St. Petersburg State University was the first Russian university to ban its employees from publishing in international open access journals published by Elsevier. There are good reasons for this: Elsevier itself told T-invarinat that the funds received from Russian authors are indeed sent to Ukraine. Why did the publishing house put the scientists in such a difficult position, when they could face real jail time for publishing? And why did St. Petersburg State University become the “first student” in this story?
Elsevier is considered one of the three largest scientific publishing houses in the world. Founded in 1880 in Amsterdam, the publishing house now has branches in many countries. Under the wing of this publishing house are such famous journals as The Lancet, Cell, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Biomaterials, Biological Psychiatry, etc. As well as electronic libraries of specialised literature ScienceDirect and Trends, Current Opinion series, Scopus online citation database, SciVal research effectiveness measurement tool, ClinicalKey medical search engine, ClinicalPath evidence-based cancer care service.
Top news about the lives of scientists during the war, videos and infographics – in T-invariant’s Telegram channel. Subscribe so you don’t miss out.
In general, Elsevier is a whole network of important scientific journals and databases, publications in which are hard to neglect for a modern scientist who wants to stay at the forefront of science. Nevertheless, in September, the rectorate of St. Petersburg State University issued a decree calling on people to refrain from publishing in Elsevier’s 1893 journals. “In order to preserve the ethical standards of SPbSU’s scientific activities and to counteract the unfriendly policy of Elsevier publishing house aimed at financial support of Ukraine at the expense of Russian authors,” the order explains. The order also explains that it refers to payment for the services of the Open access system or Supports open access. St. Petersburg State University professors willingly explained to us that the funds received from Russian authors are transferred by their editorial offices to help Ukraine. In the order itself, among the consequences of violating this order is only the refusal to provide compensation or other remuneration to the author of the article. But in reality, if you transfer money knowing that it will be transferred to Ukraine, you will face a criminal case under the article “state treason” and up to 20 years’ imprisonment.
– The ban is legitimate,” said one of the employees of the St. Petersburg State University, who wished to remain unnamed. – Let’s try to look at the situation from the outside. A country is at war with another country. We are not going to discuss who started it and who is to blame.
Tell me, are there many countries in the world that would understand their citizens who finance the enemy’s army? Rather, we should talk not about the moment when our rectorate forbade to do it, but about the moment when Elsevier management decided to send all the funds received for publication from our authors to Ukraine. And the order you are talking about is just SPbSU’s concern for its professors.
Interestingly, many scientists assumed that the transfer of money through the Open access system to the Ukraine aid funds was a fake or a hoax. But Elsevier confirmed this information to T-invariant. We were reminded that the publishing house condemns the Russian invasion and has stopped selling its services in Russia and Belarus. In addition, the letter says that they can discuss possible discounts for Open access payments with authors on an individual basis.
Today it is really impossible for Russian scientific institutes and universities to subscribe to journals and get access to Elsevier databases. But it cannot be said that this publishing house has cut off all relations with Russia. For example, the article “Secret friends of Russian (propaganda) science”by Alexei Plastun, Inna Makarenko and Tatiana Grineva provides data on how often Ukrainian territories (Donetsk, Luhansk, Simferopol, Sevastopol, etc.) are labelled as Russian – just on the example of Scopus (Elsevier). The same article gives examples of blatantly propagandistic articles in international journals that have been indexed in Scopus (for example, they provide justifications forthe annexation of Crimea or justify the formation of DNR and LNR). The authors also note that at the time of publication of the article, the same Scopus indexed more than 800 Russian journals, 77 of which were added to the index during 2022-2023, with 19 of them founded by universities whose rectors signed a letter in support of the war.
At the same time, a public statement against the war signed by leading academic publishers, including Elsevier, said: “Our actions are not directed at Russian researchers, but at research organisations in Russia and Belarus.
Publication in world scientific journals for any scientist is the main product of his work. If one makes world discoveries and shares them only with the immediate neighbourhood and colleagues in one’s own country, scientific activity essentially turns into a state-funded hobby. This is why publications in highly ranked journals are crucial for science. In order to make new scientific research as accessible as possible to the entire scientific community, many scientific journals practice Open access (OA). In this case, free free access to scientific articles is provided. The journal is still responsible for the quality of the published article. But articles posted in such access are more often read by colleagues, more often cited, and more actively discussed. The unpleasant side of OA is that all the associated costs are borne by the author, paying for this very open access. At the same time, the price of publication, depending on the journal, may vary from a dozen dollars to several thousand dollars (most often in such cases, grants or the employer cover the OA fee). Most journals have a choice: to make the publication paid for by the reader (then colleagues will pay for access to the article if they are interested in your research) or free (paid by the author). A number of journals have a hybrid option: the journal is available by subscription, but you can make your article available to everyone by paying a fee.
Up-to-date videos about science at war, interviews, podcasts and streams with famous scientists on the T-invariant YouTube channel. Become a subscriber!
If we look at the journals removed from the “White List” of the Russian Academy of Sciences (created in the spring of 2022, a national database for accounting scientometric data. –T-invariant) Elsevier journals, we can see that only journals with mandatory open access were removed. Hybrid journals (like Elsevier journals where one can choose not to pay OA) on the White List remained. Of the 29,074 scientific journals in which Russian scientists are recommended to publish, 28,045 are published abroad in languages other than Russian.
–Of course, at first, all sorts of rubbish Russian journals were terribly revitalised,” says Dmitry Dubrovsky, PhD in History, formerly a lecturer at St Petersburg State University and Higher School of Economics, now a visiting lecturer at the Faculty of Social Sciences at Charles University . – But in essence, strangely enough, nothing has happened. They still demand publication in international decent journals. International decent journals are for the most part unfriendly, that is, practically all of them. It is difficult to run with a patriotic flag and publish in decent journals at the same time. It turns out like in the anecdote “you either put on your trousers or take off your cross”. The trouble is that the magazines are friendly, patriotic, wonderful, but mostly lousy. Not all, but good journals are also leaving, slowly emigrating. To keep decent authors and international participation, they have to leave Russia.
Dmitry Dubrovsky. Photo: planeta.press
Our colleagues from the scientific and educational publication in the field of biology and medicine PCR.NEWS talked to prominent scientists about whether it has become more difficult to publish in foreign journals. They received very different answers: from “nothing has changed” to recognising the dramatic changes. Pavel Volchkov, Candidate of Biological Sciences, Executive Director of the Centre for Living Systems and Head of the Laboratory of Genome Engineering at MIPT, commenting on the links with foreign colleagues, admits:
– Yes, there are problems with publishing. Different publishers located in different countries have different policies. Moreover, publishers based in the same country, whether in the US, the UK or Switzerland, may have different policies. There’s a whole spectrum. In some places they may openly reply that due to known events we do not accept articles from Russia, but there are practically no such places. There are resources that accept publications from Russia with the exception of publications from universities and institutes that are on sanctions lists. The laws of the country do not prohibit this directly, but the interpretation of the law is not always unambiguous. And in order not to have problems in principle, some editorial offices prefer not to get involved.
Pavel Volchkov. Photo: novayagazeta.ru
The same article cites the opinion of Doctor of Medical Sciences, head of the laboratory of the biochemical basis of pharmacology and tumour models of the N. N. Blokhin NMIC Oncology and the Department of Biochemistry. N.N. Blokhin and the Department of Biochemistry named after N.N. Blokhin. Vadim Pokrovsky, Head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Basis of Pharmacology and Tumour Models at the N.N. Blokhin NMIC Oncology Centre and the Department of Biochemistry named after T.T. Berezov at PFUR:
– Over the last two years we have published the maximum number of articles in Q1 journals indexed by Scopus or WoS in the history of the department and laboratory. In the incomplete year 2024, there are already more than 30 of them. Including five with co-authors from other countries.
Vadim Pokrovsky. Photo: scientificrussia.ru
– At the local level, the signal comes not from science managers, but from the patriotic public,” said one of the scientists working in Russia on condition of anonymity. – Self-censorship is fuelled primarily by precedents, which fortunately do not yet exist. As a rule, foreign co-authors have paid for the hybrid version in the past. Russians used to go to MDPI, one of the main publishing houses for Russian scientists, for publications for RNF reports : cheaper, faster, and easier. Institute directors and university rectors have previously been interested in publications purely out of compulsion, and now there has been a moratorium on publications for the last two years….
Our interlocutor reminds us that many strong scientists have left Russia since the beginning of the war, which is why, in his opinion, the management prefers not to emphasise publications in prestigious scientific journals:
– ‘In general, it’s easier for the management to look the other way than to try to penalise those who publish,’ he admits. – So it turns out that in terms of the number of publications in Elsevier, Russia has no decline, compared to 2023, even some growth, including at St. Petersburg State University. And even for hybrid publications and fully paid OA in 2024 there will be growth, apparently due to foreign co-authors.
In addition, our interlocutor believes that the growth in the number of publications in Elsevier is not only due to the White List or the loyalty of university rectors and institute directors. In 2024 there was a drop in the number of publications of the Russian Federation in MDPI.
– Two reasons coincided: global correction of issues due to reputational costs of publishing “junk”, especially the deprivation of impact factor and tightening of SDN-compliance (impact factor – a numerical indicator of citation of articles; SDN-compliance – a list of people and organisations that fall under personal sanctions. –T-invariant), shutting up the MDPI-fountains of Skoltech, MIPT and other rich techies,” he explains. – The second factor is purely domestic – it is the absolutely wild situation with the publication of RAS journals. Many people have got used to publishing, and even gained momentum, so there is a certain overflow, including to Elsevier, mostly to weaker journals. Well, it is impossible to predict how sustainable this trend is now.
There is a feeling that co-operation with Russian scientists is largely a matter of individual decision. But the official position (at least for now) does not encourage such co-operation.
The order issued in September banning publication in a number of Elsevier journals (while the Russian Academy of Sciences itself excludes the relevant journals from the “White List”) is not the only example of SPbSU’s demonstrative loyalty. Previously, university employees were advised not to use the word “sanctions” in relation to measures applied to Russia (but this term is considered acceptable for retaliatory measures). We remember well the mass dismissals of “disloyal” teachers at the university. And it was SPbSU that collected a record 1,100 signatures under a letter to Vladimir Putin with words of “sincere support for the NWO”.
Unfortunately, none of the teachers currently working at SPbSU agreed to share with us what is happening at the university now. But several people who worked there previously have spoken to us. They easily recall the first alarm bells: for example, back in 2020, all university employees were offered to sign an additional agreement to their contract that prohibited them from making additional comments to the media without the rector’s permission. This proposal made it virtually impossible for journalists to take actual comments from university employees.
Dmitry Dubrovsky recalls how faculties were systematically stripped of their autonomy:
– SPbSU is probably one of the most terrorised universities in the Russian Federation. In general, it is most similar in its political development (with some delay) to that of the Russian Federation. When I first came to work there, the faculties were subjects with some autonomy and freedom of decision-making. But the further Kropachev advanced, the more actively he built his “vertical of power”. This is probably what many rectors did. But he did it in the first and most decisive way, destroying the freedom of the Academic Council and tightening various rules.
As another former SPbSU professor, who asked not to be named, noted, “the rating of St. Petersburg University may be falling, but there is enough for many more generations of students, no matter what the university administration comes up with”. This teacher admits that the most “rowdy” have long been fired. And those who remained are far from always ready to express their opinions openly, moving away from politics into teaching, research, etc.
Some of our interlocutors are sure that the personality of the rector of SPbSU played a significant role, while others see this as a general trend. For example, Dmitry Dubrovsky, answering this question, admits that similar processes are taking place in other higher education institutions of the country, but they are less noticeable:
– It’s like the collapse of a house. A skyscraper can lose dozens of floors and still rise above the rest. Of course, flagships always attract more attention from those looking to make a change. What do we have? Shanyinka is crushed, the European is half-crushed, Vyshka is decapitated (although some islands still remain there). The Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration has become RSREU. The degradation of the leading universities is more noticeable. During an earthquake, skyscrapers fall by the dozens, while two-storey houses stand – and nothing. Where there was no special level, there is no need to change anything.
It is hard to say whether the pressure from the outside has turned St. Petersburg University into an organisation trying to guess the thoughts and aspirations of the management, or whether the figure of the rector has played a special role here. But there is no doubt that “something is rotten in the Kingdom of Denmark”. And for some reason, St. Petersburg University seeks to be the first to support and anticipate any movements of the Russian authorities.
Scientists need publications in international scientific journals, as well as links with their foreign colleagues. But this window of opportunity continues to narrow (unless, of course, we are talking about countries like India or China). And it is narrowing from both sides: from the Russian side and from the side of Western journals. The situation with Elsevier and SPbSU is a vivid example of this. Elsevier, by transferring money to Ukrainian funds, endangers its authors. And SPbSU tries to anticipate possible trends and introduces new bans for its teachers and students. It is difficult to say whether all these measures affect the initiators and supporters of the war. But we can say for sure that scientists, including those with an anti-war stance, are the first to suffer from them.
You can support the work of T-invariant by subscribing to our Patreon and choosing a convenient donation amount.
Text: Yulia Chernaya
Yulia Chernaya 27.11.2024