The future of peer review process in academia

Came across an interesting article in the New York Times a few weeks ago about new directions in the peer review process.  Traditionally, academic articles go through a “peer review” process before publication.  This ensures the accuracy and quality of published papers by putting the submitted manuscripts through a series of review by other experts in the field.  The NYT article describes an experiment by the journal Shakespeare Quarterly to open up the review process to the public and online.  Having been a reviewer for a number of journals, and also having submitted manuscripts for consideration in academic journals, it is clear that there are flaws to the current peer review system.  Some of the problems can be addressed by experimenting with a hybrid system involving both experts and non-experts in the review process.  Such a system need not threaten the expertise of those in academia, nor does it mean we are democratizing the production of knowledge.  The question regarding the value of opening up the peer review system is an empirical one, and it’s worth finding out.