Share Page
Post on LinkedIn
Copy URL to Clipboard
Copied!

To assure a sustainable scholarly publishing system, should reviewers receive financial compensation for their labor, considering the significant profits publishers receive from APC and subscriptions?

I have noticed an increasing number of scholars who do not want to peer review. Publishers make money from article processing charges (APCs) and subscription fees, and although the reviewers are often authors as well, they have not been paid for their time and expertise. They have supported the system for a long time on a voluntary basis, but this is becoming impossible. APCs should either be reduced to basic handling fees or reviewers should receive some compensation for their time and expertise. How much longer could we continue to allow publishers to abuse our free work in the twenty-first century? I would like to hear your thoughts.
Academia Peer Review
1 Answer
Accepted, Highest Scores first Newest first
Accepted
0
Simon@
Considering that nowadays through APCs, most of the commercial publishers make substantial profits and also taking into account the high contributions of the peer reviewers, I think that there is a compelling ethical and economic reason for providing some sort of compensation (financial or other incentives like vouchers) to the reviewers. However, this must be approached cautiously in order to prevent undermining the collaborative spirit from the academic research. A balanced solution might involve a hybrid model in which compensation is available but not obligatory. 

Post an Answer

Sign In to Answer
Type
Public
Status
Answered
Bounty
1 Ping Credit
Created
07/31/2025
Answer Count
1
Vote Count
0
Creator
Jean Baptiste