Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Integrity, Equity, and Evidence: Scholarly Publishing in 2025 from a Global South Perspective
The year 2025 has been a defining period for scholarly communication, marked by rapid technological disruptions, evolving peer-review practices, and heightened global awareness of research integrity. For many in the Global South, including those of us working within Asia’s diverse scientific ecosystems, the year has highlighted long-standing challenges while also revealing new opportunities for meaningful progress. From my experience as a researcher in infectious diseases and zoonoses, an editor across multiple international journals, and an evaluator of clinical and regulatory protocols, three principles have stood out as essential in navigating the shifting terrain of publishing: integrity, equity, and evidence.
This reflection offers an insider’s view of how these principles have been tested, reshaped, and reinforced throughout 2025.
Integrity Under Pressure: Old Challenges, New Dimensions
Research integrity remains one of the most urgent concerns in scholarly publishing. Although issues such as plagiarism, image manipulation, and unethical authorship practices are not new, their complexity has increased with the rise of generative AI tools and sophisticated data-fabrication techniques.
From my role as an editor and reviewer for publishers such as Springer Nature, Wiley, PLOS, and BMC, it has become clear that technological progress has created both tools for detection and avenues for misconduct. AI-generated manuscripts, fabricated data sets, and synthetic citations have challenged editorial teams in unprecedented ways. At the same time, AI-based screening platforms, text-similarity tools, and image-forensics software have equipped journals with stronger verification mechanisms.
Structural issues in the Global South compound these challenges. Limited access to training, scarce funding for research integrity offices, and unequal availability of screening tools leave many institutions vulnerable. In 2025, I observed increased cases of unintentional ethical breaches, often rooted in gaps in awareness and mentorship. This underscores the need for regionally tailored integrity-capacity programs, particularly for early-career scholars.
Peer Review and Editorial Workflows: Technology as a Double-Edged Sword
Artificial intelligence has reshaped peer-review processes more dramatically than in any previous year. Editorial teams increasingly rely on AI-supported reviewer suggestions, automated checks for scope and novelty, and predictive tools that flag potential ethical or methodological concerns.
However, these innovations come with caution. AI-based reviewer recommendations tend to reinforce existing biases by prioritizing researchers from high-income countries whose profiles are more visible in global databases. Automated triage tools sometimes misclassify regionally important research, such as zoonotic diseases and parasitic infections, as low-impact because their global citation footprints are smaller.
In my editorial work, AI has streamlined repetitive tasks, supported initial screening, and improved workflow efficiency. Yet overreliance risks undermining nuanced human judgment, especially in interdisciplinary fields like public health and veterinary medicine.
Successful integration of AI requires:
- Clear guidelines for responsible use
- Transparency about automated decisions
- Editor training in AI literacy
- Systems to monitor algorithmic bias
The challenge for the Global South is ensuring equitable access to these technologies, so that AI becomes an enabler rather than a barrier.
Open Access Realities: A Gap That Widens Despite Progress
Open access (OA) has advanced significantly, but financial pressures associated with Article Processing Charges (APCs) continue to disadvantage researchers in low- and middle-income countries. Many Asian researchers struggle to publish high-quality work because APC waivers are inconsistent, limited, or highly competitive. Even when waiver programs exist, administrative barriers and financial restrictions exclude many talented scientists.
In fields critical for public health, such as zoonotic diseases, epidemiology, and antimicrobial resistance, this inequity slows the global flow of knowledge. A paper that could influence policy or save lives is sometimes delayed simply because authors cannot pay. Open access cannot truly be “open” unless financial models evolve to support equitable participation.
Publishers and regional bodies like ACSE can play a transformative role by expanding waiver programs, encouraging non-APC models, and supporting regional journals committed to fair publishing policies.
Evidence Visibility: Why Global South Research Still Struggles to Be Seen
Despite producing valuable research, scientists and journals from the Global South remain underrepresented in global indexing systems and citations. Persistent barriers, including language limitations, editorial bias, Western-focused evaluation systems, weak journal infrastructure, and limited integration of regional research, continue to restrict visibility.
In zoonoses, this gap is particularly clear, as research from high-burden regions is often the least recognized internationally. Improving visibility is not just about citations but about acknowledging that knowledge from all regions is essential for global scientific progress.
Positive Transformations: Signs of Hope in 2025
While the challenges are real, 2025 also brought several encouraging developments:
- Growing integrity awareness: More institutions adopted responsible conduct guidelines and integrity training programs.
- Improved collaboration: Regional and international networks expanded opportunities for joint publications and shared expertise.
- Digital innovation: Open-source editorial platforms reduced operational burdens for local journals.
- Strengthened regional journals: Many Global South journals improved peer-review quality, editorial policies, and indexing status.
- AI-supported editing: Language-editing tools helped non-native English authors enhance clarity and reduce rejection due to linguistic barriers.
These developments demonstrate that progress is possible when technological innovation is paired with inclusive policies and capacity building.
Building a Fairer and More Transparent Publishing Ecosystem
Looking ahead, the future of scholarly publishing in the Global South depends on addressing inequity at both systemic and practical levels. Essential steps include:
- Strengthening editorial capacity through regional training, shared resources, and mentorship programs.
- Improving research-integrity infrastructure, including national guidelines, institutional oversight, and accessible detection tools.
- Expanding equitable OA models that reduce dependence on APC-based systems.
- Ensuring fair integration of AI, with transparent and bias-aware frameworks.
- Increasing representation of Global South scholars in editorial boards, peer-review networks, and publishing governance.
- Prioritizing visibility of regionally important research, especially in public health, infectious diseases, and zoonoses.
Organizations like ACSE and collaborative communities across Asia can lead these efforts by promoting standards, building networks, and amplifying diverse voices.
Future Perspectives
The year 2025 has shown that scholarly publishing is not merely a technical process; it reflects global structures, scientific values, and collective responsibilities. For researchers and editors in the Global South, the pursuit of integrity, equity, and evidence remains both a challenge and a mission.
If the global community commits to fairer systems and transparent practices, then 2026 and the years beyond may bring a publishing ecosystem that genuinely represents the diversity, excellence, and potential of all scholars, regardless of geography.
Keywords
Global South Publishing Research Integrity Open Access Equity AI in Peer Review Editorial Bias Scholarly Communication 2025 Visibility of Regional Research Ethical Publishing Practices
Dr. Faham Khamesipour (DVM, M.Sc, MPH, Ph.D.-DVSc, Postdoc) is a researcher in zoonotic diseases and public health, working with the Center for Communicable Diseases Control, Ministry of Health, Iran. He collaborates with several national research institutes, including the Iran FDA, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, and Shiraz University, contributing to studies in infectious diseases, veterinary medicine, and molecular health research.
View All Posts by Faham KhamesipourDisclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their affiliated institutions, the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), or the Editor’s Café editorial team.
