A recent article published in PLOS ONE, ‘Scholarly Publishing’s Hidden Diversity’, presents a key finding in the scholarly publishing landscape, one that validates what Dimensions has long championed: inclusive indexing. The study’s conclusion is that inclusive indexing matters, and it is reshaping our understanding of global scholarly publishing.
Beyond oligopoly
Historically, the dominance of a handful of commercial publishers has shaped perceptions of prestige and impact in academia. But these perceptions are largely framed by selective databases like Web of Science (WoS), which tend to favor high-output, English-language journals concentrated in the Global North.
By contrast, Dimensions reveals a different pattern emerging. Between 1980 and 2021, Dimensions indexed 32% more articles and nearly five times as many journals as WoS. This statistic in itself is an indicator that the publishing ecosystem has been growing out of sight beyond English-language journals.
Independent publishing on the rise
According to the study, the proportion of articles published by smaller, independent publishers has grown steadily over the past two decades. In Dimensions, major publishers’ share declined from 65% in 1989 to 44% in 2021, but the WoS data suggests increased concentration. This divergence underscores how selective indexing can mask bibliodiversity and the local, regional, and mission-driven scholarship emerging around the world.
Journals outside the “Big Five” are not only more inclusive geographically and linguistically, but they also lead in Open Access (OA) innovation, particularly in Diamond OA publishing, which avoids article processing charges (APCs) and promotes equitable access.
Global insights, local impact
Dimensions data shows that researchers in many countries, including Brazil, Indonesia, and Russia, publish a majority of their work outside the dominant commercial channels. This is especially true in the Social Sciences and Humanities, where independent journals are driving a paradigm shift.
For publishers, funders, and institutions seeking to engage more meaningfully with global research communities, these insights are invaluable. And Dimensions data provides the visibility and granularity needed to understand these dynamics not just at the macro level, but at the local and institutional scale.
In this context, Dimensions has also taken proactive steps to elevate underrepresented regions. Recently, Dimensions partnered with African research funders to index grantee research outputs, further supporting equitable visibility of scholarly work from the African continent. This collaboration ensures that research supported by national funders like NRF South Africa, FNI Mozambique, and NRF Kenya gains global visibility.
An equitable future
The conclusion of the PLOS ONE study is clear: the future of scholarly publishing depends on recognizing and supporting its full diversity. Tools like Open Journal Systems (OJS) have enabled the proliferation of independent journals but visibility remains a key challenge. And that is where Dimensions steps in.
By offering an inclusive, comprehensive, and openly accessible database of research outputs, Dimensions helps surface a more complete spectrum of academic publishing. For libraries, funders, consortia, and publishers, this means better decisions, broader reach, and a deeper understanding of where scholarship is truly happening.
To discover how Dimensions can help you see what others miss, contact the Dimensions team.
Summary of paper from Dimensions summarization feature:
This paper analyzes the dominance of a few major publishers in global scholarly publishing and highlights the rapid growth of smaller, independent publishers since the rise of online publishing around 2000. Using data from Dimensions and Web of Science, it reveals that while smaller publishers are increasing their share of published articles, there is still significant concentration among major publishers, particularly in English-speaking countries. The study suggests that improved indexing of independent journals could enhance their visibility and promote greater bibliodiversity in scholarly publishing.