#elsevier
LightNews LightNews
hansonmark.bsky.social
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.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
merijnoudenampsen.org
Volgens mij liggen de wortels hiervan in de jaren negentig, bij Elsevier Weekblad. Hoofdredacteur HJ Schoo had toen de neiging om zich een sociaaldemocraat te noemen, hij was daar vrij expliciet over dat dit strategisch was om zijn rechtse standpunten breder geaccepteerd te krijgen.
November 11, 2025 at 8:20 AM
jorisluyendijk.bsky.social
Voor al die sukkels bij de VVD, Elsevier, de Telegraaf en WNL die denken en roepen dat echte kerels gewoon geld verdienen door olie en gas te boren, en softies zich verliezen in linkse hobby's zoals zonnepanelen en windmolens. Ignorant fucks.
davidho.bsky.social David Ho @davidho.bsky.social · 5d
The US is the world's largest oil and gas producer. Yet, "China is now making more money from exporting green technology than America makes from exporting fossil fuels."
China’s clean-energy revolution will reshape markets and politics
The world’s biggest manufacturer now has an interest in the world decarbonising
www.economist.com
November 7, 2025 at 6:15 PM
maxplanck.de
According to an international survey conducted by Elsevier, 68 percent of scientists say that publication pressure has increased over the past two to three years. 3,200 researchers from 113 countries took part in the survey. www.elsevier.com/insights/con... @elsevierconnect.bsky.social
Researcher of the Future: Confidence in Research
In this report, learn how researchers are adapting to rapid AI change, shifting funding landscapes, and new expectations for collaboration and impact.
www.elsevier.com
November 10, 2025 at 7:39 AM
hansonmark.bsky.social
The solutions of the past 3 decades have failed to change the incentives of #PublishOrPerish. As a result, researcher funding, time, control, and trust has been lost.

The ONE CONSTANT in the wake of the serial crisis, #PlanS and #OpenAccess reform has been publish profit margins.

2/n
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.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
merijnoudenampsen.org
Best fascinerend dat rechtse mensen de neiging hebben om zich links te noemen.

‘Wij vinden onszelf niet rechts’, zegt vertrekkend hoofdredacteur van opinieblad EW (voorheen Elsevier) www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2023/... www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2023/...
‘Wij vinden onszelf niet rechts’, zegt vertrekkend hoofdredacteur van opinieblad EW (voorheen Elsevier)
Arendo Joustra: Na 24 jaar stopt Joustra als hoofdredacteur van opinieweekblad EW. Een gesprek over de Nederlandse politiek en tegendraadse journalistiek in tijden van populisme. „Ik ben een soort mar...
www.nrc.nl
November 11, 2025 at 8:27 AM
chromatowski.bsky.social
#NEISvoid PSA

TIL patients and caregivers can get free access to Elsevier papers!

Email your request to [email protected] and include confirmation you are a patient. Turnaround is 48 hours.

#LongCovid #MECFS
Patient access Patients and non-professional caregivers can make requests for individual papers related to medicine and healthcare at no cost. These papers can be requested by e-mailing patientaccess@elsevier.com 7. We aim to provide the requested articles within 48 hours. Please include the article title and author(s), date published, and/or the URL if available. This will ensure that our team can locate the requested content as quickly as possible. Please include the text "I confirm | am a patient or non-professional caregiver" to confirm your eligibility to us this service; please do not disclose
November 10, 2025 at 7:45 PM
retractionwatch.com
An Elsevier journal has retracted a study on the placebo effect coauthored by a researcher known for extreme claims that have failed to withstand scrutiny. The move comes after critics said the researchers misunderstood “what a ‘treatment effect’ is.”
Journal retracts ‘bizarre’ placebo effect paper
An Elsevier journal has retracted a study on the placebo effect coauthored by a researcher known for extreme claims that have failed to withstand scrutiny. The move comes after critics said the res…
retractionwatch.com
November 7, 2025 at 6:52 PM
elsevierconnect.bsky.social
COP30 is underway in Belém, Brazil 🇧🇷, bringing global leaders together to address the climate crisis.

Elsevier has curated free research on renewable energy, carbon-neutral agriculture, and hydrogen infrastructure via the RELX SDG Resource Centre: spkl.io/63323AbvuP
COP30 is underway in Belém, Brazil
November 11, 2025 at 5:22 PM
thelancet.com
🌏 Despite substantial progress, asthma still poses a serious health burden globally.

A Lancet—@lancetrespirmed.bsky.social Series provides new insights into the genetics, prevention, & risk factors of the disease: spkl.io/63322Abjbm
From Paper 2: Pathways activated by external stimuli and the effect of ACBs. Copyright: 2025 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
November 11, 2025 at 12:04 PM
internationalsnsd.bsky.social
According to Stanford University and the newly released 2025 Elsevier Scientific Database ranking,four faculty members from SNSD have been listed among the Top 2% Scientists in the World:

Dr. Ahmad Esmaeilzadeh
Dr.Leila Azadbakht
Dr.Sakineh Shab-Bidar
Dr.Mahmood Alizadeh Sani
#TUMS #Nutrition
November 10, 2025 at 6:58 AM
richardsever.bsky.social
I wouldn't say it concerns me any more than offering authors the option to submit to Elsevier journals, which we also to. Does that make us complicit in corporate pricing strategies?
November 7, 2025 at 1:39 PM
manchester.ac.uk
We're so proud! 💜

More than 500 researchers from across The University of Manchester have been recognised in the latest Stanford/Elsevier Top 2% Scientist Rankings, highlighting the University’s global research excellence.

🔗 www.manchester.ac.uk/about/news/o...
Over 500 Manchester academics named among world’s top scientists
November 5, 2025 at 4:20 PM
glebaron.bsky.social
I've argued in the past that pre-print servers are a solution to slow peer review and to get rid of Elsevier/Sage/Taylor-Francis. But this is why we can't have nice things.
November 8, 2025 at 4:30 PM
smutclyde.bsky.social
So I thought that Elsevier was already as enshittified as possible. I was wrong.
November 4, 2025 at 4:19 AM
scenario2020.bsky.social
#UnpopularOpinion?

#OpenAccess publishing practices have managed to increase profits for private publishing firms more than support science communication.

#profiteering #EducationForSale #TheBig5 #Wiley #Springer #Nature #TaylorandFrancis #Sage #Elsevier #publishing #academicsky #booksky 🧪
November 5, 2025 at 3:13 PM
timisstuck.bsky.social
To me, this looks like impeccable behavior from the authors. Must have been painful but they really did the right thing not only requesting retraction but disproving their own prior work!

Meanwhile Elsevier...
November 6, 2025 at 4:02 PM
thelancet.com
What if we could find new ways to approach liver cancer prevention and treatment?

Join Helena Wang on Nov 27 to explore how we can work together to reverse the rise of this global health challenge.

👉 Register now: hubs.li/Q03GK-q50

#oncology #hepatology #lgcw2025
Blue graphic with hexagon pattern. Text says: "The Lancet Webinars. Join Helena Wang, Asia Senior Executive Editor at The Lancet, for our global webinar on global strategies to reverse the rise of liver cancer on Thursday, November 27, 2025 at 9am GMT/10am CET". A photograph of Helena Wang appears on the right-hand side. Copyright: Elsevier Ltd.
November 7, 2025 at 11:10 AM
researcheracad.bsky.social
Although less known than impact factor, SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) and SJR (Scimago Journal Rank) are essential metrics for assessing a journal’s influence.

Discover more through #ResearcherAcademy: spkl.io/63321AZvyt

#Elsevier #PhDsky #AcademicSky
a banner
November 6, 2025 at 1:00 PM
erikansink.bsky.social
The good news is that the editorial board continued after Elsevier ditched us; this week we launched the Journal of Water Economics:

www.journalofwatereconomics.com

Open access, no APC, and no Elsevier.
Journal of Water Economics
The Journal of Water Economics publishes theoretical and empirical research on the economics of water resources. Topics include allocation, governance, pricing, regulation, policy instruments, valuati...
www.journalofwatereconomics.com
November 3, 2025 at 10:01 PM
alistair-munro.bsky.social
After Elsevier cut off the tap for the journal Water Resources and Economics in 2024, the research is flowing again, with the launch of the independent new journal, Journal of Water Economics. Edited by the same team, backed by U. Waterloo. #Econsky 😃

openjournals.uwaterloo.ca/index.php/jo...
Journal of Water Economics
The Journal of Water Economics publishes theoretical and empirical research on the economics of water resources. Topics include allocation, governance, pricing, regulation, policy instruments, valuati...
openjournals.uwaterloo.ca
November 4, 2025 at 3:45 AM
stinky-doggy.bsky.social
The simple act of reading this caused my publications in heat transfer and thermal hydraulics to just disappear from Elsevier like that photo in Back to the Future.
November 4, 2025 at 5:52 AM
thelancet.com
"We must reflect on current prevention strategies in the context of the changing contribution of different cardiovascular conditions."

@nath-conrad.bsky.social & colleagues explore the evolving spectrum of cardiovascular disease: tinyurl.com/5c9pe8mj
The proportion of newly diagnosed cardiovascular disease in the UK, by individual condition, from 2000 to 2002 and 2017 to 2019. Proportions were calculated by dividing the age–sex-standardised incidence rate for the condition of interest by the sum of the age–sex-standardised incidence rates across all ten conditions. Copyright: 2025 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved.
November 5, 2025 at 11:26 AM
thelancet.com
Time is an under-recognised social determinant of brain health.

In The Lancet Healthy Longevity, authors call for temporal justice through research and policies that recognise time as both a resource and a site of inequity in ageing and dementia: tinyurl.com/bdhfy93p
Figure Integrative illustration of micro (individual)-level, meso (relational and organisational)-level, and macro (systemic)-level factors that shape people’s experience, use, and availability of time relevant to brain health. Copyright: 2025 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. CC BY 4.0.
November 4, 2025 at 4:05 PM
thelancet.com
👉 Register now: hubs.li/Q03NdTNP0
📆 Nov 20, 2025 | 2pm GMT / 9am EST / 10pm CST

Join our expert panel as they explore innate immunity’s role in neurological diseases, and therapies to prevent inflammation-driven neurodegeneration.

#neurology #brainhealth #lancetwebinar
Blue graphic with text saying: "Webinar: Innate immunity regulation of brain health on Thursday, November 20, 2025 at 2pm GMT/9am EST/10pm CST. Join Elena Becker-Barroso, Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet Neurology, Sam Rose, Scientific Editor of Neuron, David Hunt, Professor of Medicine at University of Edinburgh, Andrea Ablasser, Professor at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, and Manuel Friese, Professor of Neurology at University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf". The Cell Press and The Lancet logos appear in the top left and right corners respectively. Copyright: Elsevier Ltd.
November 5, 2025 at 7:50 AM