The landscape of academic-led publishing

Jisc has issued a new report on Changing Publishing Economies: A landscape study of new university presses and academic-led publishing (pdf). At least, I think it’s a new report; oddly, there’s no date of publication on the report. But it’s a very interesting overview of initiatives at least through 2016 when the study was commissioned.

A significant aspect of the report involves the increasing role of library as publisher.

it is important to note the difference between the library as publisher with regard to post production services and the library as university press, which implies an active role in the entire publishing process.

In the section on background, motivations and goals (p 43) the report identifies that many initiatives are “community based” and originate from existing research communities based around shared interests. The report also describes how academic-led publishing initiatives does not necessarily mean institutional-based initiatives.

Open Humanities Press argues that its independence means it is better able to respond to what scholars want “rather than to what their institutions, libraries and funders want”, which is similarly emphasised by Ubiquity Press and Language Science Press.

This section of the report summarizes insightful responses to a series of open-ended questions that are well worth reading. Several responses touch on topics I want to explore in future posts, such as publishing multimodal scholarship. Overall, it’s a very good report on non-commercial academic publishing.

Publishing initiatives covered in the report:

Goldsmiths Press
Language Science Press
Mattering Press
MayFly Books
Media Commons Press
meson press
Open Book Publishers
Open Humanities Press
Open Library of Humanities
punctum books
Ubiquity Press



Leave a Comment

Required fields are marked *.