Elsevier stated they sought “closer alignment with Elsevier strategic priorities and publishing policies” as the rationale behind their decision.
Image credit:©iStock.com, sesame
Six editors and nearly 60 advisory editors of Games and Economic Behavior have resigned following the journal’s publisher’s decision not to renew the editor-in-chief’s contract.
In late July, Elsevier informed Hervé Moulin, a business professor at the University of Glasgow, that his six-year tenure as editor-in-chief of the journal would conclude in December. Moulin expressed disappointment at the news, noting he had hoped to continue in his role.
The journal’s six editors tendered their resignations in the weeks that followed, according to an August 16 email, the text of which was also posted on the Game Theory Society’s website. Games and Economic Behavior serves as one of the group’s two official journals. As of August 19, 58 of the 62 advisory editors had also stepped down.
“Requests for explanations, first by me, then in a collective letter by the other six Editors, were dismissed by Elsevier which simply reaffirmed its legal power to make such decisions,” Moulin wrote in the email, which was cosigned by the six resigning editors. In the email, he noted that Elsevier cited “closer alignment with Elsevier strategic priorities and publishing policies” as the motivation for the move.
This event marks the seventh mass editorial exodus covered this year. In April, we reported on the resignation of editors from another Elsevier journal following the publisher’s similar decision not to renew the editor-in-chief’s contract.
Because editors are required to provide three months’ notice, the resigning board members stated they intend to fulfill their duties at the journal until November 14. Moulin opted to resign concurrently rather than complete his contract.
Roberto Serrano, another editor resigning in November, stated that Elsevier “has behaved in this incident arrogantly and inappropriately, by refusing to answer key questions about the future direction of the journal, which we had asked, and by suggesting names of new editors with no input from the academic community.”
Serrano, a professor of economics at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, added: “As the other editors of the journal, we wanted to own what those new initiatives and directions for the journal were, and their answer was complete silence.”
Moulin stated that the publisher “crossed a fundamental red line in the good faith agreement between the Editorial Board and the publisher” by failing to consult with the editorial board regarding future editorial appointments.
The publisher communicated to the editorial board in an August 20 email: “We respect Hervé’s leadership experience, hence the outreach about potential successors was made with a view to including him in shaping GEB’s future — but he chose not to respond further and withdrew from those discussions.”
“Leadership transitions are a normal part of a journal’s evolution, and Elsevier’s priority is ensuring GEB continues to serve its editors, authors, and the research community well,” the publisher stated.
An Elsevier spokesperson noted that Moulin “reached the end of its three-year timespan, and the team at Elsevier deeply appreciates the Editor’s years of contribution to GEB.”
“No respectable academic journal can work under these rules, and so it is understandable that the resignations of our entire board of Advisory Editors — about 60 distinguished scholars — have followed the resignation of us, the seven editors,” Serrano said. “[W]hen a publisher goes as far as to suggest who the new editors should be, without any input from the academic community, I can’t work for a journal like that.”
This article was authored by Avery Orrall, and it was first published at Retraction Watch.
