Academic Publishing: Reform Peer Review- V

I had been discussing opening up the data exchanges based on blockchains. There are enough legal safeguards to ensure that the data be kept in escrow, for example, while the scientists can collaborate effectively. One of the major spin-off benefits would be in the costs savings for the libraries.

Opening up the prepublication archives would help the universities or researchers with far lesser resources. Bulk of grants go towards the “fees” to make the “research open access”. Assuming that it costs around USD 10 for hosting the articles (based on very optimistic unreasonable assumptions), it would again free up the money for pursing more projects than a large chunk of money for fewer.

On our proposal, publication happens at the initiative of authors on one or more online archives of scientific publications. Insofar as journals continue to exist, they will create issues consisting of previously published articles. Since these are already publicly available, they will not be in a position to charge for access, so all journals will be open access (we expect these to be run mainly by academic societies rather than for-profit publishers, and to be fewer in number).

Is Peer Review a Good Idea? | The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science | Oxford Academic

The journals provide “editorial inputs” (if any) and copy editing services. This, too, can be done locally that would still leave libraries with enough resources to have better trained personnel.

Data exchanges based on blockchain and raw-data in escrow has the potential to revolutionise academic publishing with a quicker turnaround time.