Don't Let Public Funds Buy Prestige: Address Academia's 'Academic Bubble'

Taiwan's higher education sector is grappling with a phenomenon described as an "academic bubble," where the pursuit of prestige through rapid publication in high-fee open-access journals overshadows genuine scholarly rigor. The issue has gained prominence following recent impeachments of university professors by the Control Yuan, highlighting ethical concerns within academia.

Scholars are increasingly drawn to publishing in special issues of open-access journals with high Article Processing Charges (APC), often boasting about achieving multiple Q1 or Q2 rankings in short periods. While open access and high APCs are not inherently problematic, concerns arise when rapid review processes, frequent special issue submissions, and unclear relationships between editors and authors transform academic publishing from knowledge accumulation into performance packaging.

This trend is particularly worrying as the associated costs are frequently covered by public funds from the National Science Council or university subsidies. The article argues that taxpayers may find it unacceptable if public money is primarily used to facilitate professors' promotions, project performance metrics, or social media accolades, rather than contributing to substantive research. The responsibility of a professor extends beyond mere publication numbers; it includes serving as a role model for students through rigorous research, honest guidance, and ethical conduct.

Some universities have begun creating alert lists for controversial journals and rapid review processes as a form of self-regulation. However, the article suggests that such individual efforts are insufficient to alter the systemic incentives. The National Science Council and Ministry of Education are urged not to impose rigid journal blacklists that could stifle academic freedom, but rather to manage the flow of public funds more effectively.

Recommendations include requiring disclosure of APC expenditures, journal names, special issue details, and review times for funded projects. Furthermore, when evaluating applications for promotion or projects involving high APCs or unusually fast acceptance rates, applicants should be required to demonstrate substantial academic contributions beyond just Q1 or Q2 labels. Individuals who consistently publish in highly controversial journals using public funds should face closer scrutiny in future funding applications. The piece concludes that academic freedom should not shield the misuse of public funds, nor should open access become a shortcut for performance metrics. Taiwan's international academic respect hinges on genuine, honest research with public value, not on inflated publication numbers.