MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute)

MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute) is a Basel, Switzerland-headquartered academic publisher, founded in 1996, that publishes exclusively open access: every article it accepts is made freely readable on publication, funded by an author-side Article Processing Charge (APC) rather than reader subscriptions. MDPI operates several hundred peer-reviewed journals across the sciences, social sciences, and humanities — examples include International Journal of Molecular Sciences (IJMS), Sustainability, and Nutrients — structured heavily around themed ‘Special Issues’ with guest editors, and is known for comparatively fast median times from submission to first editorial decision and to publication relative to many subscription journals. MDPI is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA). It is a real, currently operating publisher, not a defunct or fictitious one — but the label ‘MDPI journal’ does not, by itself, tell you the editorial rigor of any specific title, which varies journal by journal and has been the subject of genuine, documented scrutiny from indexing bodies and parts of the research community (see below).

Basel-based, open access since 1996

MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute) was founded in 1996 and is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland, with editorial offices in several other countries. Every MDPI journal is fully open access: articles are freely readable on publication with no subscription paywall, and the publisher recovers its costs through an author-side Article Processing Charge (APC) rather than reader or library subscriptions. MDPI now operates several hundred peer-reviewed journals spanning the sciences, social sciences, and humanities — titles such as International Journal of Molecular Sciences (IJMS), Sustainability, and Nutrients are among its highest-volume publications.

The Special Issue model, and the volume criticism it has drawn

Most MDPI journals organize a large share of their content into themed Special Issues, each with one or more guest editors and a stated submission deadline. This structure lets MDPI scale rapidly and publish a high volume of content with comparatively fast median times from submission to first decision and to publication. It has also drawn specific, documented criticism: some Norwegian research-assessment bodies placed a number of MDPI titles into the non-counting “Level X” category of Norway’s national Publication Indicator around 2021, citing concerns about Special-Issue-driven growth and its effect on editorial oversight. Rapid Special Issue growth, high per-editor invitation volume, and short review windows are the specific, recurring concerns raised about this model — distinct from, and less severe than, an allegation of predatory publishing.

The 2023 Web of Science delistings

In March 2023, Clarivate (which operates Web of Science and the Journal Citation Reports) discontinued Web of Science coverage of two MDPI journals — International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) and Journal of Risk and Financial Management (JRFM) — citing its “Content Relevance” evaluation criterion. This was part of a larger review that affected 50-plus journals across multiple publishers that year, including 19 Hindawi titles. MDPI publicly acknowledged the decision and appealed the IJERPH delisting. A Web of Science delisting is an indexing/quality-classification decision made by Clarivate about a specific journal — it is not the same thing as a predatory-publisher finding, and it does not retroactively affect the peer-review status of articles already published in that title.

MDPI and Beall’s List: a closed historical dispute

MDPI was added to Jeffrey Beall’s list of predatory publishers in February 2014, then formally removed on 28 October 2015 after an appeal review, when Beall’s own appeals process and a separate Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA) membership review both concluded MDPI met OASPA’s publishing-ethics and transparency criteria. MDPI is a current member of both COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and OASPA, both of which require members to meet ongoing ethics and transparency standards. Calling MDPI a predatory publisher today, without qualification, restates a settled 2014-2015 dispute as if it were still open. See also CASRAI’s dedicated Beall’s List entry for how that list functioned and why it was discontinued as an actively maintained resource.

Legitimate publisher, journal-by-journal quality varies

MDPI is a real, currently operating, peer-reviewed academic publisher — not a defunct or fictitious one, and not a publisher whose journals should be assumed illegitimate on the basis of the “MDPI” name alone. At the same time, “published by MDPI” does not by itself tell you the editorial rigor of a specific title: that varies journal by journal, exactly as it does across any large multi-journal publisher. Before citing, submitting to, or evaluating a specific MDPI journal for a CV, grant application, or tenure file, check that individual title’s current indexing status (Web of Science, Scopus), editorial board composition, and any self-citation-rate concerns, rather than relying on the publisher name as a proxy for quality either way. CASRAI’s companion guide, Is MDPI Peer Reviewed?, walks through that per-journal due-diligence process in more depth; CASRAI has also covered MDPI’s generative-AI authorship policy specifically.

Worked examples

• A researcher checking a call for papers notices the journal is published by MDPI, uses an APC-funded open-access model, and follows a Special Issue structure with a named guest editor and a stated submission deadline — these are typical structural features of an MDPI journal, not in themselves evidence of poor quality.
• A CV or bibliography lists a peer-reviewed article in an MDPI-published journal (for example, International Journal of Molecular Sciences) alongside articles in subscription-model journals from other publishers; the MDPI article is a normal, indexed, peer-reviewed publication, distinguished from the others mainly by its funding model (APC vs. subscription) and open licensing.

Counter-examples

• Treating ‘published by MDPI’ as automatically equivalent to ‘predatory’ is not an accurate characterization: MDPI was added to Jeffrey Beall’s list of predatory publishers in February 2014 and formally removed in October 2015 after an appeal review, and MDPI is a current member of COPE and OASPA — both of which require applicants to meet publishing-ethics and transparency criteria. Calling MDPI a predatory publisher today, without qualification, overstates a settled historical dispute as an ongoing one.
• Conversely, treating every MDPI journal as editorially equivalent to a well-established subscription journal in the same field, with no further check, is also not accurate: individual MDPI titles have been discontinued from Web of Science coverage by Clarivate at various points (for example, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health and Journal of Risk and Financial Management in 2023) and MDPI’s Special-Issue-driven growth model has drawn specific, documented criticism — so per-journal due diligence (indexing status, editorial board, self-citation rate) remains warranted rather than assumed.

Related terms and guides

• Beall’s List — the discontinued predatory-publisher watchlist MDPI was removed from in 2015.
• COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) — one of the two publishing-ethics bodies MDPI belongs to.
• Journal Citation Reports (JCR) — the Clarivate product that determines Web of Science / Journal Impact Factor indexing status.
• DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment) — relevant to judging a journal or article on its own merits rather than the publisher’s reputation alone.
• Is MDPI Peer Reviewed? — the full per-journal due-diligence walkthrough.
• MDPI’s Generative-AI Authorship Policy Explained.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is MDPI a predatory publisher?

Not currently, and not since 2015. MDPI was on Jeffrey Beall’s list of predatory publishers from February 2014 until it was formally removed on 28 October 2015 following an appeal and a separate OASPA membership review. MDPI is a present-day member of both COPE and OASPA. Individual MDPI journals can still have real, documented indexing or editorial-process concerns worth checking (see the Web of Science delistings above), but “predatory publisher” is not an accurate characterization of MDPI as a whole today.

Is MDPI peer reviewed?

Yes — MDPI journals require peer review before publication. Editorial rigor still varies title by title, the same way it does at any large multi-journal publisher; CASRAI’s guide Is MDPI Peer Reviewed? covers how to check a specific MDPI journal’s process and indexing status.

Is MDPI a journal or a publisher?

MDPI is a publisher, not a single journal. It operates several hundred separately named, separately indexed journals (for example, International Journal of Molecular Sciences, Sustainability, Nutrients), each with its own editorial board, scope, and indexing status.

Why were some MDPI journals removed from Web of Science?

In March 2023, Clarivate discontinued Web of Science coverage of two MDPI titles — International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health and Journal of Risk and Financial Management — citing its “Content Relevance” criterion, as part of a broader review that also delisted 19 Hindawi journals and others that year. MDPI appealed the IJERPH decision. This is an indexing decision about specific titles, not a finding that MDPI as a whole is predatory or that its peer review does not occur.

What does MDPI stand for?

Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute.

Last verified 2026-08-16 against MDPI’s own public announcements (mdpi.com/about/announcements), independent reporting (Scholarly Kitchen, Beall’s List historical record), and Clarivate’s public statements on the 2023 Web of Science review.