Government does not fund peer-reviewed journal articles—publishers do

In summary: Unfortunately, many of these are now in the hands of large corporations, such as Routledge and Taylor & Francis.Publishers have been lobbying to keep the restrictions on federally-funded research, which requires researchers to make their publications publicly available (e.g. PubMed, arXiv) even after an embargo period.This nice (where is that tongue-in-cheek smiley?) piece of bipartisan legislation would remove restrictions on federally-funded research that requires researchers to make their publications publicly available (e.g. PubMed, arXiv) even after an embargo period.Some reading:http://paulcourant.net/2008/09/17/fair-copyright-in-
  • #1
D H
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Insights Author
15,464
690
"Government does not fund peer-reviewed journal articles—publishers do". That is the (IMHO rather outrageous) statement by Allan Adler, Association of American Publishers VP for government and legal affairs to the House Judiciary Committee last week regarding the http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.801:" . This nice (where is that tongue-in-cheek smiley?) piece of bipartisan legislation would remove restrictions on federally-funded research that requires researchers to make their publications publicly available (e.g. PubMed, arXiv) even after an embargo period.

Some reading:
http://paulcourant.net/2008/09/17/fair-copyright-in-research-works/
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6595774.html
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2009/02/open_access_the_time_to_act_is.php?utm_source=sbhomepage&utm_medium=link&utm_content=channellink

Googling the Fair Copyright in Research Works Act results in a lot more hits, none of them favorable to the publishing industry that I can see.

I made my opinion known by calling Adler's statement outrageous. Others have called it galling. Any other opinions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


D H said:
I made my opinion known by calling Adler's statement outrageous. Others have called it galling. Any other opinions?

Simple solution, don't peer review for any journal that doesn't allow latter free publication.
Or send them a bill at consultancy rate!
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Government research should remain in the public domain period.

The public paid for it, they have a right to the results.
 
  • #4
AFAIK, most peer-reviewed journals are sponsored by scientific and technical societies through subscriptions or purchases of articles. The publishing companies are sponsored by their customers, some of whom receive salaries from the national governments as employees or research grants, as well as private industry.

I suppose the government and universities could simply publish through the GPO or institutional presses or electronically on the institutional websites, or Arxiv.
 
  • #5


Astronuc said:
I suppose the government and universities could simply publish through the GPO or institutional presses or electronically on the institutional websites, or Arxiv.

Journals used to be published by individual institutions and were distributed by swaps (I will send you mine each month if you send me yours) long before commercial publishers got in on the business. Then to save money most institutes handed over their journals to publishers like Springer Verlag.
The journals don't pay the authors, or the referees and charge a fortune - because institutions don't have a choice, then as institutes cut their subscriptions the price has to go up for the rest of them.

The trouble with just publishing online, either on arvix or your own website is organising the peer review. There are a couple of processes for a peer-peer review system but all the proposed systems are a complex mess of public-private key signatures and web of trust mechanisms (you would think they had been designed by committees of academics).
But the alternative is just to trust the paper based on the institute, so any paper with a .mit.edu or cam.ac.uk is correct and anything with .gmail.com is rejected.
 
  • #6


Skyhunter said:
Government research should remain in the public domain period.
The public paid for it, they have a right to the results.

This isn't a question of the data being in the public domain, it's the published paper - which is owned by the journal who spent money on editing it, typesetting it, checking/refereeing it and finaly prinitng and distributing it.
As an example the presidents speech is in the public domain - but the broadcast is owned by the TV station.

In the US most non-classified government data is freely available, eg map data from USGS. In the UK it has to be paid for (and is very expensive) this means that the taxpayer saves money, the mapping agency actually makes a profit, and the data is higher qulity.

But it stifles business and innovation - somethign like Google Earth or streetmap wouldn't have been possible in the UK. Ironically the reason it is now is that the official data is so expensive that a number of companies have mapped it themselves.
 
  • #7
mgb_phys said:
Journals used to be published by individual institutions and were distributed by swaps (I will send you mine each month if you send me yours) long before commercial publishers got in on the business. Then to save money most institutes handed over their journals to publishers like Springer Verlag.
Well the two biggies are Springer and Elsevier (Reed-Elsevier). There is also Kluwer, which may have an affiliation with Springer, and there's Pearson.

Fortunately there are still some university presses, e.g. Cambridge UP, Oxford UP, Harvard UP, Princeton UP, UChicago P, . . . . which are still independent.
 

What does it mean when it is said that "government does not fund peer-reviewed journal articles"?

When it is said that "government does not fund peer-reviewed journal articles", it means that the government does not provide financial support directly to the researchers or scientists who publish their work in peer-reviewed journals. Instead, the funding for these articles comes from publishers who charge subscription fees or article processing charges to access the published research.

Why doesn't the government fund peer-reviewed journal articles?

The government typically does not fund peer-reviewed journal articles because they do not have a direct role in the publication process. Their primary role is to fund research and support the scientific community, not the publication of their findings. Additionally, the government may have limited funds and must prioritize how they allocate those funds, leading to a focus on supporting research rather than publication.

Who funds peer-reviewed journal articles?

Peer-reviewed journal articles are typically funded by publishers. These publishers charge subscription fees to access their journals or may require authors to pay article processing charges to have their work published. Some funding may also come from institutions or organizations that support specific research or fields of study.

Do researchers receive any compensation for publishing in peer-reviewed journals?

In most cases, researchers do not receive direct compensation for publishing in peer-reviewed journals. However, publishing in reputable journals can boost their reputation and credibility, leading to potential job opportunities, grants, and collaborations. In some cases, researchers may also receive financial compensation for publishing their work in open access journals.

How can I access peer-reviewed journal articles if the government does not fund them?

To access peer-reviewed journal articles, individuals can subscribe to journals or pay for individual articles. Many universities and research institutions also have subscriptions to various journals that their students and faculty can access for free. Additionally, some journals offer open access options where articles are freely available to the public without subscription fees.

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
746
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
70
Views
10K
  • General Discussion
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
54
Views
8K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
2
Views
4K
Back
Top