Germany’s decision to sign a national agreement with open access publisher MDPI has been criticised as “highly problematic” in light of the Swiss-headquartered firm’s “questionable practices” regarding peer review and special issues.
At the end of 2024, the Germany National Library of Medicine, known as ZB MED, announced it had signed a deal on behalf of more than 100 German institutions for their staff to publish in MDPI journals until the end of 2026. The deal will provide discounts of up to 30 per cent on the article processing charge paid by German authors, which is typically SFr1,600 (£1,435).
But the deal has been condemned by Anna Abalkina, a noted research fraud sleuth based at the Free University of Berlin, who said there was “substantial evidence of questionable practices in MDPI’s publishing model, including peer-review mills, papers produced by paper mills, and an overemphasis on special issues”.
Describing the deal as “highly problematic”, Abalkina said it would create “inappropriate incentives for scholars” to publish in MDPI journals, whose special issues – for which periodicals invite scholars to propose and run publications on distinct themes, with submissions remaining open for months – were particularly concerning given it was “impossible to verify the honesty and qualifications of all special-issue editors”.
“This deal should provoke a discussion about publication priorities and the need to avoid supporting predatory journals,” said Abalkina, who questioned why the Germany’s research funder had not been required to ratify the agreement, as it did with larger deals involving Springer Nature, Elsevier and Wiley.
The deal was announced after Finland’s Publication Forum downgraded 271 journals belonging to Frontiers and MDPI to its lowest level, claiming these publishers “make use of the APC operating model” which “aim[s] to increase the number of publications with the minimum time spend for editorial work and quality assessment”.
Norway has also removed MDPI’s mega-journal Sustainability from its register of approved journals, while Clarivate’s Web of Science delisted the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health from its influential index in March 2023.
Switzerland’s research funder has said it will not fund publication in MDPI’s special issues, following concerns about their proliferation. Analysis by Grenoble-based economist Paolo Crosetto published in 2023 found that some journals were opening these issues at a rate of nine a day.
In addition to concerns about how peer review can be conducted effectively at this scale, questions have been raised about the relevance of some special issues to the journal’s main theme.
Meanwhile, a blogpost quoting emails from anonymous MDPI employees describing a “toxic” work environment and constant “micromanagement” from China-based managers brought attention to the firm’s points-based system for editorial staff which, some believe, pushes editors to “prioritise quantity over quality”, Retraction Watch said.
Editors receive one performance point for every published manuscript they handle but only half a point for rejecting a paper, the website said, with those who hit a certain number of points given a monthly bonus. “Unethical practices and the publication of low-quality manuscripts for financial gain pose a significant threat to the academic community,” one anonymous employee was quoted as saying.
MDPI, which has grown rapidly – partly because of its rapid turnaround times and lower costs than legacy publishers – has also faced criticism over the use of alleged “citation circles” to boost its authors’ metrics.
“Our work found that MDPI has uniquely high-impact inflation, which indicates a lot of that journal impact factor is coming from self-citations, or from small rings of co-citing authors – so-called ‘citation cartels’,” explained Mark Hanson, a researcher at the University of Exeter, who has studied the publisher.
Asked about the analysis undertaken by ZB MED before signing off on its deal, Petra Labriga, its head of strategic licensing and acquisitions, said it had considered the percentage of journals by the Directory of Open Access Journals, the percentage with impact factors and the percentage of those listed on the Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions. Rejection and retraction rates, as well as membership of trade bodies, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics also played a role in its considerations, she said.
“In the case of MDPI, the number of existing partnerships (78) with academic institutions in the German market, prior to the consortium’s formation, has also been considered as an indicator of customer satisfaction with the publisher,” said Labriga.
“While we are aware of recent policy changes in other countries, we may not always have the comprehensive background information needed to fully assess these local decisions, such as Finland,” she added, stating that ZB MED’s analysis had included “discussions with information and science colleagues and in this specific case, evidence-based studies on journal quality and author/ editor satisfaction [which had] helped to form a decision in favour of MDPI”.
Labriga noted that German institutions had paid approximately €1.5 million (£1.27 million) in article processing charges to MDPI in 2023, making it their second-largest payment after Springer, which received about €2 million.
“To date, there has been no substantial evidence – only opinions and anecdotal examples – that would categorise MDPI as a publisher of insufficient quality. Every publisher portfolio includes a range of journals, some of higher quality than others,” she said.
“It is more productive to focus on the quality of individual articles rather than making blanket assessments of entire journals or publishers.”
A MDPI spokesman said the deal “marks a significant milestone in advancing open-access publishing in Germany”, noting that “MDPI already has existing agreements with other consortia in Europe, including SIKT in Sweden, KEMÖ in Austria, Jisc in the UK, CSAL in Switzerland, and Bibsam in Sweden”.
“Through this collaboration, MDPI and ZB MED aim to strengthen Germany’s contribution to global research by increasing the visibility of scientific output and promoting open access principles,” he added.
