MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

INTERNATIONAL MODELS OF PUBLISHING REGULATION

2025· article· W7119050413 on OpenAlex
Iryna SHYROKOVA

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity science · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicScientific Research and Philosophical Inquiry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingContext (archaeology)AutonomyUkrainianGlobalizationProcess (computing)State (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of globalization and digital transformation, the regulation of the publishing industry is becoming increasingly relevant, as only balanced state, institutional, and professional approaches can ensure the sustainable development of the book sector. The Ukrainian model of publishing regulation is still in the process of formation, and studying international experiences is a necessary step toward adapting effective practices to the national context. This article aims to analyze publishing regulation models in countries such as Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Poland, and Australia, with a focus on institutional mechanisms, legal frameworks, forms of financial support, and the role of professional associations. It demonstrates that several typical models exist-interventionist, corporatist, liberal-regulated, federal, and transitional-which differ in the degree of state involvement, the level of autonomy of the professional community, and the motivation systems for preserving cultural diversity in publishing. The purpose of the research is to systematize global regulatory models of the publishing industry and identify elements that may be relevant for implementation in Ukraine. The article examines contemporary theoretical and methodological approaches to regulation in the creative industries, with a particular emphasis on publishing. It outlines key models of state intervention and self-regulation based on the examples of France, Germany, the UK, Canada, Poland, and Australia. Legal, economic, and institutional tools used to support the publishing sector are analyzed, and practices relevant to the Ukrainian context are highlighted to strengthen cultural policy effectiveness in the book sector. The methodological framework is based on comparative analysis using general scientific methods of systematization, generalization, and content analysis of legal acts, reports, and analytical materials from professional organizations. The scientific novelty lies in the attempt to typologize publishing regulation models in the global context and outline ways to integrate best practices into the Ukrainian book market system. The study concludes that successful models are characterized not only by stable legal frameworks but also by ongoing cross-sectoral co- operation-between the state, professional associations, educational institutions, and international donors. Adapting elements of these models to Ukraine may enhance the efficiency of the publishing industry, ensure its sustainable development, and strengthen its cultural mission.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.014
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it