The resignation of all members of a journal¡¯s editorial and advisory boards in a row over academic independence raises fundamental questions about ¡°who owns¡± academic publications, scholars have claimed.

The mass resignations at the European Law Journal ¨C in which a total of 20 academics linked to the Wiley publication quit ¨C follow more than a year of negotiations with the US publisher in the wake of its alleged effort to appoint new editors-in-chief in 2018 without consulting either its board of editors or its advisory board.

According to its most recent editors-in-chief ¨C Joana Mendes, professor of comparative and administrative law at the University of Luxembourg, and Harm Schepel, professor of economic law at the University of Kent ¨C Wiley later agreed a new system for appointing editors in which committees would be consulted but it refused to formalise the change in their contracts.

Writing on the legal website , the two academics explain that editors¡¯ insistence on that ¡°modest point¡± had ¡°vital importance¡± because enshrining the system would have ¡°clear[ed] the way to a model where editors respond to the board, not to the publisher¡± and would have established a framework ¡°where editors work for the journal, not as remunerated contractors for the publisher¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

¡°In other words, it is a fundamental condition for safeguarding academic autonomy,¡± they conclude.

Wiley would continue to publish ¡°something that is called the European Law Journal¡± and would find a new editorial and advisory board, the professors continue, but they question whether it would be ¡°business as usual¡±.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

¡°It is their right to do so. After all, they ¡®own¡¯ the European Law Journal. Or do they?¡± they ask.

The two scholars also commented on the ¡°marvellously cheap¡± services provided by academics to publishers, who profited from the ¡°free labour of authors and reviewers¡± to generate products in the form of journals whose ¡°demand has the elasticity of cast iron¡±.

Speaking to ³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ, Professor Schepel said that he and his fellow editors had not taken the decision to resign lightly.

¡°I have been with the journal for 15 years, and many editors have worked [on it] since its creation 25 years ago ¨C this is not something we would have done if we¡¯d had a choice,¡± he said.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

¡°It was not the issue that we didn¡¯t approve of their suggested appointments either, who were wonderful. But we felt it is the prerogative of a journal to appoint its own editors, and we had to draw a line in the sand.¡±

A Wiley spokeswoman told THE that the company was ¡°saddened by the decision of the editorial board of the European Law Journal to resign¡±.

¡°Wiley is engaged in discussions with independent academic advisers as we search for a new editorial team,¡± she added, saying that this team will ¡°have the authority to set editorial policy and appoint a new board for this important journal¡±.

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com