Towards universal open access? Why we need bibliodiversity rather than a "silver bullet" | SciELO in Perspective

flavoursofopenscience's bookmarks 2018-08-25


Nothing is probably falser than the representation of scholarly communication as an integrated field dominated by a few global actors across all disciplines, countries, communities. When Jeffrey Beal published his despising words about SciELO and Redalyc because, according to him “many north-american researchers have never heard of it”, he could have said the same of Elsevier because many humanities researchers have never heard of it, in North-America and elsewhere, to take another example that illustrates how absurd this approach can be, simply because the researchers’ information and citation practices are not global, but rather largely influenced by local parameters, in terms of disciplines, national contexts, transnational networks of research teams sharing the same methods, objects, types of instruments.



08/25/2018, 08:42

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » flavoursofopenscience's bookmarks


oa.opinion oa.scielo oa.advocacy oa.scholcomm oa.business_models oa.fees oa.journals oa.bibliodiversity


Pierre Mounier

Date tagged:

08/25/2018, 07:59

Date published:

08/14/2018, 08:42