Finland’s Publication Forum (JUFO) has decided to downgrade 271 journals published by Frontiers and MDPI to the lowest quality rating, effective in 2025. This announcement has sparked widespread debate in the academic world, with both publishers and researchers voicing concerns about its impact on open-access publishing and academic research.
What is JUFO and Why Does It Matter?
JUFO is a system used in Finland to rate academic journals and publications. It ranks journals from level 0 to level 3, with higher levels indicating better quality and more weight in funding decisions for Finnish universities. A “level 0” rating, which the downgraded journals will receive, equates these publications with non-peer-reviewed content, reducing their academic value.
This downgrade could discourage researchers from publishing in these journals, as it may affect how their work is viewed by peers and how their universities receive funding.
Why Were These Journals Downgraded?
JUFO explained that its decision was based on concerns over the quality of publications from Frontiers and MDPI. These publishers use an open-access model where authors pay an Article Processing Charge (APC) to publish their work. JUFO has criticized this model for prioritizing the number of publications over the quality of editorial work and peer review.
In a statement, JUFO described these journals as “grey area journals” and noted the rapid rise in APC-based publications as a key concern. They worry this trend might increase costs for researchers and universities while sacrificing the thorough quality checks needed for reliable scientific work.
Immediate Impact of the Decision
This decision directly affects 193 MDPI journals and 78 Frontiers journals. JUFO has categorized these publications as level 0, meaning they will no longer be seen as credible academic sources in Finland’s quality rating system.
For researchers, this could mean rethinking where to publish their work. Journals rated at level 0 do not carry the same weight as higher-rated ones in academic evaluations, and publishing in them might impact a researcher’s reputation or funding opportunities.
Universities in Finland, which rely on JUFO’s ratings for government funding, may also be less inclined to support or encourage publications in these journals.
Reactions from MDPI and Frontiers
Both MDPI and Frontiers have strongly opposed JUFO’s decision.
Giulia Stefenelli, MDPI’s scientific communications lead, expressed her disappointment, saying the downgrade seems to be a blanket judgment rather than an objective assessment of individual journals. She called the process unclear and said it does not reflect the true quality of MDPI’s work.
Shirley Dent, Frontiers’ head of public relations, echoed similar concerns. She described the move as unfair and arbitrary, pointing out that JUFO did not provide any solid evidence for the downgrade. Dent stated that all Frontiers journals meet JUFO’s criteria for level 1 but were still downgraded.
Both publishers argue that the decision appears to target their open-access model rather than being a fair evaluation of their journals’ quality.
Why This Matters for Open-Access Publishing
Open-access publishing has grown rapidly in recent years, with many researchers favoring it because it makes academic work freely available to everyone. However, it also comes with challenges, including questions about quality control and the cost of publishing.
Frontiers and MDPI are among the largest open-access publishers, and JUFO’s decision could set a precedent for other countries or institutions to follow. Critics of the downgrade worry it may discourage innovation in open-access publishing and limit researchers’ ability to share their work widely.
Finnish Researchers React
The reaction among Finnish researchers has been mixed. Some support JUFO’s decision, arguing that academic quality must remain a top priority. “Open-access publishing is important, but it should not come at the expense of rigorous peer review,” said Dr. Elina Virtanen, a senior researcher based in Helsinki.
Others are concerned about the potential negative effects on open-access publishing. “This decision could make it harder for researchers to choose affordable and accessible options for publishing their work,” said another researcher who asked to remain anonymous.
Latest Updates and Future Developments
JUFO released the full list of affected journals on December 16, 2024, along with an explanation of its reasoning. It stated that the downgrade was based on feedback from expert panels and concerns raised by the academic community. However, it also kept 16 MDPI journals and 22 Frontiers journals at level 1, indicating that not all of their publications were judged to be problematic.
Both Frontiers and MDPI have announced plans to challenge the decision and seek greater transparency in JUFO’s evaluation process. They argue that open-access models should be judged on their quality and value, not their funding structure.
JUFO has shown no signs of reconsidering its decision, emphasizing that it aims to encourage Finnish researchers to publish in high-quality journals.
What Happens Next?
This development has added to the ongoing debate about open-access publishing and its role in the academic world. While the decision may encourage stricter quality control, it also raises questions about fairness and the future of open-access models.
As researchers and publishers wait to see if JUFO’s decision will influence other countries or institutions, the academic community continues to grapple with balancing accessibility, cost, and quality in scientific publishing.
For now, the spotlight remains on Finland and its bold stance against two of the biggest names in open-access publishing. Further updates are expected as this story unfolds.
1 thought on “Breaking News: Finland to Downgrade 271 Frontiers and MDPI Journals in Quality Rating”