Scholarly Publishing Round-up: Funding Shifts, Editorial Insights, And The Communication Imperative

ESRC’s new applicant-led pilots

This Research Professional News update explores the Economic and Social Research Council’s (ESRC’s) plan to pilot two new applicant-led funding schemes in the UK, React and Connect, beginning in April 2026. React will support time-critical, impact-focused research with a streamlined review process designed to move quickly from decision to project start. Connect, by contrast, will fund exploratory, high-risk ideas aimed squarely at knowledge creation. The separation is intentional. Rather than requiring proposals to deliver both immediate impact and long-term discovery, the ESRC is testing a more specialized approach. Existing applicant-led schemes will remain open, and the overall budget for applicant-led research is set to rise in the coming years. The Connect pilot will also use distributed peer review, where applicants review one another’s proposals, a model intended to reduce burden and increase fairness. The announcement reflects a broader shift in how UK funders are thinking about agility, specialization, and peer review reform. Read the full article here.

A conversation with a journal editor

Christina Gessler’s Academic Life newsletter features an interview with Paulina Strzyz, Deputy Editor at Advanced Science. Strzyz shares a first-hand account of what happens on the other side of the editorial desk. Strzyz describes editing as grounded and demanding work. Editors read deeply, weigh evidence carefully, and make difficult decisions under time pressure.  The interview also offers practical insight for authors. Strong manuscripts clearly state the research question, provide context, and build a logical narrative toward their conclusions. Perfect grammar matters less than clarity of thought and structure. Strzyz emphasizes that writing is not an afterthought. It is central to publication success. For those considering editorial careers, she notes that there is no formal training path. Editors learn on the job, drawing on scientific breadth, judgment, and resilience. This interview humanizes editorial work and reminds us that behind every decision is careful reading and real professional care. Read the full article here.

Why science communication is becoming a strategic priority for publishers

In their guest post in The Scholarly Kitchen, Ashutosh Ghildiyal, Gareth Dyke, and Maria Machado argue that science communication must become the next competitive edge for scholarly publishers. Simply publishing research is no longer enough. In an environment saturated with information and misinformation, communication determines whether research will have impact or fade into obscurity. The authors outline a vision in which the journal article is the centerpiece of a broader communication ecosystem that includes plain-language summaries, podcasts, video explainers, policy briefs, and interactive tools. These formats are not framed as optional outreach, but as strategic infrastructure that can expand reach, strengthen trust, and open new revenue streams. The authors also suggest that publishers can position themselves as knowledge brokers, supporting evidence-based decision making through synthesis services, professional guidance tools, and partnerships with institutions and policymakers. The article also challenges publishers to treat communication with the same seriousness as peer review. Scientific excellence without communication excellence, they argue, is no longer sufficient for sustainable success. Read the full article here.

If you’ve come across a piece lately that sparked reflection or raised important questions, feel free to share it with the ReviewerOne community.