Recommended
Global challenges call for global solutions—imagine the chaos if there was no international cooperation on climate change or trade. Yet, despite the fact that every nation funds, conducts, and benefits from research together worth $1 trillion, our research publishing system remains deeply flawed, with scant global collaboration to fix it. In our digitally interconnected world, where AI is rapidly advancing, sharing research should be easier than ever, supercharging progress and global prosperity. However, this potential is stifled by a publishing industry dominated by corporate interests that restricts access for millions of researchers who can't afford to pay. Although some strides have been made in reforming publishing payment models and engaging with individuals and institutions to improve Open Access, high-level diplomatic and political cooperation has been largely ignored. This needs to change. But how?
Building on our previous CGD policy paper on research publishing reform and the G20, this blog introduces a new vision for research reform and a novel theory of change based on science diplomacy to achieve it. This is further expanded upon in our CGD policy paper, How Science Diplomacy Can Reshape Global Research Publishing: A Theory of Change.
A united vision for research publishing reform
Effective research publishing reform requires a clear vision that stakeholders can unite behind. However, many existing visions for publishing reform are confusing, especially for policymakers and civil society actors who are unfamiliar with the academic jargon. We present a clear and consolidated vision, focusing on three core publishing system characteristics: accessibility, quality, and usability and three core domains of change: financing, infrastructure, and governance models.
We envision a research publishing system which is more effective at spreading knowledge and more inclusive. Research should be free to read, easy and affordable to publish, available quickly, stored safely, and accessible in many languages. Research should balance quick sharing with scientific good practice. Quality should be judged based on open, transparent peer review, not on journal prestige or impact factors. Finally, research should be easy to use, adapt, and share through open licensing requirements and more flexible formats beyond PDFs that are more fitting for the online and generative AI era.
To achieve this, financing, infrastructure, and governance models must be reformed. The research publishing system is currently fee-based and flagrantly profit-driven, creating significant barriers for researchers and readers. We need a model that fosters immediate access, affordability and long-term sustainability, based on fair profit and the public good, with costs covered mostly by funders and research institutions, not individuals.
How science diplomacy can help us achieve our vision
Research publishing is a global system and proper reform will require sustained, high-level global leadership and cooperation. This will be no easy feat. We will need leadership to mobilise for action and diplomacy to negotiate trade-offs and competing incentives. We’ve created a theory of change to outline how science diplomacy can be harnessed in service of research publishing reform (Figure 1). The framework highlights how stakeholders can support and influence policy makers and science diplomats and tracks the process of change through from agenda setting to impact.
Figure 1: Science diplomacy-based theory of change
While simple in theory, this is complex in practice. Political processes are non-linear and unpredictable. Good stakeholder, context, and political analysis will be key to understand how this theory of change can be deployed in particular settings, paying attention to underlying assumptions. Do all states have equal capacities to generate evidence, influence political agendas and engage in dialogues, especially given historic power asymmetries? Will all states benefit equally? Which stakeholders may block progress given their interests in the status quo? And will our international system encourage cooperation or become more self-interested? These are vital questions to answer to ensure a robust theory of change.
Next steps
Global leadership and cooperation are essential for addressing global challenges, and reforming research publishing is no different. As the research publishing landscape evolves alongside rapidly advancing technology, now is the time to unite behind a clear vision for reform. Our theory of change, grounded in science diplomacy, outlines a pathway to achieve this vision. However, bringing this shiny new theory of change to life requires testing it in real-world scenarios, refining it through collaboration, and establishing ways to track meaningful progress. To do this we recommend organizations and actors involved in research publishing reform:
- Test and adapt the theory of change for real-world contexts: We encourage research publishing reform actors and organizations to use this theory of change to guide their political engagement strategies. By applying this theory of change in various political and institutional environments, we can refine and strengthen it, ensuring it remains adaptable across a variety of contexts. For example, in our paper, we show how this theory could guide policy uptake at the G20.
- Align different actors using the theory of change: Different stakeholders may be working at various stages of the theory of change—some building foundations, others driving political interest or developing international harmonization strategies. Connecting these stages of political engagement can help actors better understand how their efforts align and complement one another. This can enhance communication, foster coordination, and identify gaps where additional resources are needed to advance research publishing reform.
- Develop indicators to track progress: A theory of change provides a strong foundation for establishing indicators to measure progress towards both early and long-term outcomes. We encourage research reform actors to use this theory of change to develop and share indicators to track political progress toward research publishing reform so we are better able to measure and evaluate our collective efforts.
Disclaimer
CGD blog posts reflect the views of the authors, drawing on prior research and experience in their areas of expertise. CGD is a nonpartisan, independent organization and does not take institutional positions.
