| Abstract: |
The article is devoted to the problem of improving the governance of
publication systems, within which the actors that produce scientific
publications, supply them to readers, as well as funding and coordinating the
processes of their production and supply interact. It is emphasized that the
ownership of a scientific text includes two components: the right to a
monetary reward for the use of the article by the consumer and authorship. The
first component can be passed to another, but the second cannot. Authorship is
the basis for building up an individual intangible asset, which we call
authorship capital. The desire to increase it determines the dual role of the
author in the publication system: he is not only a producer of the knowledge
embodied in the article, but also, along with the reader, its ultimate
consumer. The dual role of the journal is also noted, which, organizing the
review process, turns out to be not only a supplier of articles, but also a
producer of knowledge. These two features give rise to a variety of possible
financing schemes for publishing systems. The specific features of knowledge
as a private and public good are analyzed. One of them is the high cost of
knowledge consumption. Due to this and a number of other circumstances, the
market model for financing publication systems is inefficient; the most
important task is the transition to open access. Such a transition should be
accompanied by improved methods for evaluating the performance of researchers
and the quality of journals. The comparison of large groups of objects (e.g.,
journals or research institutions) is inevitably based on citation indicators,
while expertise can play only a supporting role. On the contrary, when it
comes to making decisions within a small group, e.g., when allocating given
funds among laboratory members, expert evaluations must play a decisive role.
The directions of the reform of the Russian publication system are discussed,
ensuring the reduction of rent-seeking activity and increasing the adequacy of
the indicators used. |