O. Pourret, D. Hedding, D. Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Haiyan Liu, Jonathan P. Tennant
{"title":"International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences","authors":"O. Pourret, D. Hedding, D. Ibarra, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Haiyan Liu, Jonathan P. Tennant","doi":"10.31223/x5hw2s","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Open access (OA) implies free and unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. Recently, OA publishing has seen a new wave of interest, debate, and practices surrounding that mode of publishing.\n Objectives: To provide an overview of publication practices and to compare them among six countries across the world to stimulate further debate and to raise awareness about OA to facilitate decision-making on further development of OA practices in earth sciences.\n Methods: The number of OA articles, their distribution among the six countries, and top ten journals publishing OA articles were identified using two databases, namely Scopus and the Web of Science, based mainly on the data for 2018.\n Results: In 2018, only 24%–31% of the total number of articles indexed by either of the databases were OA articles. Six of the top ten earth sciences journals that publish OA articles were fully OA journals and four were hybrid journals. Fully OA journals were mostly published by emerging publishers and their article processing charges ranged from $1000 to $2200.\n Conclusions: The rise in OA publishing has potential implications for researchers and tends to shift article-processing charges from organizations to individuals. Until the earth sciences community decides to move away from journal-based criteria to evaluate researchers, it is likely that such high costs will continue to maintain financial inequities within this research community, especially to the disadvantage of researchers from the least developed countries. However, earth scientists, by opting for legal self- archiving of their publications, could help to promote equitable and sustainable access to, and wider dissemination of, their work.","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Science Editing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31223/x5hw2s","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Background: Open access (OA) implies free and unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. Recently, OA publishing has seen a new wave of interest, debate, and practices surrounding that mode of publishing.
Objectives: To provide an overview of publication practices and to compare them among six countries across the world to stimulate further debate and to raise awareness about OA to facilitate decision-making on further development of OA practices in earth sciences.
Methods: The number of OA articles, their distribution among the six countries, and top ten journals publishing OA articles were identified using two databases, namely Scopus and the Web of Science, based mainly on the data for 2018.
Results: In 2018, only 24%–31% of the total number of articles indexed by either of the databases were OA articles. Six of the top ten earth sciences journals that publish OA articles were fully OA journals and four were hybrid journals. Fully OA journals were mostly published by emerging publishers and their article processing charges ranged from $1000 to $2200.
Conclusions: The rise in OA publishing has potential implications for researchers and tends to shift article-processing charges from organizations to individuals. Until the earth sciences community decides to move away from journal-based criteria to evaluate researchers, it is likely that such high costs will continue to maintain financial inequities within this research community, especially to the disadvantage of researchers from the least developed countries. However, earth scientists, by opting for legal self- archiving of their publications, could help to promote equitable and sustainable access to, and wider dissemination of, their work.
背景:开放获取(OA)意味着免费和无限制地获取和再利用研究论文。最近,围绕这种出版模式,OA出版掀起了一股新的兴趣、争论和实践浪潮。目标:提供出版实践的概述,并在世界上六个国家之间进行比较,以激发进一步的辩论,提高对开放获取的认识,促进对地球科学开放获取实践进一步发展的决策。方法:采用Scopus和Web of Science两个数据库,主要以2018年的数据为基础,对6个国家的OA文章数量、分布以及发表OA文章排名前十的期刊进行识别。结果:2018年,两大数据库均收录的文章中,OA文章仅占24%-31%。在发表OA文章的十大地球科学期刊中,有6种是完全OA期刊,4种是混合型期刊。完全开放获取的期刊大多由新兴出版商出版,其文章处理费从1000美元到2200美元不等。结论:开放获取出版的兴起对研究人员有潜在的影响,并倾向于将文章处理费用从组织转移到个人。在地球科学界决定放弃以期刊为基础的评估研究人员的标准之前,这种高成本很可能会继续在这个研究界维持财务不平等,特别是对来自最不发达国家的研究人员不利。然而,地球科学家通过选择合法的自我存档他们的出版物,可以帮助促进公平和可持续地获取和更广泛地传播他们的工作。
期刊介绍:
EASE"s journal, European Science Editing , publishes articles, reports meetings, announces new developments and forthcoming events, reviews books, software and online resources, and highlights publications of interest to members.