Uneven Sustainability in Academic Publishing: A Call for Transparency and Collaboration

A Review of: McCord, D., Cassady, S., Roman, P., Cato, J., & Mantz, E. (2025). Sustainability in Library Collection Development: Introducing a Green Audit Template. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship, 11, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.33137/cjal-rcbu.v11.43852 Objective – To assess the sustainability practices of academic publishers and their alignment with library collection management, and to determine the nature of sustainable partnership opportunities at the intersection of library and publisher practices. Design – A cross-sectional, unobtrusive analysis of existing content. Setting – The academic publishing industry. Subjects – Sustainability practices from 16 international academic publishers selected based on their prominence in Western Libraries' print book acquisitions. Methods – The Green Audit Template, a rubric based on the United Nations’ (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and industry standards and inspired by lifecycle assessment (LCA) approach, was employed to assess various aspects of sustainability practices of the 16 publishers. The assessment relied exclusively on the publishers’ websites and analyzed publicly available reports, corporate policies, and sustainability statements from the websites. The analysis focused on the trends found among all publishers rather than identifying major differences between publishers. Main Results – Notable variability was found in the sustainability practices of academic publishers, with transparency and commitment largely influenced by regional regulations, funding levels, and institutional capacity. Publishers based in the United Kingdom (U.K.) and the European Union (E.U.), where environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting is mandatory, demonstrated the highest levels of disclosure, with all of them publicly sharing sustainability initiatives. In contrast, only 66% of North American publishers voluntarily disclosed such efforts, while 31% of all publishers lacked any publicly available sustainability information. Although 44% of publishers provided annual reports detailing environmental commitments, only half of them showed clear progress toward achieving their goals. In terms of sustainability commitments, 38% of publishers pledged to reach net-zero emissions, with target years ranging from 2040 to 2050. However, only two publishers had achieved ISO 14001 certification, an internationally recognized environmental management standard. Additionally, while 63% of publishers had signed the UN SDG Publishers Compact, the extent of their sustainability efforts varied, with some publishers focusing more on advocacy rather than implementing environmentally friendly practices. Material sourcing and production practices also revealed gaps in sustainability efforts. More than half of the publishers, 54%, reported using sustainably sourced paper, and 25% discussed their recycling processes, how they dispose of e-waste, or how they manage edition changes. Very few provided details on Open Educational Resources, servers, sustainable ink and glue. Transportation and infrastructure were also key areas of concern. While 43.75% of publishers reported implementing sustainable travel policies such as reducing business travel and promoting public transit, only 12.5% of publishers disclosed warehouse locations, and just 31.25% addressed eco-friendly shipping practices, primarily through strategies like reducing print production and minimizing plastic packaging. Among the 43.75% of the publishers that acknowledged sustainability efforts in their offices, a variety of practices were reported, such as using renewable energy, reducing in-office printing, using carbon credits, and funding reforestation projects to achieve carbon neutrality. Conclusion – While some academic publishers are making progress toward sustainability, some of their practices vary widely. Government-mandated ESG reporting plays a crucial role in driving disclosure, with U.K. and E.U. publishers showing more comprehensive sustainability commitments compared to their North American counterparts. Larger publishers generally lead in green initiatives, while smaller publishers face challenges due to limited resources and capacity. The need for increased transparency and accountability in publishing is highlighted, and libraries and publishers are encouraged to adopt and adapt the Green Audit Template as a common reporting framework. Further research may delve into digital infrastructure sustainability, recycling practices, the role of smaller publishers in green initiatives, and collaborative efforts between libraries and publishers.