Brazilian here. Almost all of our journals are open access. They are published by universities, almost all of them public. Participation on editorial boards is a activity you put on your curriculum. You, normally, enter editorial boards by writing reviews. The system just works. Anglophone journals are just fucked up, for profit enterprise. You don't need a whole new publishing system, but only get universities that want citations to publish open access journals.
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2022
20 points (100.0% liked)
Open Source
31134 readers
285 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Interesting perspective. I wonder how many Brazilian scholars cross over into Anglophone journals in their pursuit of publication credits. Because as it stands, I am not sure I have seen any academic I know of who writes in English partnering with a Portuguese author to write in Portuguese journals. I am clueless about Brazilian academic landscape and would be happy to know how language shapes open/closed publications.
The academic world revolves around Anglophone publications. What we got is Brazilian academics writing in English to publish in Anglophone journals to get more citations, sometimes in partnership with other Anglophone researchers.
If you publish in English, you get citations from English and many other languages. If you publish in Portuguese (or Spanish, or German) you get citations only from this language. All "high impact" journals are in English, after all.
This is consistent with my experiences too. I have always admired publications which translate the abstract as it gives a peak into a whole world out there. Perhaps this is one other area future decentralized publishing should look into.
How about this: all phases of peer review and the editing/publishing process are public and transparent. I don't know if I fully understand how this is supposed to work in practice, but to me it appears to only address half of the problem.
Some people try that kind of thing and use Twitter to develop their ideas. See NN Taleb and his clique. But I hear you -- there is a lot to be gained from software development practices.
Scholars who use this will be denied grants, mark my words
Which is weird that the more open you get with knowledge, the more you are victimized.