Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Gonville & Caius College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Yale J Biol Med. 2023 Jun 30;96(2):267-273. doi: 10.59249/OMSP9618. eCollection 2023 Jun.
The peculiar nature of scientific publishing has allowed for a high degree of market concentration and a non-collusive oligopoly. The non-substitutable characteristic of scientific journals has facilitated an environment of market concentration. Acquisition of journals on a capabilities-based approach has seen market concentration increase in favor of a small group of dominant publishers. The digital era of scientific publishing has accelerated concentration. Competition laws have failed to prevent anti-competitive practices. The need for government intervention is debated. The definition of scientific publishing as a public good is evaluated to determine the need for intervention. Policy implications are suggested to increase competitiveness in the short-run and present prestige-maintaining alternatives in the long run. A fundamental change in scientific publishing is required to enable socially efficient and equitable access for wider society's benefit.
科学出版的特殊性质允许了高度的市场集中和非串通的寡头垄断。科学期刊的不可替代性特征促进了市场集中的环境。基于能力的期刊收购使得市场集中有利于少数占主导地位的出版商。科学出版的数字时代加速了集中。竞争法未能阻止反竞争行为。政府干预的必要性存在争议。将科学出版定义为公共利益,以评估干预的必要性。为了在短期内提高竞争力,并在长期内提供维护声誉的替代方案,提出了一些政策建议。需要进行根本性的科学出版变革,以便更广泛的社会能够获得社会效率和公平的机会。