Towards a Corporate Governance system for journals

In the previous post, I suggested the idea of ​​using the corporate governance model but for academic journals and research, a kind of Journal Governance system, aligning journal practices with each other and with the scientific environment in which they operate, which would lead the academic publishing industry towards a Corporate Governance system for journals.

In corporate governance there are two leading models: that of the Shareholders (in our case the journal would seek wealth maximization), monitored by the market, that is, their readers, paper rejections ratios, subscriptions, indexation in high ranked indexes, publication prestige, etc.; and that of the Stakeholders, having into account a dense network of journal collaborations; but the trend is to use a mixed model, in which the publishing world could have the following key Journal Governance Variables.

The internal forces, those directly responsible for determining both the strategic direction and the execution of the journal’s future:

1. The journal owner (publishing company, faculty/university, scientists): Maximization of the journal value.
2. The editorial board: Transparency and international approach.
3. The editors (Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor):  Independence and loyalty.
4. The peer-reviewers: Knowledge and ethics.

The external forces, those interested in the journals behavior and success:

1. Readers, looking for quality, innovation and rigor of published research.
2. Authors, seeking the prestige of the journal.
3. Funding institutions, in need of project validation.
4. Universities and faculties.
5. Databases and indexes.
6. Accreditation agencies of professors.
7. The regulation of each country on education and teaching.

Many of these forces are currently existing, but in a weak way and not incorporated or regulated by a comprehensive model, for example forcing journals to publish a sort of Journal  Governance Annual Report, among other practices, which would be compelling as other quality practices, such as peer-review or independence of the academic board.

Anyway I’m not naive, I know that this hypothetical system of Journal Governance wouldn’t be infallible either, but would be the best we could come to have in the medium term, don’t you think so?