Purpose This article investigates the discrepancy between decolonial critiques of academic publishing and the emergence of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies adopted by major publishing organizations. It examines whether and how publishers' current DEI initiatives address colonial continuities and epistemic injustice in scholarly communication. Design/methodology/approach A document analysis was conducted on publicly available policy texts from three academic publishers (commercial, non-commercial and society). Drawing on the Critical Diversity Literacy framework's five hooks (Steyn et al., 2018), the study compares publishers' conceptualizations of diversity with a decolonial diversity conception derived from a review of scholarly debates on coloniality of knowledge production and evaluation. Findings Publishers' policies generally emphasize DEI in a solution-oriented manner, recognizing existing inequalities that ought to be overcome. However, their conceptions remain ahistorical and apolitical as they refrain from discussing colonial continuities and power hierarchies. While policy goals often align superficially with decolonial aims, such as epistemic diversity and inclusion of marginalized voices, the underlying ideological frames remain rooted in Western universality and liberal market logic. Differences across organization types are minimal, mainly differing in the scope and amount of DEI resources deployed. Originality/value By juxtaposing decolonial theory with DEI policy documents, this study highlights conceptual gaps and unexamined power relations in current academic publishing reforms. It demonstrates the utility of organizational ethnography for uncovering spaces of potential decolonial practice in academic knowledge production. The findings offer actionable insights for aligning publisher policies with epistemic justice and for future ethnographic inquiry into decolonizing scholarly communication.
Sarah Patricia Wendt (2026) studied this question.