The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry

Pourret, Olivier; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Hursthouse, Andrew; Hullebusch, Eric D. van

doi:10.1016/j.ringeo.2020.100001

Cited by 13 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Higher education leaders in many countries including South Africa are looking to move to a European model (Paterson, 2020). The major consequence of Plan S in the UK is an increase of OA publications with a shift from hybrid to fully OA (Pourret et al, 2020c).…”

Section: Open Access Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The APC-dominated philosophy has created a complex system and hierarchy of financial privilege around OA publishing (Pourret et al, 2020c). In this situation, those researchers who can afford to publish in OA journals, and in particular those which have a high JIF and charge high APCs are given an advantage over those who do not benefit from such financial security and are restricted in choice imposed by their inability to afford APCs.…”

Section: Global Inequalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences

Pourret¹,

Hedding²,

Ibarra³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Open Access (OA) describes the free, unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. Recently, a new wave of interest, debate, and practice surrounding OA publishing has emerged.Objectives. The paper presented here focuses on international disparities in OA publication practices of the Earth Science community. We aim to provide an overview of actual publication practices and comparison between several countries with the intention of stimulating further debate and raising awareness to aid the decision-making processes for the further development of OA practices in the Earth Sciences.Methods. Number of OA articles, proportion of OA articles by countries and journals’ selection was performed using the Scopus and Web of Science indexing databases.Results. In 2018, only between 24 and 31% of total articles were available as OA. The ten top journals for Earth Sciences that publish OA articles are mostly fully OA (6) or hybrid journals (4). Fully OA journals are mostly published by emerging publishers and have a large range of Article Processing Charges (APCs) from less than $US 1000 up to $US 3000.Conclusions. The rise in OA publishing has potential impacts for the profiles of researchers and tends to devolve publication costs from organizations to individuals. Until the Earth Sciences community makes the decision to move away from journal-based evaluation criteria, it is likely that such high costs will continue to impose financial inequities upon this research community, especially for researchers from least developed countries. However, Earth Scientists could more widely choose legal self-archiving as an equitable and sustainable way to disseminate their research.

show abstract

Section: Open Access Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Global Inequalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences

Pourret¹,

Hedding²,

Ibarra³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(depending on servers) shows that less than 250 articles in total have used this model in the last three years (Table 1). This number is very low compared to the 9326 and 9196 articles published in the field of geochemistry in 2018 and 2019, respectively [9]. INA-Rxiv https://osf.io/preprints/inarxiv 7 arXiv* https://arxiv.org 4 AgriXiv https://agrixiv.org/ 3…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

“…This raises major issues around the "added-value" of both the publishing and peer-review processes, which continue to cost 10s of billions of dollars in public and private money each year [8]. In geochemistry, we know that around US$7,000,000 each year is spent on open access to journals [9], with virtually none of this being reinvested into the community itself or the community being reimbursed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The sustainability of geoscience preprint systems is always questionable, as we can see through popular, not-for-profit, community-driven preprint servers (e.g., INA-Rxiv) that currently face closure because of financial troubles [13] or are moving towards other economic options (e.g., EarthArXiv). This highlights the issue with the sustainability of these services, which should perhaps not be an issue considering how much money is currently being spent on less-efficient and less-sustainable for-profit systems (i.e., in commercial publishing activities, around US$7,000,000 has been spent per year these last years) [9].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the potential of preprints in geochemistry: the good, the bad and the ugly

Pourret¹,

Irawan²

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Potentially toxic elements in groundwater: a hotspot research topic in environmental science and pollution research

Papazotos

2021

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A scientometric analysis based on the Scopus database was conducted to provide insight into research activities on the occurrence of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) (As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Sb, and Zn) in groundwater during 1970-2019. The selection of these PTEs was based on their significance concerning their reference frequency in environmental science and pollution research (ESPR) studies and their toxicity to living organisms. The analysis utilizes data about the quantity, type, journal, geographical, institutional, and funding patterns of publications. The results indicate that the publications' annual output has increased over the years, and especially after 2000, it presents a remarkable growth rate. The most studied PTEs were As and Pb; nevertheless, the research on the rest of PTEs cannot be neglected as it shows continuously increasing trends over time. The evolution of instrumentation and the dissemination of contamination case studies that affect a large part of the world population contributed significantly to the scientific community and relative stakeholders' interest. According to the analysis, the USA and China are the two principal countries with the most considerable contribution, producing the most research regarding the number of publications, research institutions, and funding sponsors. China owns the most influential research institution (i.e., Chinese Academy of Sciences) and largest funding sponsor (i.e., National Natural Science Foundation of China; ≈5% of global funding) on a worldwide scale due to its investment in research and development (R&D) and is expected to become the greatest force in the future.

show abstract

The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry

Cited by 13 publications

References 28 publications

International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences

International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences

On the potential of preprints in geochemistry: the good, the bad and the ugly

Potentially toxic elements in groundwater: a hotspot research topic in environmental science and pollution research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About