When good incentives create bad markets: Protecting research integrity in faculty reclassification
The revised DBM–CHED Joint Circular on faculty reclassification marks an important milestone in Philippine higher education. By assigning substantial weight to publications in internationally indexed journals and citations in Scopus and Web of Science, the policy affirms that research is no longer peripheral to academic life—it is central to the mission of the university.
This is a welcome development.
Universities exist not only to transmit knowledge but also to create it. Faculty members who undertake rigorous research, publish in reputable journals, and contribute to the global body of knowledge deserve recognition. The Circular appropriately raises the standards of scholarship by recognizing only publications in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Scopus or Web of Science, while continuing to recognize journals indexed in the ASEAN Citation Index (ACI) only for publications up to its discontinuation in 2024. Compared with earlier promotion guidelines that recognized a wider range of scholarly journals, the revised framework substantially narrows the pool of publications eligible for promotion. This change undoubtedly strengthens quality assurance by encouraging faculty members to publish in internationally recognized journals. At the same time, however, it also increases the institutional value of these journals. As promotion becomes more closely tied to publications in a limited number of indexed outlets, access to those outlets inevitably becomes more valuable—and with greater value comes stronger incentives for commercialization.
Yet every policy that creates incentives also creates new behaviors.
The success of a policy should therefore not be judged solely by whether its objectives are desirable, but also by whether it unintentionally produces consequences beyond those originally intended.
This is where the conversation on faculty reclassification must continue.
The Joint Circular has undoubtedly increased the value of scholarly publications in academic promotion. Consequently, it has also increased the value of everything associated with obtaining those publications.
Publications have become institutional currency.
Like any valuable currency, they create markets.
One consequence that deserves greater attention is the growing financial burden now placed on faculty members themselves. Publishing in reputable international journals often requires article processing charges (APCs), particularly in open-access journals. These fees are legitimate and support peer review, editorial management, and the dissemination of research. However, in many Philippine higher education institutions, publication support remains limited or inconsistent. As a result, many faculty members shoulder these costs from their own resources simply to produce the research outputs expected for promotion.
The implication is significant.
Promotion increasingly requires not only intellectual merit but also financial investment.
For many early-career academics, contractual faculty members, and researchers from institutions with limited research funding, publishing internationally has become an expensive undertaking. It is no longer sufficient to conduct good research. One must also have the financial means to bring that research to publication.
This is not merely a question of affordability.
It is a question of equity.
A promotion system that rewards internationally indexed publications without ensuring equitable institutional support risks disadvantaging capable researchers whose primary limitation is not scientific ability but financial capacity. Academic excellence should never become contingent upon one's ability to finance publication.
At the same time, rising demand for recognized publications inevitably creates opportunities for commercialization.
Around the world, the scholarly publishing ecosystem has witnessed the proliferation of paper mills, publication brokers, ghostwriting services, fabricated peer-review schemes, citation cartels, and purchased authorship arrangements. These enterprises did not emerge because researchers suddenly abandoned ethical principles. They emerged because publications became increasingly valuable as academic credentials.
The Philippine research community is not immune to these pressures.
The stronger the incentive to publish, the greater the demand for services that promise to make publication easier, faster, or more certain. Legitimate editorial assistance and language editing coexist with far more troubling practices—offers of guaranteed publication, purchased co-authorship, manuscript fabrication, or publication slots exchanged for financial payment.
What begins as an incentive for research productivity can gradually become a marketplace for academic advancement.
This broader commercialization may also help explain another emerging phenomenon that has received little attention: the increasing interest in acquiring established scholarly journals. As editor of a university-published journal, I have, on several occasions, received unsolicited offers from organizations expressing interest in purchasing the journal, despite its non-profit nature and modest operating model. At first, these proposals seemed difficult to understand. Viewed in the context of a research ecosystem where internationally indexed publications increasingly determine promotion and professional advancement, however, the interest becomes less surprising. The value of a journal today lies not only in its publishing operations but also in its position within an academic system that rewards the publications it produces.
The value of an indexed journal today extends beyond subscription revenue or article processing charges. Its greatest value lies in its position within the research ecosystem. Journals determine what enters the scholarly record and what subsequently qualifies for promotion, institutional incentives, research awards, and professional recognition.
In other words, journals have become strategic assets because they sit at the gateway of academic credentials.
To be clear, journal acquisitions are not inherently unethical. Around the world, reputable publishers routinely acquire journals to improve editorial management, expand dissemination, and ensure long-term sustainability. Ownership itself is not the concern.
The concern arises when journals are valued less for the integrity of the science they publish and more for the academic incentives they control.
The integrity of Philippine science depends not only on rigorous promotion standards but also on protecting the systems that support those standards.
The Joint Circular has successfully elevated expectations for research productivity. The next challenge is ensuring that the research ecosystem evolves alongside these expectations.
This requires moving beyond publication metrics toward responsible research assessment.
For the Commission on Higher Education, this means complementing publication-based promotion criteria with a national framework on research integrity. Universities should be encouraged—or required—to establish institutional programs on publication ethics, responsible authorship, and responsible research assessment. Research Integrity Offices should become as integral to universities as Research Offices themselves.
Universities likewise have an obligation to reduce the financial barriers to ethical publishing. Faculty members should not be compelled to finance legitimate publication costs from their own pockets simply to remain competitive for promotion. Institutional publication funds, competitive APC assistance, stronger support for university-based journals, and mentoring for early-career researchers should become integral components of faculty development rather than optional privileges available only to a few.
Research institutions must also strengthen support for scholarly journals. University journals, particularly those operating on a non-profit basis, are part of the country's research infrastructure. They should be protected as institutions that safeguard scientific quality rather than viewed merely as publication outlets that satisfy promotion requirements.
Ultimately, the purpose of faculty reclassification is not simply to produce more papers.
It is to strengthen Philippine science.
That objective cannot be achieved by publication metrics alone.
Science advances because society trusts that published research represents genuine intellectual contribution, rigorous peer review, and honest scholarship. If the incentives surrounding publication become increasingly commercialized without corresponding investments in research integrity, financial support, and ethical oversight, the country may produce more publications while inadvertently weakening the credibility of the research enterprise itself.
The CHED–DBM Joint Circular has taken an important step toward recognizing research excellence. It should now be matched by an equally ambitious commitment from CHED, universities, and research institutions to protect the integrity of the system it has helped create.
The future of Philippine science will not be determined merely by how many papers our universities publish.
It will be determined by whether those papers continue to be produced through a system that rewards excellence, protects integrity, and ensures that scholarly achievement is earned through discovery—not purchased through opportunity.
---
Angelo Mark Walag ([email protected]) is a professor at the University of Science and Technology of Southern Philippines. Jovito C. Anito Jr. is an associate professor at Jose Rizal Memorial State University. Jayson L. de Vera is an associate professor at the Faculty of Science, Technology, and Mathematics of the Philippine Normal University (PNU). Arlyne C. Marasigan is a professor at the College of Advanced Studies and the Educational Policy Research and Development Office of PNU. The views expressed herein are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official positions of the institutions with which they are affiliated.
- Latest
