IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v39y2015i1p3-18.html

Current Dynamics of Scholarly Publishing

Author

Listed:
  • Gloria Origgi
  • Giovanni B. Ramello

Abstract

Background: Scholarly publishing is an essential vehicle for actively participating in the scientific debate and for sustaining the invisible colleges of the modern research environment, which extend far beyond the borders of individual research institutions. However, its current dynamics have deeply transformed the scientific life and conditioned in new ways the economics of academic knowledge production. They have also challenged the perceived common sense view of scientific research. Method: Analytical approach to set out a comprehensive framework on the current debate on scholarly publishing and to shed light on the peculiar organization and the working of this peculiar productive sector. Result: The way in which scientific knowledge is produced and transmitted has been dramatically affected by the series of recent major technosocietal transformations. Although the effects are many, in particular the current overlap and interplay between two distinct and somewhat opposite stances—scientific and economic—tend to blur the overall understanding of what scholarly publishing is and produces distortion on its working which in turn affect the scientific activities. The outcome is thus a series of intended and unintended effects on the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge. Conclusion: The article suggests that a substantial transformation characterizes science today that seems more like a thrusting, entrepreneurial business than a contemplative, disinterested endeavor. In this essay, we provide a general overview of the pivotal role of the scholarly publishing in fostering this change and its pros and cons connected to the idiosyncratic interplay between social norms and market stances.

Suggested Citation

  • Gloria Origgi & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2015. "Current Dynamics of Scholarly Publishing," Evaluation Review, , vol. 39(1), pages 3-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:39:y:2015:i:1:p:3-18
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X15572017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X15572017
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X15572017?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramello, Giovanni B., 2010. "Copyright and endogenous market structure: a glimpse from the journal-publishing market," POLIS Working Papers 146, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    2. Lanham, Richard A., 2006. "The Economics of Attention," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226468822, September.
    3. Nicita Antonio & Ramello Giovanni B., 2007. "Property, Liability and Market Power: The Antitrust Side of Copyright," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(3), pages 767-791, December.
    4. John Ziman, 2001. "Citation gold standard," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6828), pages 518-519, March.
    5. Migheli, Matteo & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2014. "Open Access Journals & Academics' Behaviour," IEL Working Papers 18, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    6. David N. Laband, 2013. "On the Use and Abuse of Economics Journal Rankings," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0, pages 223-254, August.
    7. Gloria Origgi & Giovanni B. Ramello & Francesco Silva, 2014. "Publish or perish. Cause e conseguenze di un paradigma," ECONOMIA E POLITICA INDUSTRIALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(4), pages 9-25.
    8. Mark Armstrong, 2010. "Collection Sales: Good Or Bad For Journals?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 163-176, January.
    9. Migheli Matteo & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2013. "Open Access, Social Norms & Publication Choice," IEL Working Papers 13, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    10. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2014. "Open Access Journals And Academics' Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(4), pages 1250-1266, October.
    11. Daniele Fanelli, 2010. "Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(4), pages 1-7, April.
    12. Éric Archambault & Vincent Larivière, 2009. "History of the journal impact factor: Contingencies and consequences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 79(3), pages 635-649, June.
    13. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Ramello, 2013. "Open access, social norms and publication choice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-167, April.
    14. Edlin, Aaron S. & Rubinfeld, Daniel L., 2004. "Exclusion or Efficient Pricing? The "Big Deal" Bundling of Academic Journals," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt9hc6n6ds, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Battista Ramello, 2018. "The market of academic attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 113-133, January.
    2. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen & Daniel Meierrieks, 2015. "The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from Germany," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 475-503, June.
    3. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Ramello, 2013. "Open access, social norms and publication choice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-167, April.
    4. Eberhard Feess & Marc Scheufen, 2016. "Academic copyright in the publishing game: a contest perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 263-294, October.
    5. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen & Daniel Meierrieks, 2016. "The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from countries in the Mediterranean Open Access Network (MedOANet)," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(4), pages 463-489, December.
    6. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2014. "Open Access Journals & Academics’ Behaviour," ICER Working Papers 03-2014, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    7. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2014. "Open Access Journals And Academics' Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(4), pages 1250-1266, October.
    8. Jacqmin, Julien, 2018. "Why are some online courses more open than others?," MPRA Paper 89929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Alexander Cuntz & Frank Mueller-Langer & Alessio Muscarnera & Prince C. Oguguo & Marc Scheufen, 2024. "Access to science and innovation in the developing world," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 78, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    10. Hajar Sotudeh & Zahra Ghasempour & Maryam Yaghtin, 2015. "The citation advantage of author-pays model: the case of Springer and Elsevier OA journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 581-608, August.
    11. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2021. "Why Open Access: Economics and Business Researchers’ Perspectives," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2020. "Incentives to Open Access: Perspectives of Health Science Researchers," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, May.
    13. Li Yan & Wang Zhiping, 2023. "Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, March.
    14. Frank Mueller-Langer & Marc Scheufen, 2013. "Academic publishing and open access," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse & Christian Handke (ed.), Handbook on the Digital Creative Economy, chapter 32, pages 365-377, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Xiaoting Xu & Juan Xie & Dongqing Lyu & Zhen Zhang & Jiang Li & Ying Cheng, 2026. "Modeling submission decision behavior: the effect of relevance and value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 131(1), pages 31-57, January.
    16. Maja Jokić & Andrea Mervar & Stjepan Mateljan, 2018. "Scientific potential of European fully open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1373-1394, March.
    17. Buehling, Kilian, 2021. "Changing research topic trends as an effect of publication rankings – The case of German economists and the Handelsblatt Ranking," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    18. Giovanni Ramello, 2011. "Property rights and externalities: the uneasy case of knowledge," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 123-141, February.
    19. Sergio Copiello, 2020. "The alleged citation advantage of video abstracts may be a matter of self-citations and self-selection bias. Comment on “The impact of video abstract on citation counts” by Zong et al," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 751-757, January.
    20. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen, 2021. "Economic perspectives on the future of academic publishing: Introduction to the special issue," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1922-1932, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:39:y:2015:i:1:p:3-18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.