Reaffirming trust and integrity in research: a community conversation

Library and publishing organisations highlight “loss of public trust in the essential role of American research and scholarship”

In a time marked by unprecedented challenges to the research enterprise, including funding cuts and attacks on academic institutions, a group of library and publishing organisations issued a joint statement reaffirming their commitment to trust and integrity in research. This statement, a collaborative effort across different corners of the research world, aimed to highlight a deeper crisis: the loss of public trust in the essential role of American research and scholarship.

To delve deeper into the impact of this statement and the next steps, Research Information interviewed key stakeholders involved in its creation and dissemination: Andrew K. Pace, Executive Director, Association of Research Libraries (ARL); Caroline Sutton, CEO, International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM); Teresa Anderson, Executive Director, Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL); Melanie Dolechek, Executive Director, Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP); and Peter Berkery, Executive Director; Association of University Presses (AUPresses).

Could you briefly reiterate the core message of the initial statement?

Andrew Pace (ARL): “The core message was simple: the research community is facing a moment where the structures that hold the ecosystem together are under pressure, and we can’t afford to face that quietly or alone. It was a call to stand together, acknowledging that while we may not agree on every issue, protecting the conditions that make research possible is in everyone’s interest.”

What prompted this unified action from libraries and publishers, who sometimes have differing perspectives?

Caroline Sutton (STM): “Despite our different perspectives, we recognised a shared concern for the foundations of scholarship. This statement reflects a shared belief in the importance of access, continuity, and trust in the scholarly process. We will likely continue to have thoughtful debates about pricing and access, but this moment called for a different kind of conversation.

“This statement isn’t about business models. It’s about the broader conditions – like trust, transparency, and public investment – that enable any model to succeed.”

How has the statement been received by the community?

Melanie Dolechek (SSP): “The reception has been largely positive, with many expressing appreciation for the strong, clear stance taken. A common sentiment was that the framing avoids partisan rhetoric and focuses on what is needed, which many found valuable.

“However, some felt the statement didn’t go far enough. There were calls for bolder, unified action. Some emphasised the urgency of the situation, describing it as bleak and stressing the need to articulate the value of what we do and find ways to get through this difficult period together. Some comments reflected deep concern about specific issues, such as the impact of restrictions on research topics.”

Following the statement, what kind of follow-up actions are being planned?

Teresa Anderson (ACRL): “Several avenues are being explored. The feedback indicated that providing resources or tools that help institutions communicate the value of research infrastructure is the most important priority for our communities. There is also some interest in sector-specific messaging tailored for internal use, and cross-sector convenings or discussion series.”

Are there specific groups or sectors that you believe should be included in future efforts?

Peter Berkery (AUPresses): “Absolutely. Producing a joint statement like this takes time – and trust. In the scholarly community, diversity of thought is a hallmark. People choose their words carefully – especially when collaborating across sectors.

“This collaboration reflects one conversation that led to shared language. We hope it opens the door to further engagement, not defines its limits. Potential allies we hope to engage are researchers, universities, and other learned societies and associations.” 

What are some of the challenges you anticipate in moving forward?

Andrew Pace: “One challenge will be translating the broad support for the statement into concrete actions. Ensuring that diverse voices are heard and that the follow-up efforts are genuinely collaborative will also be crucial.”

Caroline Sutton: “Another challenge is the need to communicate effectively with the lay public. Some feedback suggested that we need to focus on storytelling and messaging to combat misinformation and restore trust in science and scientists, rather than solely addressing those who already support us.”

Finally, what is your message to the research community as you move forward with this initiative?

Melanie Dolechek: “It’s crucial to recognise that this isn’t business as usual. We need strong and united leadership focused on clearly communicating the value of research and researchers to people across the whole of society, everywhere in the world.”

Teresa Anderson: “We must also listen to what the public tells us and ensure they are well informed. Appreciation for upholding the principles of research trust and integrity!”

Peter Berkery: “Working together is better than working alone. Our shared concern is not based solely on this rededication to trust and integrity in the research process. It is born of genuine concern for and commitment to public health, economic prosperity, civic engagement, equity of access to information, and ensuring the value of public good. Future generations depend on our actions today, that’s why we must stand together to uphold trust and integrity in the research enterprise.”

The group says the joint statement on trust and integrity in research “marks just the beginning of a larger conversation and concerted action” – and that, as the research community moves forward, the emphasis will be on translating shared values into tangible outcomes.

It concludes: “By addressing concerns, fostering collaboration, and prioritising clear communication, the stakeholders hope to rebuild public trust and ensure the vitality of the research enterprise for generations to come. The commitment to future action, advocacy, and collaborative efforts underscores the long-term vision of this initiative.”

If you’d like to provide feedback or express interest in the ongoing work of this group, please use this form.

Do you want to read more content like this? SUBSCRIBE to the Research Information Newsline!