浪花直播

• June 2020. Workshop leads to joint commitment, signed by an initial 12 publishers
• Feb 2021. Schema established for collection of gender data; work on developing schema for data collection methods for race and ethnicity is ongoing
• March 2021. Post-publication author name changes good practices devised, shared with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and National Information Standards Organization (NISO). Members of the joint commitment have since facilitated name changes for hundreds of authors
• May 2021. Workshop held to discuss making progress on tackling harmful historical content. Outputs shared with COPE working group
• May 2021. Facilitated collaborative conversations between Elsevier (owners of Editorial Manager) and ScholarOne about how to best incorporate diversity data collection into submission and peer review systems 
• June 2021. Number of publishers joined commitment reaches 40
• November 2021. Minimum standards on which to build launched
• January 2022. Number of publishers joined commitment reaches 50 
• April 2022. Standardised questions for self-reported diversity data collection launched
• July 2023. Steering committee launched

1. Ensure inclusion and diversity are integrated into publishing activities and strategic planning.
2. Work to understand the demographic diversity of authors, editorial decision makers and reviewers, such as gender, geography and ethnicity data.
3. Acknowledge the barriers within publishing which authors, editorial decision makers and reviewers from under-represented communities experience and take actions to address them.
4. Define and communicate the specific responsibilities authors, editorial decision makers, reviewers and staff members have towards inclusion and diversity.
5. Review and revise as appropriate the appointment process for editors and editorial boards to capture the widest talent pool possible.
6. Publicly report on progress on inclusion and diversity in scholarly publishing at least once a year. 

These minimum standards do not encompass human resource management. The detailed implementation of these standards will vary, and it is expected that every organisation taking part will adopt and implement these minimum standards in good faith. 

Organisations adopting these minimum standards are encouraged to make their commitment to these standards public. 

With which gender do you most identify? Please select one option:

• Woman
• Man
• Non-binary or gender diverse
• Self describe* [opens text box]
• Prefer not to disclose

What are your ethnic origins or ancestry?

Please select ALL the geographic areas from which your family鈥檚 ancestors first originated:

• Western Europe (e.g. Greece, Sweden, United Kingdom)
• Eastern Europe (e.g. Hungary, Poland, Russia)
• North Africa (e.g. Egypt, Morocco, Sudan)
• Sub-Saharan Africa (e.g. Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa)
• West Asia / Middle East (e.g. Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia,)
• South and Southeast Asia (e.g. India, Indonesia, Singapore)
• East and Central Asia (e.g. China, Japan, Uzbekistan)
• Pacific / Oceania (e.g. Australia, Papua New Guinea, Fiji)
• North America (Canada, United States)
• Central America and Caribbean (e.g. Jamaica, Mexico, Panama)
• South America (e.g. Brazil, Chile, Colombia)
• Self describe* [open text box]
• Prefer not to disclose

How would you identify yourself in terms of race?

Please select ALL the groups that apply to you:

• Asian or Pacific Islander
• Black
• Hispanic or Latino/a/x
• Indigenous (e.g. North American Indian Navajo, South American Indian Quechua, Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander)
• Middle Eastern or North African
• White
• Self describe* [open text box]
• Prefer not to disclose

*where system functionality does not permit the collection of free-text responses, the use of 鈥渙ther鈥� is an acceptable alternative to 鈥渟elf describe鈥�. Some publishers may also choose not to include a 鈥渟elf describe鈥� or 鈥渙ther鈥� option.

While the options above are recommended for collecting geographic ethnic origins data to best reflect individual identity and maximise responses, it may be necessary at the early stages of data reporting and/or for publishers working with a smaller number of researchers to report on the data in an aggregated form to drive diversity goals.

Aggregated groupings would be labelled: Europe (Western Europe, Eastern Europe), Africa and Middle East (North Africa, Sub-saharan Africa, West Asia/Middle East), Asia and Oceania (South and Southeast Asia, East and Central Asia, Pacific/Oceania), North America (North America), Latin America (Central America and Caribbean, South America).

In collecting sensitive demographic data, it is important to be explicit about why the data are being collected, how they will be used and who will have access. Below is an example statement to use in introducing the questions. Individual organisations can use this as it stands, or as a starting point to devise their own explanatory statement.

[Publisher] is deeply committed to fostering a scientific community that supports and benefits from the talents of researchers from a wide range of backgrounds. Please help us collect the data we need to gauge our success at advancing diversity, inclusion and equity in research by responding to the questions below. Important: individuals鈥� gender, ethnic, or racial identities will in no way be used when evaluating journal submissions; this data will be aggregated and anonymised before being analysed and reported in order to improve our policies and processes. For details about the storage of and access to these data, please see our [Privacy Policy and/or other public-facing info site].

The questions were developed by the Diversity Data Questions subgroup of the joint commitment group. All members of the subgroup were given space to share their insights and we also engaged with published research in this area. For the race and ethnicity question set, Elsevier engaged a subject matter expert, , who has expertise in racial and ethnic classification on censuses worldwide.

We tested a draft race and ethnicity question set via a survey (sent to 100,000 global active researchers), which we closed when >1% of recipients had responded (1,174 total responses). Respondents were asked about their race and ethnicity (along with other demographic questions). They were also asked about their perceptions of the representativeness of the options provided, and their comfort with sharing race and ethnicity demographic information when in the role of editorial board member vs. reviewer vs. author.  We used this incredibly valuable stakeholder feedback, alongside further expert input from Professor Morning, to revise the question set to the current version.

Inclusion and diversity in research ensures:

• entry of new researchers and opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to advance and excel throughout their careers.
• a wider range of topics and research questions will be pursued.
• rigorous, reproducible and higher-quality鈥痳esearch studies; and
• equitable and widespread impact of research outcomes to benefit all of society. Societal challenges of our time make it necessary for us to harness the inclusive contribution of diverse researchers to deliver equitable impact.

Diversity data enables us to define where problems such as bias lie in scholarly publishing, put in place actions, set goals and measure progress. Using a standardised set of questions to collect data puts us in the best position to create comparable (aggregated and anonymised) datasets between journals and publishers, set subject-specific baselines, and identify where action is most needed.

The joint commitment group鈥檚 intention is not to devise a single, objective or prescriptive 鈥渢ruth鈥� about researchers鈥� gender identity nor race and ethnicity, rather develop a set of options that resonate with stakeholders that we serve from around the globe such that they are willing to self-report data. By employing these constructs, we aim for a data-driven approach to inform our goals around diversity, inclusion and equity in scholarly communications and research more broadly. The level of aggregation and number of options these question sets offer to researchers is intended to parallel the scale of diversity publishers can practically accommodate, e.g., diversity on editorial boards, as reviewers, or as invited speakers for conferences. The questions will be periodically reviewed and updated as necessary.

Chair

Fiona Counsell, Head of Editorial Policy & Process, Taylor & Francis

Dr Fiona Counsell (she/her) has been with Taylor & Francis since 2009 and is currently Head of Editorial Policy & Process for the journals publishing programme. Her role leads on developing and implementing editorial and publishing policies in line with strategic priorities, which includes DEIA initiatives to support the research communities Taylor & Francis serves. Fiona was a founder member of Taylor & Francis' first Employee Resource Group Women in Publishing, formed in 2017, and is still part of the committee and currently serves on Taylor & Francis鈥� Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Council.

Co-chair

Joseph Krumpfer, Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Polymer Science, Wiley

Joseph Krumpfer received his B.S. degree in chemistry and B.A. in classical studies from Seton Hall University in South Orange, NJ in 2007 and then obtained his Ph.D. in polymer science and engineering from the University of Massachusetts 鈥� Amherst in 2012. He was awarded an Alexander von Humboldt postdoctoral fellowship at the Max Planck Institute for Polymer Research in Mainz, Germany, and then worked at Pace University in Pleasantville, NY, as a professor of inorganic and polymer chemistry. He is currently an editor-in-chief of the Journal of Polymer Science at Wiley.

Secretary

Sarah Whitehouse, Journals Manager, Peer Review and Ethics, 浪花直播

Dr Sarah Whitehouse (she/her) is Journals Manager, Peer Review and Ethics at the 浪花直播, where she is responsible for journals peer review strategy, publishing ethics strategy, quality and impact, and inclusion & diversity in publishing. Sarah has worked in STM publishing since 2014 in a range of operational and strategic roles. She holds an MBiochem from University of Bath and a PhD from University of Bristol.

Committee members

Vikki Davies, Production Portfolio Manager, Frontiers

Vikki Davies (she/her) is a Production Portfolio Manager at Frontiers, based in Oxfordshire. She has worked in the publishing industry since 2008, working at Taylor and Francis for 14 years and joining Frontiers in 2022. She has been involved with Employee Resource Groups since 2017, and has a keen interest in workplace gender equity, healthcare and gender, and parental rights. She is the current chair of the Gender Equity ERG at Frontiers.

Joanna Harries, Senior Publishing Editor, The Royal Society

Dr Joanna Harries (she/her) is a Senior Publishing Editor at the Royal Society, where she is responsible for peer review and development for the Society鈥檚 physical sciences journal Proceedings of the Royal Society A. She is also a member of the Society's Diversity and Inclusion Staff Steering Group. Joanna previously worked as an Assistant Editor on the Society of Chemical Industry journals. She holds a BSc in 浪花直播 from University of Bristol and a PhD from University of Bath.

Stephanie Hull, Content Acquisition Director, Emerald Publishing

Stephanie Hull (she/her) is Content Acquisition Director at Emerald Publishing where she is responsible for leading the commissioning teams across the books, journals and cases programmes. She has been involved in various initiatives related to measuring the diversity of Emerald鈥檚 authors, reviewers and editorial board members, and she was part of the team that implemented the Joint Commitment鈥檚 standardised questions into their manuscript submission system. Stephanie joined Emerald Publishing in 2010 after beginning her career at Pearson.

Rupa Sarkar, Editor-in-Chief, The Lancet Digital Health

Dr Rupa Sarkar is the founding Editor-in-Chief of The Lancet Digital Health. Appointed in November 2018, she has established the journal as the leading publication in artificial intelligence and digital health. Dr. Sarkar is a seasoned editor and scientist with extensive experience in leadership, communication, and strategy. She has a robust background in data analytics, stemming from her Ph.D. in embryonic stem cell development from Imperial College London and postdoctoral research at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Prior to her current role, Dr. Sarkar served as Chief Editor of Nature Protocols. Dr. Sarkar is committed to diversity and inclusion, serving as the Engagement Director of Elsevier鈥檚 Inclusion and Diversity board and leading initiatives at The Lancet as a founding member of The Lancet鈥檚 Race and Ethnicity Equity group. She has delivered seminars in over 30 conferences globally and is a recognised expert in AI, medicine and scientific publishing, interviewed by media outlets such as BBC News.