“Open Science is increasingly seen as “Science for the Future” and the “Future of Science”. Science is not necessarily accessible by all, inclusive and readily available. Science can contribute to achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). UNESCO was tasked to lead a global dialogue on Open Science, to identify globally-agreed norms and practices in order to create a standard-setting instrument.
The session will address what open science means for Africa, the challenges and opportunities for making science accessible to all, assess the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science, and identify concrete measures advance science in Africa…”
“The OpenGLAM world [galleries, libraries, archives, museums] just got richer by 13 historic artworks from India thanks to the folks at DAG Museums. Now that might sound like a small number, but for India, this is a huge step towards providing Open Access.
These high-resolution artworks have been released by DAG as part of India’s first ever GIF-IT-UP Challenge. These are now free for you to download and use as you wish, without any fear of breaking copyright laws. The CC by SA license allows you to use and alter an image even for commercial purposes, as long as you give credit and license your new work under the identical terms.”
Abstract: Seen from Francophone Sub-Saharian Africa, the struggle for open access takes on a meaning different from that which prevails in the countries of the global North. The detour proposed in this article aims at uncovering issues that are often invisible in the debates around open access, in particular the mechanisms of exclusion set up by the world-system of scientific publication, dominated by the Anglo-Saxon mercantile model. We will show that a concept of open access, which is limited to the legal and technical questions of the accessibility of science without considering the relations between the center and the periphery, can become a source of epistemic alienation and neo-colonialism in the global South. On the other hand, if we integrate the concern for the development of the knowledge produced in the periphery and the awareness of all that hinders the creation of this knowledge, open access can become a tool of cognitive justice in service to the construction of an inclusive universalism associated to fair open science.
“This webinar, co-hosted by SOAS and the University of Cape Town, focuses on access to African law and legal scholarship. It brings together a panel of law, law and society, and open access academics and practitioners, who will share their experiences on law as lived in Africa.
The session will provide an opportunity for engaging with the challenge of open access legal scholarship in Africa, especially from the perspective of accessibility of this information. The panellists will share details of their own current or planned activities to expand open access law on the continent, shared in concrete personal and organisational contexts. The panel will then proceed to discuss and chart a possible way forward for a continental effort to mobilize African scholars for better open access to legal scholarship.
Many Africanists and African legal scholars agree that increasing access to African law and African legal scholarship will not only have distinct knowledge creation benefits but would also counter the narrative that there is limited legal scholarship within Africa. African legal knowledge, created, nurtured and built upon on the continent, by African scholars, will reflect their context, thoughts and aspirations. More and quality access to primary and scholarly legal information for teachers, researchers and librarians in law, will assist African legal academia to implement and teach a most relevant legal curriculum in law faculties across the continent and abroad.
In that sense, the primary purpose of the webinar is to promote ideas on accessibility of African law, written by Africans. The second purpose, a very practical one, is to establish a forum and continued conversations that will ensure projects, currently operating in silos, can begin to exchange ideas, actions and resources, so that wider, more impactful programmes are generated in the process….”
“Talk presented as part of the Organisation of Human Brain Mapping (OHBM) Open Science Special Interest Group Symposium on Collaborative Science. Features interviews with Researchers connected to the Global South, describing some of the challenges they face around interacting with open science coming from the Global North.”
Abstract: At the NASIG 2019 Conference, the presenter outlined how the dominance of English-language publishers based in the Global North negatively impacts researchers in Puebla, Mexico. Universities in the Global South must compete in world-wide university ranking systems, which intensifies the pressure to compete with researchers in the Global North to publish in journals of the Global North in order to demonstrate global competitiveness and local career standing. To support those competitive publishing expectations, institutions of the Global South must also subscribe to English-language journal packages of the Global North, thus locking in a cycle of academic publishing dominance. Meanwhile, Latin America is developing quality Open Access (OA) alternatives. In May 2018, the presenter received funding from a NASIG grant to interview journal editors and librarians at universities in Puebla, Mexico. Through these interviews, the presenter sought to explore challenges for researchers publishing in Global North journals, discuss the role of OA at the interviewees’ institutions, consider the future outlook for OA in Mexico, and examine the social justice implications of the academic journal publishing ecosystem. The presenter reported on findings from the interviews and invited members to discuss how engagement with researchers from the Global South can help the global scholarly communication ecosystem become more equitable.
“We are very happy to announce the first in a series of four workshops on Co-Designing Open Access Infrastructures. These meetings are particularly focused on Africa and organized by the West and Central African Research and Education Network (WACREN), EIFL and Coko….”
“This Research4Life Landscape and Situation Analysis, therefore, provides extremely pertinent and valuable insights into the shifting dynamics and external influences at play, from Global Megatrends down to Trends in Scholarly Communication, which will serve as an invaluable scene-setting contextualisation for the whole Research4Life Reviews project. Given the extremely interesting and useful reflections provided here, the Research4Life Executive Council is happy to share its insights and conclusions with other stakeholders in the wider research communication ecosystem and indeed the broader world.”
“Who owns knowledge? How do we disseminate it to benefit societal goals and values that speak norms of justice? Who should have access to knowledge? For whom should knowledge serve? In our time, the highly active landscape of knowledge production via publication, with widespread immediate interconnectivity of scholars around the world, allows for the making of a stronger intellectual community. It can be argued that this one of many impacts of globalization, in that academics are more interconnected than ever before, just as world economies, geopolitics, and global media. Moreover, the scholars who present new knowledges or make visible alternative knowledges come from a wider range of backgrounds than ever before, including non-white/Euro-descendant racial and ethnic groups, working class people, all genders, all sexualities, and non-Western nations. Beyond that, scholars are engaging with a broader body of research subjects and ideas that can transform society in exciting ways.
Understanding this means that theorizing the possibilities of open access is a productive dialogue. The challenges of paywalls are multiple and overlapping. Engaging in such debates calls for deconstructing the value of knowledge repositories guarded behind a pay schedule. There are a number of questions to raise regarding the gatekeeping mechanisms of paywalls: How do paywalls represent a form of power? For what reason do we create a financial barrier to intellectual labor? Aside from hosting intellectual work (in digital and print form), what is the necessity of creating a corporate system that profits from labor that journal hosting bodies are not financially or otherwise accountable to? The perspective in this paper is largely situated in a North American – primarily United States-based – perspective….
Widespread open access publishing would bring about a more just distribution of knowledge within the United States and globally.”