Why scholarly publishing needs an independent certification authority - Research Information

[Ina Smith]

https://www.researchinformation.info/analysis-opinion/why-scholarly-publishing-needs-an-independent-certification-authority/

Scholarly publishing has a growing trust and governance problem, and the sector needs an independent certification authority to help distinguish legitimate, trustworthy publishers from questionable or harmful actors.

Scholarly publishing is under pressure from predatory journals, paper mills, manipulated peer review, AI-generated content, weak editorial controls, and increasingly commercialised publishing practices. Because there is no single, universally recognised certification system, authors, librarians, institutions and funders often have to judge publisher quality themselves, using fragmented signals such as indexing, DOAJ listing, COPE membership or Crossref participation. The author argues that these organisations are useful, but none currently functions as a full industry-wide certification authority.

The proposed certification authority would not assess the content of research or restrict academic freedom. Instead, it would certify whether publishers follow recognised standards around things such as editorial independence, peer review integrity, transparency of ownership, ethical publishing, conflicts of interest, AI disclosure, data integrity, corrections and retractions, metadata quality, discoverability and long-term preservation.

The article argues that such certification would benefit:

• Researchers, especially early-career researchers, by giving them a trusted signal when choosing where to publish.
• Libraries and universities, by helping them assess publishing partners and open access agreements.
• Funders and policymakers, by helping ensure publicly funded research is published through responsible channels.
• The public, by strengthening trust in scientific information in an era of misinformation.

The article is calling for a formal “trustmark” or certification system for scholarly publishers - one that is independent, nonprofit, transparent, and governed by a broad mix of stakeholders including publishers, libraries, funders, research institutions, societies, infrastructure organisations and public-interest representatives.

This aligns strongly with current discussions around research integrity, trusted open infrastructure, Diamond OA, metadata quality, AI governance and journal accreditation. It also raises an important question: whether the scholarly publishing ecosystem needs a new certification body, or whether existing organisations such as DOAJ, COPE, Crossref, OASPA, NISO and national quality frameworks could be better coordinated into a shared trust framework.

Ina Smith

Programme Officer: Open Science and Open Infrastructure

Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf)

 

Switchboard: +27 12 349 6600   

Tel: +27 828180117   

Email: i...@assaf.org.za 

 

 

25A De Havilland Crescent, Persequor Park

Meiring Naudé Road, Lynnwood 0020, Pretoria, South Africa.

 

PO Box 72135, Lynnwood Ridge 0040, Pretoria, South Africa.

 

Website: www.assaf.org.za

ASSAf Disclaimer: The views and opinions included in this email belong to their author and do not necessarily mirror the views and opinions of the organisation. Our employees are obliged not to make any defamatory statements, infringe, or authorize infringement of any legal right. Therefore, the organisation will not accept any liability for such statements included in emails. In case of any damages or other liabilities arising, employees are fully responsible for the content of their emails. The processing of personal information by ASSAf is done lawfully and not excessive to the purpose of processing in compliance with the POPI Act, any codes of conduct issued by the Information Regulator in terms of the POPI Act and / or relevant legislation providing appropriate security safeguards for the processing of personal information of others.