Most cholars in Kenya boast of having been published in top-ranking journals, both open and non-open access. What majority are not aware about is that all the traditional model publishers have thrived on secret predatory practices; the most conspicuous one being acquiring the author's copyright, then making money from sales of these articles, leaving authors with only citations. Most well-established publishers forbid researchers from sharing journal articles they have authored via email.
Initially, most of these publishers promise to share a certain percentage with the authors, but such promises do not come to be. In the words of Nick Hopwood, an Associate Professor at University of Technology Sydney, the only relationship between publishing and a scholar’s bank account is that they won’t get a job if they fail to publish.
Predatory publishing is a term that sparks wariness in the spines of academics. Interestingly, scholars scorn at what they do not know, and at least a few know from whence it was birthed. Predatory publishing is an invisible and seemingly invincible elephant in academic publishing. The ghost of predatory scholarly journaling first showed up with the advent of the open-access model of publishing inspired by Internet business platforms.
In 2013, John Bohannon did an experiment in which he tested the credibility of open access journals, in which even the giant publishers such as Sage and Elsevier were implicated. Later in 2015, the academia was drawn into its reality by Jeffrey Beall, a librarian and researcher at University of Colorado Denver. Bealls used the words "predatory publishing" to refer primarily to open access journals, which were taking head-on traditional publishing models.
Traditional publishers thrived on subscriptions while the new model came with open and free access to scholarly resources. The criteria used by Bealls was the most comprehensive and was anchored on 26 principles pointing at the poor standards and practices, among them ethics and integrity of the publishing process, business practices and constitution of editorial boards, among others.
READ MORE
Airlift programme that crashed with dreams of Uasin Gishu youth
Dagoretti North students to benefit from TVET scholarship program
We must nurture a culture of philanthropy
Witnesses risk jail for discussing Sh1b fraud case on social media
Even so, the list published by Mr Beall generated controversy and in January 2017, he was convicted of pulling it down, and since then, he stopped publishing the list on his website. However, it was too late because the listing had already become part of a standard in determining the credibility of publishers although, since then, it is seemingly generated by organisations and people with a vested interest; it has become an academic propagandist tool.
In Kenya, most institutions of higher learning continue to use the listings to inform policy on academic publishing for both faculty and postgraduate students. I am not interested in the discussion on whether the list is credible or not; at least not for now.
What I am interested in is the fact that Kenyan scholars have become victims of another predatory form by publishing in the mainstream, well established international journals. Yes, I said mainstream.
These journals do thorough work in peer-reviewing a manuscript and make out of a scholar the highest quality articles. In this model, scholars and researchers are not charged any money, but they sign away their copyrights. These articles are not open access; they are sold at hundreds of dollars or are put under subscriptions.
Global North
The work that cost scholar's time, resources and energy are taken away and a company benefits from the proceeds. See, this is the highest form of predation that goes on unnoticed and what scholars are left with is boasting that "I have published in such and such recognised journal, top ranking, high impact factor and prestigious". This is vanity. Let me explain why.
The articles are closed in the global north repositories. How many of us purchase journal articles for our research? Nought! As a result, the knowledge that could have been useful to our upcoming scholars is casketed in a non-open access repository. Any knowledge resource that is not open for consumption is as helpful as not being there in the first place.
Moreover, once a scholar publishes in these 'well established' international journals, they miss on the citations. The scholars in Germany, UK and US, have no interest in research about measures for mitigating floods, landslides, or Mau conservation in Kenya. Nor will they have any need for a study on the socioeconomic impact of the BBI report adoption in Kenya.
Most PhD or Master's candidates researching local phenomena have never come across some of the best research in non-open access repositories. A PhD thesis can use at least 200 references, but how many such researchers buy journal articles from such publishers? Not not one. At least I didn’t.
Dr Ndonye teaches Mass Communication at Kabarak University
