Ambassadors' Letter to Young Academies in the Netherlands

Dear Representatives of the Young Academies and Early Career Advocates, The recognition and rewards initiative has been welcomed by the Dutch academic community and is an important first step towards a more diverse and sustainable academic ecosystem. We would like you to help lobby for an amendment to the rewards and recognition documents of your institution. Specifically, we would like to call for the support of researchers who contribute to equitable and sustainable scholarly publishing practices via the recognition and rewards institutional documents. Background It is not news to anyone that the scholarly publishing system is problematic in its current form and there is now a large body of literature that spells this out in detail. Economically, the scholarly publishing system malfunctions given that it concerns an oligopoly, where a few publishers have the power to control prices. Profit margins of some leading publishers exceed that of any other sector (sometimes exceeding 30-40%). While Gold Open Access publishing has become the new standard, in part due to innovations in university policies, it has been strategically co-opted by commercial publishers to generate more profits at the cost of closing off publishing choices to researchers at less wealthy institutions. Additionally, the drive to publish more—as each publication earns an article processing fee—yields business strategies that reduce the quality of scientific work (e.g., Frontiers reducing ability to reject papers, some journals coopt special issues so as to reduce quality control. The current for-profit system thereby supports the high-throughput publishing of lower quality research, a key concern for the future of science. Scholar-led diamond open access publishing (no fee to read, no fee to publish) is a viable alternative that can disrupt the oligopoly, thereby reducing pricing, and in the future, with the right infrastructural support, it can be a replacement of common publishing standards. Recent studies are showing that especially researchers in the West depend on big publishers, with the Global South increasingly considering alternative smaller publishers. Indeed, Netherlands-based researchers often voice their concern that they are putting their career progression at risk by publishing at new scholar-led venues. Some change advocates therefore argue that early career researchers currently cannot carry the brunt of moving towards scholar-led publishing alternatives, calling instead upon more senior academics to take the lead. Regardless of who is taking action, many researchers would agree that there is a risk involved in deviating from common publishing standards in one's field. Call for action from the Young Academies To solve this problem we would argue that the following should be amended to the recognition and rewards policy documents to actively promote change leaders in scholarly publishing: *"Academics involved in the betterment of the scholarly publishing system should be recognized and rewarded for their contributions to sustainable academic practices, either through: • Publishing with diamond open access scholar-led or community-owned journals and platforms • Editorial work with diamond open access scholar-led or community-owned journals and platforms • Development of innovative publishing models that prioritize academic values and guarantee academic quality • Active participation in initiatives that promote equitable access to scholarly knowledge • Research and advocacy work aimed at reforming publishing practices • Contributions to open science infrastructure and alternative assessment systems • Leadership in transitioning academic communities towards high quality scholar-led diamond publishing formats Such contributions should be valued in promotions, tenure, and grant evaluation processes. Institutions commit to protecting researchers who choose to publish in high-quality, mission-aligned venues that may not yet have established traditional prestige markers, recognizing that sustainable transformation of academic publishing requires collective action and institutional support."* This amendment would align with the Recognition and Rewards initiative's core principles of valuing diverse contributions, reduction of emphasis on impact factors, supporting societal impact, and fostering sustainable academic practices. By explicitly protecting and rewarding scholars who work toward publishing reform, institutions can demonstrate genuine commitment to systemic change. To get a better understanding of your position on this matter, could we please receive a reply on whether your board can take this issue up with your university's policy makers? We are happy to meet with any of you to further discuss this. We believe this represents a timely moment to align the Recognition and Rewards framework with publishing system reform. Especially, early career researchers, who will inherit the consequences of today's publishing decisions, deserve institutional support for choosing sustainable alternatives over exploitative practices. Thank you for your consideration and leadership on this vital issue. Sincerely, Wim Pouw, on behalf of the ambassadors of the Diamond Open Access Expertise Center