Авторский капитал и реформирование российской публикационной системы

Polterovich, Victor (2023): Авторский капитал и реформирование российской публикационной системы. Forthcoming in: Voprosy Ekonomiki No. 6

Abstract

The article is devoted to the problem of improving the governance of publication systems, within which the actors that produce scientific publications, supply them to readers, as well as funding and coordinating the processes of their production and supply interact. It is emphasized that the ownership of a scientific text includes two components: the right to a monetary reward for the use of the article by the consumer and authorship. The first component can be passed to another, but the second cannot. Authorship is the basis for building up an individual intangible asset, which we call authorship capital. The desire to increase it determines the dual role of the author in the publication system: he is not only a producer of the knowledge embodied in the article, but also, along with the reader, its ultimate consumer. The dual role of the journal is also noted, which, organizing the review process, turns out to be not only a supplier of articles, but also a producer of knowledge. These two features give rise to a variety of possible financing schemes for publishing systems. The specific features of knowledge as a private and public good are analyzed. One of them is the high cost of knowledge consumption. Due to this and a number of other circumstances, the market model for financing publication systems is inefficient; the most important task is the transition to open access. Such a transition should be accompanied by improved methods for evaluating the performance of researchers and the quality of journals. The comparison of large groups of objects (e.g., journals or research institutions) is inevitably based on citation indicators, while expertise can play only a supporting role. On the contrary, when it comes to making decisions within a small group, e.g., when allocating given funds among laboratory members, expert evaluations must play a decisive role. The directions of the reform of the Russian publication system are discussed, ensuring the reduction of rent-seeking activity and increasing the adequacy of the indicators used.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• English Title: Authorship Capital and reforming The Russian Publication System
• Language: Russian
• Keywords: knowledge, bibliometric indicators, expert assessments, rent-seeking behavior, open access
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D80 - General; H - Public Economics > H4 - Publicly Provided Goods > H41 - Public Goods; H - Public Economics > H4 - Publicly Provided Goods > H44 - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets; P - Economic Systems > P1 - Capitalist Systems > P14 - Property Rights

References

Алескеров Ф.Т., Бадгаева Д.Н., Писляков В.В., И.А. Стерлигов, С.В. Швыдун (2016). Значимость основных российских и международных экономических журналов: сетевой анализ// Журнал новой экономической ассоциации. № 2 (30). С. 193–205. [Aleskerov F.T., D.N. Badgaeva, V.V. Pislyakov, I.A. Sterligov, S.V. Shvydun (2016). An Importance of Russian and International Economic Journals: a Network Approach. No. 2(30), pp.193-205 (In Russian).]

Балацкий Е., Екимова Н. (2015). Опыт составления рейтинга российских экономических журналов// Вопросы экономики. № 8. С. 99—115. [Balatsky E., Ekimova N. (2015). The experience of ranking russian economic journals. Voprosy Ekonomiki. No. 8, pp. 99-115. (In Russian). ] https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2015-8-99-115

Индикаторы науки: 2023. Статистический сборник (2023). М.: НИУ ВШЭ. 414 с. [Science Indicators: 2023. Statistical Compendium (2023). M.: HSE University, 414 pp. (In Russian).]

Малахов В. А. (2021). Движение за открытый доступ к научной литературе: причины возникновения, современное состояние и перспективы развития// Управление наукой: теория и практика. Т. 3, № 3. С. 118–133. [Malahov V. A. (2021). The Open Science Movement: Causes, State of the Art, and Prospects for Development. Science Management: Theory and Practice. Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 118–133 (In Russian).] DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2021.3.3.6

Москалева О.В., Акоев М.А. (2021). Прогноз развития российских журналов. Российские журналы открытого доступа// Наука и научная информация. № 4 (1–2). С. 33–62. [Moskaleva O. V., M. A. Akoev (2021). Forecast of the Development of Russian Scientific Journals: Open Access Journals. No. 4 (1–2), pp. 33–62. (In Russian).] https://doi.org/10.24108/2658-3143- 2021-4-1-2-33-62

Полтерович В. М. (2007). Элементы теории реформ. М.: Экономика. 447 с. [Polterovich V. M. (2007). Elements of the Theory of Reforms , Moscow, Ekonomika, 446 pp. (In Russian).]

Полтерович В. М. (2015). От социального либерализма – к философии сотрудничества// Общественные науки и современность. № 4. С. 41–64. [Polterovich V. M. (2015). From social liberalism towards the philosophy of collaboration. Obshchestvennye Nauki i Sovremennost, No. 4, pp. 41—64. (In Russian).]

Полтерович В. М. (2021). Кризис институтов политической конкуренции, интер- нет и коллаборативная демократия // Вопросы экономики. № 1. С. 52—72. [Polterovich V. M. (2021). Crisis of institutions of political competition, Internet and collaborative democracy. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 52—72. (In Russian).] https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-1-52-72

Полтерович В.М. (2022). Библиометрическое равновесие// Вестник РАН. Том 92, № 5. С. 431–439. [Polterovich V. M. (2022). Bibliometric Equilibrium. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Vol. 92, No. 3, pp. 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1019331622030194.]

Рубинштейн А. Я. (2022). Патерналистское государство, академическая наука и научные журналы: теоретические заметки// Вопросы экономики. № 9. С. 139-157. [Rubinstein A.Y. (2022). Paternalistic state: Academic science and scientific journals. Voprosy Ekonomiki. No.9 pp.139-157. (In Russian).] https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-9-139-157

Рубинштейн А.Я., Бураков Н.А. (2022). Экономическая наука и публикационная активность в патерналистском государстве// Управленец. Т. 13, № 4. С. 3–14. [A. Ya. Rubinstein, N.A. Burakov (2022). Economic science and publication activity in a paternalistic state. Upravlenets (The Manager). Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 3-14 (In Russian).] DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-4-1

Чернова О.А. (2022). Влияние открытого доступа на наукометрические показатели российских экономических журналов// Управленец. Т. 13, № 4. С. 69–82. [Chernova O. A (2022).The effect of Open Access on scientometric indicators of Russian economic journals. Upravlenets (The Manager). Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 69-82 (In Russian).] DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2022-13-4-6

Угринович Е.В., Мун Д.В., Попета В.В. (2016). Прогресс и регресс, или как вернуть в научные издания научное знание? // Информация и инновации. № 1. С. 4-11. [Ugrinovich E. V., D. V. Mun, V. V. Popeta (2016). Progress and Regress or how to get back scientific knowledge in scientific publication? Information and Innovations: Views, Trends, Prospects. No. 1, pp. 4-11 (In Russian).]

Хиллман А.Л. (2009). Государство и экономическая политика. Возможности и ограничения управления. М.: Издательский дом ГУ ВШЭ. 879 c. [Hillman A. E. Public Finance and Public Policy: Responsibilities and Limitations of Government. M.: HSE Publishing House. 879 pp. (In Russian).]

Aksnes D.W., Langfeldt L., Wouters P. (2019). Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories. SAGE Open, No. 9.

Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002). Budapest Open Access Initiative. Available online: https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/https://www. (accessed on 18 February 2023).

Callon, M. (1994). Is science a public good? Science, Technology and Human Values, Vol. 19, No.4, pp. 345–424.

Dees R. H. (2018). Public Health and Normative Public Goods. Public health ethics. Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 20–26.

Franck G. (2002). The scientific economy of attention: A novel approach to the collective rationality of science. Scientometrics,Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 3–26.

Franck G. (2019). The economy of attention. Journal of Sociology, Vol. 55(1), pp. 8–19.

Galbraith, D. (1999). Writing as a knowledge constituting process. In M. Torrence & D. Galbraith (Eds.). Knowing what to write: Conceptual processes in text production (pp. 139–160). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.

Gans J.S., Shepherd G.B. (1994) How are the mighty fallen: Rejected classic articles by leading economists. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), pp.165–179.

Kafka, Alexander C. (2018). Sokal Squared: Is huge publishing hoax ‘hilarious and delightful’ or an ugly example of dishonesty and bad faith’. Chronicle of Higher Education. October 3rd. Available from: https://www.chronicle.com/article/SokalSquared-Is-Huge/244714.

Kojakua S., Livan G., Masudad N. (2021). Detecting anomalous citation groups in journal networks. Scientific Reports. № 11 (1).

Kreiman J (2016). On peer review. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 59(3), pp. 480–483.

Lagoze, C., Van de Sompel H. (2001).The Open Archives Initiative: Building a Low-Barrier Interoperability Framework. In: Proceedings of the First ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, ACM, New York, U.S.A. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=146d326985a468be3fd6a37402053b25d2ba815d

Lyu, D., Ruan, X., Xie, J., Cheng, Y. (2021). The classification of citing motivations: a meta-synthesis. Scientometrics, 126(4), pp. 3243–3264.

McLaren C. D., M. W. Bruner (2022). Citation network analysis. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 15:1, pp. 179-198.

Nobarany S., Booth K. S., & Hsieh G. (2015). What motivates people to review articles? The case of the human-computer interaction community. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1002/asi.23469.

Pandita, R., Singh, S. (2022). A study of distribution and growth of open access research journals across the world. Publishing Research Quarterly, Vol. 38, No.1, pp. 131–149.

Pearce, J.M. (2022). The rise of platinum open access journals with both impact factors and zero article processing charges. Knowledge, No. 2, pp. 209–224.

Polterovich V. (2018). Towards a general theory of social and economic development: Evolution of coordination mechanisms. Russian Journal of Economics, No. 4, pp. 346–385.

Pranckute, R. (2021). Web of ˙ Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World. Publications, Vol.9, No.1, pp. 1-59.

Rowley, J. and Sbaffi, L. (2018) Academics' attitudes towards peer review in scholarly journals and the effect of role and discipline. Journal of Information Science, 44. 5. pp. 644-657. ISSN 0165-5515 https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551517740821

Stiglitz, J. H. (1999). Knowledge as a global public good. In: Global public goods: International cooperation in the Twenty-First century. Edited by I. Kaul, I. Grunberg, and M. A. Stern. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 308 – 325.

Thelwall M., K. Kousha, M. Abdoli, E. Stuart (2022). In which fields are citations indicators of research quality? ArXiv: 2212.05416 [cs.DL]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.05416.

Tennant, J., Dugan, J., Graziotin, D., Jacques, D., Waldner, F., Mietchen, D., Elkhatib, Y., B. Collister, L., Pikas, C., et. al. (2017). A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. F1000Research, 6:1151, pp.1-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12037.3

Wang Z., Chen Y. and Glänzel W. (2020). Preprints as accelerator of scholarly communication: An empirical analysis in mathematics. Journal of Informetrics 14(4): 101097.

Wang X., Cui Y., Xu S., Hu Z. (2018). The state and evolution of gold open access: a country and discipline level analysis. Aslib Journal of Information Management 70, pp. 573–584.

Xie J., Gong K., Li J., Ke Q., Kang H., Cheng Y. (2019). A probe into 66 factors which are possibly associated with the number of citations an article received. Scientometrics, 119(3), pp. 1429-54.

Yu, D., Wang, W., Zhang, S., Zhang, W., Liu, R. (2017). A multiple-link, mutually reinforced journal-ranking model to measure the prestige of journals. Scientometrics 111, pp. 521–42.