Katherine Baxter, Journal Publishing

When it comes to editing journals, the advice available is plentiful. A quick search for recent reports on the experience of journal editing discovers a striking similarity in the experiences they discuss. Editors of academic journals in disciplines ranging from medical science to geography tend to refer to and reflect on the same basic challenges and rewards. These follow directly from the main activities of the journal editor. For most editors, the primary remit of a journal is to publish excellent, timely and original research that is relevant and accessible to its audience. Many journals also include commentary on recent published research in the form of review essays and state-of-the-field surveys, and some include other kinds of material such as editorials, roundtables, original creative work (whether visual or verbal), obituaries, and so on. Nonetheless, the main purpose of most academic journals is to provide a venue for supporting and showcasing new scholarship. In what follows I consider some of the common issues noted by journal editors, before exploring the impact and potential of Open Access and digital media for the landscape of journal publishing.

To publish scholarship one must receive it first, and many editors reflect on the challenges of encouraging plentiful, high-quality submissions. Once material comes in the next step is to find willing and competent reviewers. As the competing pressures on academics’ time increase, many scholars can struggle to find the time or the will to undertake what is usually uncompensated and invisible work. And this leads to the final shared woe among academic editors the world over: institutional support. Although universities are usually happy to provide a nominal home for a scholarly journal, the realities of institutional support are frequently meagre unless the journal in question comes with a major stipend or reputational kudos. Ian Hay sums up this situation concisely: