The first five years of FACETS: Canada’s multidisciplinary open access academy journal

Multidisciplinary perspectives in science are needed to help address the challenges of the twenty-first century, be it health, energy, environment, technology, societal change, or others. To give one example, conservation science combines fields as broad as biology, ecology, geography, public policy, economics, philosophy, sociology, and communications (Dick et al. 2016), and conservation goals can only be achieved when these perspectives are combined. The world’s future challenges will largely be framed in both natural and socioeconomic dimensions, requiring a convergence of expertise. FACETS is positioned to shine a spotlight on Canadian issues and perspectives in ways unmatched by any other journal. Options are limited for publishing perspectives on research issues such as the impact of Tri-Council decisions on research in Canada, the influence of Canada’s Species at Risk Act or its Fisheries Act on species conservation in Canada, the emergence of community-based research in Canada, or even the impact of a global pandemic from a Canadian science and societal perspective, to give only a few examples. The multidisciplinary nature of FACETS provides a means to bring these discussions to light with the help of its Editorial Board members, many of whom incorporate multi- and interdisciplinary perspectives in their own research.

We have sought to position FACETS as part of the global transition to open access academic publishing. The world is currently experiencing a seismic shift in the way research is communicated and we wanted our new journal to be part of that transition. In this “Age of the Internet”, online communication is still a relatively new reality. Only two decades ago, research publications were still printed on paper and hand delivered to libraries and mailboxes, making research a largely exclusive enterprise. Researchers could only access diverse academic research publications if they had an affiliation to a university or research institute, and most of society was excluded from the research enterprise. The world has changed considerably since then.

The emergence of online journals, combined with the rise of open access, is expanding the reach, influence, and relevance of research to the world. For example, a recent FACETS article reported that peer-reviewed scientific journals are the most trusted source of scientific information by all members of society, from the public, to policy members, and scientists alike (Wilson et al. 2016). However, due to restricted access, typically from paywalls imposed by publishers, academic journals are still among the sources least used by society, save for those who work in universities, hospitals, museums, and research institutes (Wilson et al. 2016). This situation is even worse in poorer countries where even top institutes have limited access to academic journals. The push to bring open access to peer-reviewed journals is about creating broader access to the most trusted sources of information. Open access also has the potential to improve scientific literacy at a time when it is sorely needed in society.

Moreover, a peer-reviewed open access journal like FACETS makes articles not only accessible to all potential readers but also searchable because its articles are indexed in freely available public databases like Google Scholar. Articles in FACETS are thus easily discoverable and accessible by anyone online, avoiding the tedious and frustrating practice of searching through repositories or being stopped by paywalls.

However, open access journals are still a contentious and complex topic because many of these journals rely on article processing charges (APCs) to cover basic operating costs and APCs can be cumbersome to researchers. Most governments and granting councils currently do not have a coherent strategy for supporting open access publishing by their researchers. CSP currently offsets FACETS’ operating costs by charging APCs, but FACETS’ APC costs are among the lowest by industry standards, and CSP offers APC waivers to researchers from Research4Life member countries. Notably, CSP is actively looking for a sustainable business model that will reduce the financial burden on researchers by partnering with academic libraries who are interested in supporting open access publishing. Open access publishing is still a work in progress, and we haven’t overcome all challenges, but the benefits are evident as we progress to a more equitable and inclusive society. The global movement to open access academic publishing must continue.

FACETS has also used special collections to bring together broad multidisciplinary perspectives on a range of topics. For example, a collection titled “Social Dimensions of Rural African Agriculture, Food and Development” addresses the question of how smallholder farms in sub-Saharan Africa are increasing their food security using formal seed systems, improved breeding strategies for dairy farmers, and strategies to improve agricultural yield. Another collection titled “Ranavirus research: 10 years of global collaboration” compiled the findings of the Global Ranavirus Consortium, an organization that documented the rise and impact of pathogens that affect fish and amphibian populations, contributing to economic effects on aquaculture and the global amphibian decline. A collection with a Canadian focus is “Conservation in Canada: Identifying and overcoming barriers”, which examines political barriers to conservation in Canada. Themes explored include the effectiveness of Canada’s conservation areas in protecting species and Indigenous governance and knowledge systems. Collections currently under development include “Ărramăt, the intersections of biodiversity conservation and Indigenous health and well-being” and “Food, Fiber, Fuel, and Function: Pathways to manage ecosystem services in Canada’s working landscape”. These special collections highlight some of the breadth of participation in our new journal.

FACETS supports the rise of community-based and Indigenous participatory research and acknowledges that Indigenous knowledge has too often been ignored in the natural sciences (Wong et al. 2020). Indigenous Peoples and their cultures have typically been the subjects and objects of study, rather than its participants (Castleden et al. 2010). Research councils and researchers alike have long recognized the importance of knowledge sharing and partnerships with Indigenous communities, but they are now taking more concrete actions. Meaningful partnerships will only result from inclusive behaviours, and FACETS, along with its publisher CSP, is in a unique position to embrace Indigenous participation in ways rarely seen in other scientific journals. One example of a concrete action taken by FACETS has been to explore new approaches to authorship to honour Indigenous traditions. In one special instance, we allowed the inclusion of an Indigenous collective as an author in a FACETS article (Germida et al. 2021). Although this contravened CSP’s current authorship policy, we continue to look for ways to adapt our authorship policies to a more inclusive landscape.

A series of articles in FACETS addresses the development of better ways to establish meaningful dialogues and partnerships between Indigenous Peoples and non-Indigenous researchers. For example, Schang et al. (2020) highlighted how ecological research is often disconnected from Indigenous cultures and traditions. They surveyed 159 research articles on terrestrial ecosystems and found that only 11 of those studies included acknowledgement of Indigenous stewardship, acknowledged Indigenous Territories, or named the Indigenous group on whose Territory the work was conducted. To help address these concerns, and following the format of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that proposed 94 Calls to Action to realign the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities in Canada, Wong et al. (2020) proposed 10 additional Calls to Action for natural scientists working on Indigenous lands. These included calls for natural scientists to understand the socio-political landscape of their research sites and to seek meaningful relationships and collaborations with Indigenous communities when conducting research on Indigenous Territory. These measures can serve to shift the power dynamic and enable more meaningful knowledge sharing between Indigenous communities and their Treaty partners. Other benefits of meaningful collaborative research between Indigenous communities and scientists include improved communication, building trust and capacity, and considering how Indigenous knowledge can work in parallel with other knowledge systems (MacMillan et al. 2019). It only makes sense that these issues would come to light in a journal like FACETS, one uniquely connected to the research landscape in Canada and sensitive to the needs of its diverse residents.