Nicko goncharoff biography of albert

Journals placed on the warning list have seen submissions from Chinese authors evaporate. This is due to the inherent influence of a CAS-sponsored list and the fact that many Chinese universities adopt the list wholesale, incorporating it into their own journal guidelines. Researchers are warned that APC funding will not be provided for articles submitted to warning list journals, nor will any such articles count toward academic qualifications or career progress.

The introduction of the EWL was a shock to both international publishers and Chinese researchers, with many viewing it as a punitive measure. There was also some confusion in the research community as to the goals and methodology of the EWL. At the Symposium Dr Yang made it clear that CAS views these lists as a necessary step on the path to protecting and promoting research integrity.

She went on to provide explanations of the different risk levels and their rationale, which many of the international attendees found informative. Dr Yang also explained that the reasons for listing a journal, or for removing it, differ by journal as each often has unique circumstances to lead to its having been selected. This went some way toward explaining what to many has been a rather opaque selection process.

Since publishers have engaged with CAS and the result has been productive discussions that in some cases have led to changes in journal management as well as collaborations with CAS NSL on promoting research integrity. In addition to direct publisher discussions and broader community outreach, CAS NSL has now started to send publishers a draft list of potential EWL journal candidates about six months in advance of the final EWL release.

As noted above, a major problem with the EWL is that universities will adopt the list wholesale, rather than select certain titles more relevant to their fields of research. Even more problematic, some Chinese research universities and teaching hospitals have gone a step further and placed all or nearly all of the titles of certain publishers on their warning lists.

In follow-up discussions Dr Yang stressed this is not an intended or desirable outcome. While they can disagree with some of the Chinese views discussed here, international scholarly publishers must understand and acknowledge them in order to more effectively convey their own perspectives. Some publishers may wonder how to do this, apart from individual discussions with customers and other scholarly research community stakeholders.

One option is to join existing efforts in China to address the challenges and opportunities of open science. A recent initiative, the Open Science Promotion Consortium OSPCaims to bring together publishers, universities, research institutions, science and technology associations and professional service providers to help guide the further development and adoption of open science and open access.

Reflecting on the Symposium and the discussions which followed during the STM Annual Meeting, one could identify some key themes:. Open access and open science are making international publishing more challenging everywhere, and particularly so in China. These challenges will continue and, in some areas, increase, but there is a willingness in China to engage on these issues.

International publishers should take advantage of this wherever possible.

Nicko goncharoff biography of albert: Nicko Goncharoff is Head

It will be worth the effort. His company, Osmanthus Consulting, provides global business and operational strategy services for the STM publishing and research technology sectors, with a focus on Greater China. Thanks Rod, much appreciated. Yes, many thanks. It is very useful to have a sense of the dynamics of scholarly publishing in China.

A basic economic analysis of APC-based journal publishing indicates that two major factors would drive increased costs. First is increased transaction costs in collecting payments from authors. Second is the transition from publishing incentives from providing value to readers to providing services to authors independent of reader value. There is an interesting article in the works describing how Latindex works with OA and journal certification to ensure an admirable journal publishing environment in Latin America.

Nicko goncharoff biography of albert: In his career, Taylor

It also identifies the source of destabilizing OA publishers. The Canadian government is intent on establishing OA and is just beginning to explore ways other than solely APCs to make that happen. They would benefit from reading your post. Thanks for providing the additional regional context. I think reader value will still matter, in terms of delivering a service that authors believe will benefit their audience as well as part of the value proposition publishers offer as part of larger institutional deals.

But certainly the transition to APC-based publishing is looking financially challenging in some respects. Thanks Nicko, and excellent summary, do feel it is important and necessary to have this ope dialogue and information sharing with colleagues from China. Hopefully it may become more regular and event too! Increasing resistance to the Gold OA business model Gold OA is increasingly being criticized by some in China as yet another western business model that is being imposed upon the country.

These reforms aim to address the ethical concerns surrounding research output. This is in part due to concerns that these metrics incentivize researchers to prioritize output volume and getting published in high-impact journals over producing accurate, high-quality research. China also hopes to reduce its reliance on non-domestic publishers and improve the representation of Chinese research in the global scholarly community.

These reforms are part of a broader effort to build a more competitive research ecosystem in China — one that is grounded in ethical principles and supports the development of local talent and infrastructure. Eventually, international publishers will see more submissions going to Chinese domestic publishing organizations. Reforms that call for journal warning lists will target some prominent international titles, and this, in turn, will cause Chinese submissions to those journals to plummet.

While volumes and margins will likely decline somewhat, China will remain an important market for many international publishers. International publishers with expertise in these areas can offer valuable services to help improve the quality and impact of Chinese research, building relationships and establishing themselves as trusted partners in the Chinese market.

International publishers need to take a multipronged approach that encompasses marketing, editorial, and partnership strategies. This means working with Chinese research community stakeholders to protect or expand the researcher market and mindshare, develop an agile and responsive marketing and editorial engagement strategy, and — for some publishers — implement or expand journal publishing partnerships with domestic publishing organizations.

Publishers able to adapt quickly to changing conditions and respond effectively to feedback from the Chinese research community are more likely to succeed in this dynamic environment. Many Chinese STM publishers lack sufficient scale, publishing expertise, and the global connections needed to achieve their goals of developing or launching world-class journals.

Nicko goncharoff biography of albert: Nicholas T. Goncharoff— once captured

Many Chinese publishers recognize the need to develop their capabilities in areas such as editorial management, peer review, effective strategies to engage international audiences, and enhancing the quality and impact of their publications. One of the risks international publishers face when operating in China is the possibility of having a journal placed on a warning list by the Chinese government.

These lists are said to be aimed at journals which have published works produced by unethical actors such as paper mills or which have been subjected to citation or peer review rings. In some cases, a journal might find it is on a warning list simply because it has grown too rapidly in China or has a very high proportion of authors from China. These lists are a significant threat to international publishers.

Being placed on a warning list can result in submissions from Chinese researchers effectively drying up.