How to start an academic journal: a practical launch roadmap

Build an accountable publishing workflow before opening a call for papers. A new journal needs a defined scholarly purpose, an identifiable publisher and a team able to manage submissions through publication and later corrections. Its website and identifiers support that work. The DOAJ/OASPA setup checklist provides a practical starting framework.

This guide is for academic teams, institutions and publishers preparing a new peer-reviewed journal. The working suggestions below are not a universal licensing or application checklist. Türkiye-specific administrative requirements are labelled separately; they should not be transferred to another country or platform.

Separate establishment, hosting and indexing

The ISSN International Centre explains identification rather than a guarantee of content quality. Crossref describes registering and maintaining metadata. TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM explicitly describes DergiPark as a hosting and editorial-management service, not an index. These are different functions.

1. Define the need, scope and name

Write a short case for the journal: which publishing need will it address, who will read and submit to it, and can the proposed team sustain relevant peer review? Treat these as planning questions. Creating additional space for papers is not, by itself, a clear scholarly remit.

State the subject area, intended audience, accepted article types, publication languages and principal exclusions on the aims-and-scope page. For example, a tourism journal could define a particular research problem, methodological interest or regional focus instead of accepting everything labelled tourism. This is an editorial example, not a requirement to specialise in one particular way. Scope, aims and focus.

Before settling on a title, check the ISSN Portal and search for similarly named journals. Choose a distinctive, durable name and plan a consistent domain and abbreviation. Do not imply an affiliation that does not exist. Choosing a journal title. Consult the ISSN authority when a subsequent title change raises a new-ISSN question; do not assume that every small wording change has the same consequence.

2. Put the publisher and decision authority in writing

Identify the publisher, the institution or structure on whose behalf the journal will operate, and who will supply resources. For an institutional journal, obtain its internal approvals through that institution’s own procedures. Keep those decisions distinct from a platform’s admission requirements.

Assign responsibility for editorial decisions, subject editing, coordination, copyediting, layout, technical maintenance and metadata. A small team may combine roles, but each task still needs an accountable person and cover for absences. Agree expected contributions and terms of service with board members before listing them. Editorial roles and responsibilities.

Document how editorial acceptance and rejection remain independent of publisher, sponsor and payment interests. Establish a separate handling route for an editor’s own submission, a close collaborator’s paper and appeals against decisions. The fifth edition of the joint transparency principles, published 29 October 2026 addresses independence and conflicts; CSE’s editor-responsibility guidance also discusses a written definition of editorial autonomy. These are professional governance frameworks, not evidence that a named journal already follows them.

3. Plan access and sustainable resources together

Plan access and resources together. Open access does not remove the work or resources required to publish. Examine institutional support, shared funding, sponsorship and, where applicable, author charges. Publishing without author charges is also a possible model. Start-up funding considerations.

As an editorial planning exercise, separate hosting and maintenance, coordination, copyediting, layout, DOI services, accessibility, preservation and communication. Make volunteer time visible alongside cash costs. Record how essential work would continue if initial support ended or the editorial team changed. This is a proposed budgeting structure, not a validated cost model.

If author charges apply, explain their purpose, timing and waivers before submission; if there are no author charges, say so clearly. Under the joint transparency principles, editorial decisions should not depend on ability to pay or waiver status. No universal launch price or fee tariff is proposed here.

4. Prepare policies before inviting submissions

Write policies that describe what this journal will actually do: peer-review model, decision authority, conflicts, authorship, research ethics, data sharing, similarity checking, complaints and appeals, corrections and retractions. Include understandable rules for AI use by authors, editors and reviewers, including disclosure and permitted tools. The joint transparency principles set out the relevant policy areas.

For a practical policy check, answer three questions: who receives a report, who decides what to do, and how is the outcome recorded? If special issues are planned, specify the guest editor’s authority and the journal’s oversight. These questions are an editorial implementation aid.

Explain copyright ownership, permission to publish and readers’ reuse rights separately. The chosen licence should agree with the author agreement and the information displayed on the article. Adding a licence logo does not establish the whole rights arrangement. Copyright and licensing guidance.

5. Choose infrastructure around the workflow

Open Journal Systems is one option, not mandatory software for every journal. PKP’s OJS repository identifies it as open-source journal-management software. Its official editorial-workflow guide covers submission, review, copyediting, production, metadata and publication. Choose the workflow you need before choosing a particular installation.

Compare self-hosting with managed hosting. Assign responsibility for updates, security, backups and staff training, as well as initial installation. Software and technical infrastructure. A functioning installation does not show that the team can run its editorial process.

Rehearse a test submission through initial checks, editor assignment, reviewer invitation, assessment, author revision, editorial decision, copyediting, proof approval and publication. Check file access, anonymisation, notifications and exports along the way. This is a proposed rehearsal sequence; it does not prescribe one reviewer count or one deadline for all journals.

6. Check the correct DergiPark application category

Türkiye-specific route. DergiPark’s published prerequisites require a Türkiye-addressed publisher and unrestricted, fully open access. It distinguishes new journals, journals with an archive and journals that have left or been removed from the service. The categories have different conditions. DergiPark journal application rules.

In the rules checked on 4 November 2026, the new-journal category is for journals not previously published on another platform and not already assigned an ISSN. This category accepts applications from universities and public institutions. It requests a university senate decision or senior-management approval, respectively; the approved form is uploaded by the Scientific Publishing Coordinator (Bilimsel Yayın Koordinatörü). Current new-journal conditions.

Do not plan to publish elsewhere first and then assume eligibility for DergiPark’s new-journal category. Other publisher types and journals with an existing archive should examine the category relevant to their circumstances. This is a condition of this DergiPark route, not a general statement about who may establish a journal in Türkiye.

7. Plan ISSN and DOI work separately

Treat the journal’s ISSN and article DOI registrations as separate tasks. Türkiye’s ministry directs ISSN applications through eKYGM and tells a first-time publisher to create a publisher record first. Official ISSN application explanation.

The Turkish help page requires an online serial’s first issue to be published with at least five accessible articles/texts. It explicitly says that five texts spread across two issues are insufficient. Different publication media require separate ISSN applications, and the page requires an Alındı Belgesi for a print journal. These are the stated Turkish ISSN procedures, not a general threshold for journal quality or every indexing service. eKYGM: ISSN application and important information.

The online-ISSN stage therefore differs from the prepublication stage specified for DergiPark’s new-journal category. Plan the sequence for the route you intend to use. Do not display an identifier that has not been assigned. In another country, consult its relevant ISSN centre rather than applying the Turkish sequence by analogy.

If using Crossref, decide the membership route and who will register and maintain records. A Crossref DOI becomes active on registration. The deposit is metadata linking to content on the publisher’s site or hosting platform, rather than the article file itself. Maintain the destination when content moves. Crossref content registration.

8. Prepare metadata, accessibility and preservation

Prepare consistent article titles, authors, affiliations, abstracts, keywords, dates, language, references, licences and funding information where relevant. Compare the PDF, article landing page and records sent to external services. Crossref specifically addresses consistent journal titles and ISSNs, accurate article titles, contributors and richer metadata. Crossref journal and article metadata guidance.

Include accessibility in publication preparation. Check meaningful heading structure, text alternatives, readable contrast, keyboard access and content that assistive technologies can interpret. W3C’s accessibility principles explain these requirements; this short checklist does not establish full standards conformance.

Make separate plans for operational backups and long-term preservation, including what happens if the journal stops publishing. For OJS, the PKP Preservation Network is one option. Check the plugin’s compatibility, terms and deposit status. Its maintainer documentation describes installation, enabling the plugin and accepting its terms; installing OJS alone does not demonstrate that preservation deposits have occurred.

9. Launch with evidence of readiness

Use the following readiness checklist as an editorial working aid, not a certificate of launch approval:

• Aims, scope, languages and article types are agreed.
• Publisher responsibility and required institutional decisions are documented.
• Team members have accepted their roles; authority and backup cover are clear.
• Peer-review, ethics, appeal, charge and licensing policies are available.
• The publication schedule has been compared with available capacity.
• A sample submission, decision, proof and publication route has been tested.
• ISSN steps match the selected route and publication medium.
• If DOI registration will be used, registration, link checks and maintenance have an owner.
• Metadata, accessibility, backup and preservation checks are recorded.
• Affiliations and indexing claims in the first call have been verified.

Handle indexing as a separate application and evaluation process. Being hosted by DergiPark does not establish acceptance by TR Dizin or DOAJ. For DOAJ, use its own eligibility criteria and eventual decision. Do not advertise a pending application as directory inclusion. DergiPark’s service description; DOAJ application guide.

After the launch file is ready, test how the editor-in-chief, section editors, board, reviewers and production staff divide responsibility on a sample submission. Make the decision route and the publishing workflow usable in practice, rather than treating a completed checklist as the end of preparation.