What is the future of academic publishing? This question (i.e., systemic issues, challenges, and opportunities) is answered by several scientists in the article "The future of academic publishing."

Over the past generation, academic publishing has become a monoculture. Every scientist wants to publish his/her paper in a peer-reviewed journal, and journals are looking to increase their impact factors. Publishing articles is now synonymous with status search. Given the development of other processes and platforms, do we need journals at all?

We can no longer assume that our scientific publications will find their audience. Publishers will have to move resources from production to providing data on what is being published, investing in reliable metadata, tracking applications, and content usage analytics.

For example, the author's geographical location should not affect the possibility of being published. There is a growing demand for scientific publications to become more open, transparent, diverse, fair, and inclusive. However, the international literature is dominated by authors from higher-income countries.

We should consider that most papers do not require traditional peer review. Abandoning the traditional expert review of most works will save significant resources: the time of the author and reviewer and funds from sponsors. This shift from universal to selective peer review aligns with the growing desire to change the way scientific performance and impact are evaluated.

For more details, check this article.