The Journal of Human Evolution (JHE), a prominent publication in the field of paleoanthropology, has witnessed a near-complete resignation of its editorial board, marking the 20th such mass exodus from a scientific journal in 2023. This wave of resignations underscores a growing discontent within the scientific community regarding the changing landscape of academic publishing, particularly concerning the business practices of large publishing houses like Elsevier. The JHE editorial board’s resignation, driven by what they perceive as a series of detrimental changes implemented over the past decade, highlights a clash between academic principles and commercial interests.
The core of the dispute lies in the perceived erosion of editorial independence and the journal’s established standards. The departing editors cite a multitude of grievances, including the elimination of crucial support staff like copy editors and special issue editors, forcing these responsibilities onto an already overburdened editorial board. Elsevier’s alleged dismissal of the importance of linguistic accuracy and proper formatting further exacerbated the situation, creating an environment where editorial oversight was seemingly devalued. The restructuring of the editorial board, with plans to drastically reduce the number of associate editors and introduce a largely symbolic third-tier board, further fueled the board’s concerns about diminished editorial control and compromised quality.
Adding to the board’s frustrations was the unilateral imposition of annual contract renewals for associate editors, a move perceived as undermining the board’s autonomy and integrity. This, coupled with the introduction of AI-driven production processes without the board’s knowledge or consent, resulted in a series of embarrassing errors and formatting inconsistencies. The AI’s continued use and its tendency to alter accepted manuscripts further compounded the workload for both authors and editors. These technological interventions, meant to streamline the publishing process, appear to have instead created additional burdens and compromised the journal’s quality control.
Beyond editorial concerns, the board also highlighted the financial implications of Elsevier’s policies. The significantly higher author page charges levied by JHE, even compared to other for-profit Elsevier journals and open-access platforms, presented a substantial barrier to publication, particularly for researchers from less well-funded institutions. This financial burden contradicted the journal’s stated commitment to equality and inclusivity, further alienating the editorial board. The prohibitive costs, they argued, restricted access to publication and potentially skewed the representation of research within the journal.
The final tipping point appears to have been Elsevier’s decision to terminate the long-standing dual-editor model, a structure that had been in place for nearly four decades. The proposed alternative, maintaining the dual-editor model with a 50% pay cut for the editors, was viewed as unacceptable, ultimately leading to the mass resignation. This incident crystallized the growing rift between the editorial board and Elsevier, highlighting the publisher’s apparent prioritization of cost-cutting measures over the journal’s established editorial structure and the value provided by its editors.
The JHE editorial board’s resignation represents a larger trend within academic publishing, a struggle against what many perceive as the increasing commercialization of scientific knowledge dissemination. The board’s detailed account of their grievances paints a picture of a publishing environment where editorial independence is eroded, quality control is compromised, and financial barriers restrict access to publication. This case serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing tension between the pursuit of scientific advancement and the business imperatives of large publishing houses. The future of JHE and similar journals hangs in the balance, dependent on the ability of the scientific community and publishing industry to find a sustainable model that balances financial viability with the core principles of academic integrity and accessibility.
