Skip to main content

Content of Journals Published by Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

The practice of republishing content in journal articles is not new. In a series of articles published in 2005, I documented how Emerald Publishing in the United Kingdom (formally known as MCB University Press) conducted a massive, systematic, and deceptive republishing practice for nearly thirty years before being detected (see citations below). What made the Emerald/MCB case different than Nova Publishing was that Emerald journals claim they practice peer review, and employ real editors and editorial boards (many of which are composed of librarians). Whether or not these boards actually functioned is another question.
The subscription model is based on a relationship of trust. Most librarians have no time to verify that they purchased legitimate material. The example of Nova Publishers is an example of a company exploiting the trust between the publisher and library. While it is easy to chalk up this experience to another lesson in Caveat Emptor (let the buyer beware), it might be a warning to the growing practice of blanket approval plans over individual selection. Drop the last remaining guard of accountability and the library opens itself up to potential abuse. Examples like this one (and Emerald/MCB) need to be kept in our collective memories. It will likely, and unfortunately, happen again.

Davis, P. M. (2005). The Ethics of Republishing: A Case Study of Emerald/MCB University Press Journals. Library Resources & Technical Services, 49(2), 72-78.

Davis, P. M. (2005). Article duplication in Emerald/MCB journals is more extensive than first reported: Possible conflicts of financial and functional interests are uncovered. Library Resources & Technical Services, 49(3), 138-150.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.