中国科技期刊研究 ›› 2016, Vol. 27 ›› Issue (9): 933-937.doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201603170213

• 论坛 • 上一篇    下一篇

编营分离出版模式的评价与分析

李航1),张宏2)   

  1. 1)哈尔滨金融学院学报编辑部,哈尔滨香坊区电碳路65号 150030
    2) 《哈尔滨工业大学学报》编辑部,哈尔滨南岗区西大直街92号 150001
  • 收稿日期:2016-03-17 修回日期:2016-07-27 出版日期:2016-09-15 发布日期:2016-09-15
  • 作者简介:李 航(ORCID:0000-0003-2102-9913),硕士,编辑,E-mail: wannianhong@163.com;|张 宏,硕士,编辑。

Evaluation and analysis of themode of separation publication

LI Hang1),ZHANG Hong2)   

  1. 1) Editorial Office of Harbin Finance University, Diantan Road 65, Xiangfang District, Harbin 150030, China
    2) Editorial Office of Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology, Xidazhi Street92, Nangang District, Harbin 150001, China
  • Received:2016-03-17 Revised:2016-07-27 Online:2016-09-15 Published:2016-09-15

摘要:

目的】在全面分析编营分离出版模式利与弊的基础上,为学术期刊产业化发展方向提出了一些建议和思考。【方法】采用文献分析和案例分析相结合的方法,对编营分离概念的提出、特征属性及现状进行了深入研究。【结果】编营分离在理论上解决了科技期刊的属性之争,但在实践中并没有解决这一矛盾,反而造成了编辑权的分解,同时加剧了产业垄断,造成了学术交流信息不畅。【结论】现阶段,我国科技期刊采用编营分离模式发展产业化,要全面分析其利弊,并完善适合国情的多元化出版模式。

关键词: 编营分离, 出版模式, 体制改革

Abstract:

[Purposes]Based on the comprehensive analysis of the advantage and disadvantage of the editing-management separation publication method,several suggestions are proposed for the industrialization development of academ ic journals.[Methods]The literature analysis and the case study were adopted in this paper, by which the conception, attribute and status of editing-management separation were thoroughly studied.[Findings]Though the editing-management separation settles the dispution of the attribute of sci-tech periodicals in theory, it isn'teffective in practice, and even leads to editing power decentralization, exacerbates the industry monopoly and result in information blockade for academ ic exchange.[Conclusions]At this stage,when the industrialization of sictech periodicals in China is carried out by using the editing-management separation publication model,the advantage and disadvantage should be analyzed,and the diversified publishing model should be improved to suit China's condition.

Key words: Editing-management separation, Publication model, Structural reform