In this University of California (UC) Office of Scholarly Communication blog series, we highlight the successes and challenges of leading journals published by UC’s eScholarship Publishing program through interviews with journal editors. Our latest interview is with editors of Parks Stewardship Forum (PSF): Jonathan B. Jarvis (Editorial Board member), Rebecca Conard (Co-Managing Editor), and David Harmon (Co-Managing Editor).
In a few sentences, describe how Parks Stewardship Forum started and the purpose it serves within your field:
PSF started in 2020, when the Institute for Parks, People, and Biodiversity at UC Berkeley was launched. The Institute’s founding director has a long-standing connection to the George Wright Society (GWS), which was open to his suggestion to create a new digital interdisciplinary journal to integrate the scholarship from multiple fields that are involved with parks, protected/conserved areas, cultural sites, and other forms of place-based conservation.
The purpose of PSF is to provide a place for cross-dialogue among scholars and field practitioners working in place-based conservation, and to provide opportunities for them to be exposed to thinking and practice in other fields. PSF invites contributions from the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities, with an emphasis on how these diverse insights can be applied in the field. PSF looks to broaden the range of topics conservationists address, and we explicitly seek out new voices.
Why does it matter that your journal is diamond open access?
For the reasons just mentioned: PSF is not just a dialogue among research scientists whose work is supported well enough so they can bear hefty publication fees. We want voices from the field as well. No-barriers publishing provides access to a wide variety of academics and practitioners whose concern is the practical applications of knowledge, rather than theoretical research. Open access really facilitates this kind of exchange.
How does eScholarship support Parks Stewardship Forum’s goals?
Having the imprimatur of the UC system is advantageous when we solicit articles for theme issues. To put it candidly, it opens doors. Moreover, the eScholarship platform is easy to navigate and quite attractive, which facilitates greater readership. On the back end of the publishing process, the support team at eScholarship has been terrific. They have promptly addressed any technical problems, and in addition have provided helpful guidance to matters such as 508 compliance/accessibility.
What challenges does your publication face?
The current administration’s hostile stance towards the federal land- and ocean-managing agencies has affected one of our primary audiences in many ways. The disruption creates uncertainty, and we have already had articles withdrawn by federal authors who are no longer able to freely publish. They have been, until now, an important source of our content. Relatedly, because of staff cuts there is (or will be) turnover to new employees; reaching them promises to be a challenge (although PSF’s open access should help).
How do you measure the success of Parks Stewardship Forum?
Metrics provided by eScholarship is the primary measure. We augment this by monitoring formal feedback received to each issue as it comes out. Another measure of success is the number of submissions we receive from outside our known circle of supporters. Our belief is that PSF’s readership is expanding because the journal’s contributors themselves represent a broader base.
What does the future hold for your journal?
We expect to be turning more to academics (and professionals not in federal agencies) for contributions and to serve as guest editors for theme issues. We will probably develop theme issues that are more suited to attracting people not in federal employment. Also, we anticipate sourcing more content from a new series of annual workshops GWS is launching.
Tags: Berkeley, eScholarship, Open Access
