| Geoscience journals deal with research intrinsically linked to national strategies for resources and energy, territorial security, and ecological environments. This renders the management of ideological risks within this field both critically important and uniquely complex. A systematic approach to identifying and addressing these specific risks, however, has been lacking. To bridge this gap, this study constructs a typological framework that categorizes ideological risks into four interconnected dimensions: political orientation, information security, academic ethics, and communication ecology. Drawing on policy analysis, expert consultations, and case studies, we demonstrate that these risks stem from a systemic imbalance among the discipline's inherent attributes, inadequacies in subject awareness and institutional mechanisms, and the impact of a rapidly evolving technological adaptation. In response, we propose an integrated governance system grounded in Party-building leadership, reinforced by robust institutional safeguards, enhanced through professional capacity building, and enabled by adaptive technological tools. The findings not only contribute to a deeper understanding of risk governance in geoscience publishing but also offer a transferable framework and practical strategies for other scientific disciplines confronting similar ideological challenges. |
