from various scientific journals since 2023, a trend largely seen as a reaction to unsatisfactory changes in the publishing landscape. This wave of discontent exemplifies a broader issue: the clash between profit motives and academic integrity in scholarly publishing.
Key Issues Raised by the Editorial Board
The resigning editors have articulated a series of grievances that underscore their concerns about the journal’s future:
1. Editorial Oversight and Support
One significant complaint involves the removal of essential staff support. The editors expressed their disappointment over the elimination of dedicated roles, such as a copy editor and a special issues editor. This restructuring places an overwhelming burden on the editorial board itself, which now has to shoulder these responsibilities without adequate resources. The board voiced their concern when they were told by Elsevier that language, grammar, and readability could be disregarded in favor of efficiency. Such a stance jeopardizes the quality and rigor expected in scientific publication.
2. Reduction of Associate Editors
Moreover, the planned reduction of associate editors threatens to dilute expertise within the publication process. This downsizing means that fewer editors will be responsible for a larger volume of submissions, likely stretching their expertise thin and undermining the quality of peer review. This shift not only risks the integrity of the editorial process but also burdens editors with more work than they can manage effectively.
3. Erosion of Editorial Independence
The resignation highlighted concerns over Elsevier’s tightening grip on the editorial board’s structure. The introduction of annual contract renewals for associate editors has raised alarms regarding the potential loss of editorial independence, creating an environment where editors might feel pressured to align with publisher interests over academic integrity.
4. Outsourcing and AI Use
In-house production capabilities have been diminished or outsourced, leaving many editors and authors frustrated by the quality of the output. The recent introduction of AI in production processes further complicated matters, leading to significant errors in manuscript formatting and even alterations that distorted the original intent of the authors’ work. These developments reflect a troubling trend in which value is placed on efficiency over quality, ultimately harming the reputation and reliability of the journal.
5. Financial Barriers to Publication
The editorial board also expressed their concerns regarding the rising author page charges, which have escalated to levels beyond those of Elsevier’s other journals and competing open-access publications. The high financial burden not only restricts access for many researchers, particularly those from less affluent backgrounds or institutions but also contradicts the stated commitments of both the journal and Elsevier to promote inclusivity and equality in academic publishing.
A Larger Trend in Academic Publishing
The mass resignation from JHE is not an isolated occasion; it represents a growing trend of dissatisfaction among editorial boards in academia. With the increased commercialization of research output and the burdensome costs placed upon authors, many in the academic community are questioning the sustainability of current publishing models.
As the push for open-access publishing grows, researchers are advocating for a more equitable approach to disseminating knowledge. The rise of preprint servers and the acceptance of various alternative models indicate a shift toward openness that directly challenges traditional publishing practices.
Conclusion
The resignation from the Journal of Human Evolution is emblematic of the broader challenges facing academia today. The implications extend beyond one journal or publisher; they signal a critical juncture in the evolution of scholarly communication. As researchers, editors, and institutions grapple with these tensions, the hope is that meaningful reforms will rise from this unrest, ensuring that scientific publishing remains a realm committed to integrity, quality, and accessibility.
As discussions surrounding the future of academic publishing continue, it is clear that stakeholders must engage in thoughtful dialogue to address these pressing issues and advocate for systems that prioritize the dissemination of knowledge for the benefit of society as a whole.
