Tessera

Janne Pölönen

@jpolonen.bsky.social

Secretary General for Publication Forum (JUFO) at Federation of Finnish Learned Societies | Helsinki Initiative on Multilingualism in Scholarly Communication | CoARA Steering Board - WG on Multilingualism and Language Biases

37 Posts661 Follower 577 Folgt

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · 6d ago

Legal culture clearly is one of the contextual factors affecting the practical implementation of RRA reform. Peruginelli, Faro, Pölönen, Pietilä & Melander (2026). See you in Court! Legal frameworks, judicial remedies and ombudsman systems in research career assessment. doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

European Diamond Capacity Hub @eudch.bsky.social · last mo.

🌍 What role does #DiamondOA play in supporting multilingual #ScholarlyPublishing? @johanrooryck.bsky.social with @jpolonen.bsky.social discuss why #DiamondOA is key for multilingual scholarly communication and access to knowledge. 🔗 tinyurl.com/3w8we2bt @lseimpactblog.bsky.social

If you want to publish papers in your own language, look to Diamond OA - LSE Impact

Diamond OA publications contain more work in languages other than English, Johan Rooryck & Janne Pölönen argue for more national & international co-ordination.

blogs.lse.ac.uk

LSE Impact @lseimpactblog.bsky.social · last mo.

💥New | If you want to publish papers in your own language, look to Diamond OA ✍️ @jpolonen.bsky.social & @johanrooryck.bsky.social #DiamondOA #AcademicPublishing #Bibliodiversity

If you want to publish papers in your own language, look to Diamond OA - LSE Impact

Diamond OA publications contain more work in languages other than English, Johan Rooryck & Janne Pölönen argue for more national & international co-ordination.

blogs.lse.ac.uk

Tracy Creagh @creaght.bsky.social · last mo.

Exploring the diversity of multilingual and non-English #DiamondOA publications - @johanrooryck.bsky.social and @jpolonen.bsky.social @lseblogs.bsky.social blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsoci...

If you want to publish papers in your own language, look to Diamond OA - LSE Impact

Diamond OA publications contain more work in languages other than English, Johan Rooryck & Janne Pölönen argue for more national & international co-ordination.

blogs.lse.ac.uk

DORA @dorassessment.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Rethinking assessment isn’t easy, especially in contexts shaped by global inequalities. In Uruguay, a growing movement is challenging metric‑driven systems and opening space for more inclusive and socially relevant research assessment. New blogpost by Natalia Gras & Judith Sutz 👉 bit.ly/RRA-Uruguay

Graphic announcing a new guest blog post on research evaluation reform in Uruguay, highlighting how metric-driven systems have shaped academic life and how collective efforts are creating change.

Quote highlighting that, for the first time in Uruguay, universities, research institutes, and national organizations are collaborating to rethink research evaluation; guest blog post by Natalia Gras and Judith Sutz.

Call-to-action graphic inviting readers to explore the full story and rethink what is valued in research, with link to the Uruguay research assessment blog post.

LucyCes @lucyces.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Proud to have presented @reseaucirce.bsky.social's work about #openpeerreview in Canada at #RESSH2026. Report coming soon, so stay tuned! Research evaluation remains a critical lever of transformation for the scientific field. Thanks to colleagues and to our Firenze hosts for this inspiring event!

An academic conference presentation at the Rectorate of the University of Florence, Italy.

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Helsinki Initiative organizes 27 May 2026 15:00-16:30 CET a webinar on Multilingualism in Scholarly Communication with three presentations by Carolina Pradier, @nalsi.bsky.social, and Ulla Sivunen (with comment by Tomasz Krawczyk).

Helsinki Initiative organizes a webinar series on Multilingualism in Scholarly Communication with speakers representing different expert communities and strands of work. This event includes three presentations on global patterns of multilingualism in scholarly communication, language diversity of books collection of the Library of Congress, and signed language as language of scholarly and science communication.

Yutong FEI 费钰童 @yutong-fei.bsky.social · 6mo ago

Heureuse de partager mon dernier article : “Classification des contextes de citation : la dimension sémantique, entre enjeux de recherche d’information et stratégies industrielles. ”. Merci au comité éditorial de la revue et aux reviewers pour leurs travail. journals.openedition.org/edc/19293

Classification des contextes de citation : la dimension sémantique,...

1. Une introduction à la citation et au contexte de citation La citation est un objet de recherche particulièrement intéressant car il a fédéré très tôt des travaux multidisciplinaires, théoriques ...

journals.openedition.org

Esa Väliverronen @esaval.bsky.social · 6mo ago

Raporttini akateemisen vapauden tilasta Suomessa julkaistiin tänään. Se pohjautuu tutkijoille ja opettajille tehtyyn kyselyyn. Raportin loppuun kehittelin oman tulkintani siitä, mitkä kaikki tekijät vapautta uhkaavat. Tein siitä tällaisen kuvan. edition.fi/tsv/catalog/...

ALMASI project @almasiproject.bsky.social · 6mo ago

New resources to advance #DiamondOA in Africa, Europe, and Latin America! ✅Scoping Report on Non-for-profit Publishing Ecosystems ✅Landscape Report on Diamond OA Publishing ✅Advocacy Materials: talking points, videoclips and organisation guide for online events. Find resources: u2l.fr/9qt8bo

Open Science NL @opensciencenl.bsky.social · 8mo ago

Open Science NL is funding 27 replication studies with €5.2M. Projects will reanalyse data, repeat experiments, and explore variations across many fields. Read more 👉 www.openscience.nl/en/news/27-s...

27 studies re-examined | Open Science NL

Open Science NL has awarded funding to 27 applicants to replicate earlier studies. They will reanalyse original data, repeat experiments, and replicate studies with slight variations to the original design. A total amount of 5.2 million euros was granted.

openscience.nl

ALMASI project @almasiproject.bsky.social · 8mo ago

🎉The inaugural webinar of the Discussion Series on Scholar-led Publishing was today and it was perfect! 🙏Thank you to the 3 speakers and participants. 👀To see an overview of the presentations, expand the thread.

Public Knowledge Project @pkp.sfu.ca · 8mo ago

Thank you @almasiproject.bsky.social for this webinar to connect with the ALMASI (Aligning and Mutualizing Nonprofit #OpenAccess Publishing Services Internationally) community and the discussion on why #DiamondOpenAccess matters for reclaiming knowledge! Learn more about ALMASI: almasiproject.org

Almasi – Aligning and Mutualizing Nonprofit Open Access Publishing Services Internationally

Aligning and Mutualizing Nonprofit Open Access Publishing Services Internationally

almasiproject.org

ALMASI project@almasiproject.bsky.social · 8mo ago

Join us for the inaugural webinar of the Discussion Series on Scholar-led Publishing, co-hosted with @globalyacademy.bsky.social 🕓It will take place on December 11, 2025 at 16:00 CET. It will focus on Reclaiming knowledge: why Diamond Open Access matters. 👉Register to attend: u2l.fr/vq6tzq

Riitta Koikkalainen @riittakoikkalainen.bsky.social · 9mo ago

Next on stage Milda Baltrimienė podering abt #multilingualism in research. #HelsinkiInitiative is one fine initiative, but it has some cons, too. Ahoy @jpolonen.bsky.social Milda's abstract: doi.org/10.7557/5.8164

Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 9mo ago

We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing: a 🧵 1/n Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820 Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/... Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...

A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below.

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.

A figure detailing the drain on researcher time.

1. The four-fold drain

1.2 Time
The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce,
with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure
1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material
has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs,
grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for
profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time.
The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million
unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of
peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting
widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the
authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many
review demands.
Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of
scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in
‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow
progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to
volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier,
local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with
limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging
with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks
intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.

A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below:

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.

The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised
scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers
first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour
resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · 9mo ago

📢 Register for the 5th Helsinki Initiative webinar (8 December) on Multilingualism in Scholarly Communication with presentations by @tatsuya-amano.bsky.social, @karenstroobants.bsky.social and Andre Brasil! More information and registration: www.helsinki-initiative.org/en/events/5t...

Janire Castellano Bueno, PhD @janirecas.bsky.social · 11mo ago

🌍 Have you experienced language barriers at academic conferences, or not at all? We want to hear from everyone to better understand how language shapes participation and accessibility. 📝 Take our short survey and help make conferences more inclusive and multilingual: forms.gle/u8ESktcJP8Y6...

Amplifying global voices: Removing language barriers in academic conferences

We invite you to share your experiences with language barriers at academic conferences. Your insights will help shape more inclusive and multilingual events across disciplines and formats. This surve...

forms.gle

CWTS | Leiden University @cwts.nl · 10mo ago

📣 Special seminar on 'Perspectives on the evaluation of science', with Emanuel Kulczycki, @alesiazuccala557.bsky.social, and Jochen Gläser. 🎧 Make sure to join! 📅 Friday, 31.10.2025 🕐 1:00-3:00 PM (CET) 📌 Online & at CWTS More information 👉 www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/events/20...

Special Seminar: Perspectives on the evaluation of science

We are delighted to host a special seminar featuring the members of Eleonora Dagiene’s external PhD committee, held the day after her PhD defence. This session will bring together three distinguished ...

universiteitleiden.nl

DOAJ @doaj.bsky.social · 10mo ago

🌍💎 Bringing together #OpenAccess policymakers & funders across Africa, Europe, and Latin America is key to supporting #DiamondOA @almasiproject.bsky.social launches The Diamond OA Policy Forum on 29 October 2025, 15:00-16:30 UTC Register here: almasiproject.org/the-diamond-...

Visual image to promote the ALMASI Diamond OA Policy Forum Wednesday 29 October

Andrey Lovakov @lovakov.bsky.social · 11mo ago

"Across databases, delve (+1,500%), underscore (+1,000%), and intricate (+700%) had the largest increases between 2022 and 2024. Growth in LLM-term usage was much higher in STEM fields than in social sciences and arts and humanities" arxiv.org/abs/2509.09596

How much are LLMs changing the language of academic papers after ChatGPT? A multi-database and full text analysis

This study investigates how Large Language Models (LLMs) are influencing the language of academic papers by tracking 12 LLM-associated terms across six major scholarly databases (Scopus, Web of Scienc...

arxiv.org

European University Association (EUA)@eua.eu · last yr.

Research assessment reform is essential to break the cycle of dependence on high-impact commercial journals and related metrics. ➡️ Reclaiming academic ownership of the #ScholarlyCommunication system buff.ly/0C0Wqfn #OpenScience

Érudit @erudit.org · last yr.

→ Plaidoyer pour le multilinguisme en sciences 📚 Article à lire : @bowkerl.bsky.social, Mikael Laakso & @jpolonen.bsky.social explorent les risques liés au monolinguisme anglophone sur l’écosystème scientifique. 📌 L'article : id.erudit.org/iderudit/111... 📌 Résumé de l'article : shorturl.at/nKGgo

OpenCitations @opencitations.bsky.social · last yr.

The July 2025 dump of OpenCitations Index is out! Now featuring 2.21 BILLION citations from 5 data sources. 👉 download.opencitations.net Ever wondered how these sources overlap? This chart shows where citations are shared and where they're unique:

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · last yr.

74.4% of the 21,886 WoS-indexed journals involve commercial professional publishers, 29% societies, and 27.8% research organisations as sole/co-publishers. Our paper co-authored with @zehrataskin.bsky.social, Emanuel Kulczycki & @mikaellaakso.bsky.social - now on QSS website: doi.org/10.1162/qss....

Mapping the publisher types and collaborations behind Web of Science indexed journals

Abstract. Although the organisational aspects of scholarly journals—such as the types of organisations responsible for publishing individual journals, whether independently or in collaboration—have si...

doi.org

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · last yr.

Significant differences between European countries in the higher education institution's engagement with #CoARA, #HRS4R @dorassessment.bsky.social. This and other findings in my presentation at the CoARA General Assembly 23 June on CoARA Uptake across European HEIs: doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · last yr.

Happy to announce the soft launch of DoLS - the Directory of Learned Societies, an open, growing database of learned societies and their journals worldwide, facilitating visibility, networking, and community-building! Explore #DoLS website: www.tsv.fi/en/services/...

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · last yr.

Mark Huskisson @markhusk.bsky.social · last yr.

This interesting new preprint on SocArXiv shows that "The landscape of academic journals is beyond the oligopoly: it is diverse and often grounded in public, academic-driven initiatives rather than market imperatives." osf.io/preprints/so...

Janne Pölönen@jpolonen.bsky.social · last yr.

📢 Our new study challenges the prevailing narrative that a few commercial publishers dominate global scholarly publishing! Read the preprint: Beyond the oligopoly: Scholarly journal publishing landscapes in Latin America and Europe. doi.org/10.31235/osf...

Janne Pölönen @jpolonen.bsky.social · last yr.

OSF

doi.org

Ludo Waltman @ludowaltman.bsky.social · last yr.

Glad to see this report about 'reclaiming academic ownership of scholarly communication system'. I like presentation of diamond OA and publish-review-curate (PRC) as complementary approaches. Important to note that PRC is not only about reclaiming ownership but also about various other issues.

European University Association (EUA)@eua.eu · last yr.

📖 What are the main factors shaping the current academic publishing system? 🚧 What key challenges does the academic community face? 🔍 Are there opportunities for universities to reshape the future of #ScholarlyCommunication? 🔗 New EUA briefing buff.ly/0C0Wqfn #AcademicSky #EduSky