Archive for Open Access Publishing

A Clarivate Apology

Posted in Open Access with tags , , on July 19, 2022 by telescoper

Well, it seems that my recent post about Impact Factors has had some effect. Today I received an email from Clarivate, the salient part of which is appended below. I applied for inclusion on the Web of Science Collection in April 2021, so they have sat on this request for over a year.

Now I have to start the process  all over again. Sigh. I’m taking a wild guess here but I wonder if access to the Web of Science Publisher Portal might require the payment of a hefty subscription, so only big commercial publishers can afford it?

I suspect If I hadn’t posted about this on social media they would have ignored my submission request indefinitely.

To think so many people take this company seriously….


We are contacting you regarding the evaluation of the Open Journal of Astrophysics for the Web of Science Core Collection and following up from a recent post on social media.

Unfortunately we have not been able to evaluate your journal to this date due to the large amount of journal submissions we are continuously receiving and the implementation of new internal management systems. We are taking several actions to improve the efficiency of the editorial process, one of them is the migration of our submission platform to the Web of Science Publisher Portal. The Portal allows publishers to securely log in and submit journals for inclusion in the Web of Science Core Collection and provides a way to view the status of all journals submitted.

All journals previously submitted using the Journal Submission Form on the Master Journal List that have not received a decision regarding inclusion in the Web of Science Core Collection, have to be re-submitted through the Web of Science Publisher Portal; that is the case of the Open Journal of Astrophysics, which needs to be re-submitted. Please remember that only publishers can submit journals through the portal.


UNESCO and Open Science

Posted in Open Access, Politics with tags , , , , , on January 12, 2022 by telescoper

Time to pass on news of an interesting development from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) concerning Open Science. Here’s a little video to explain what it’s about:

A press release announcing the new recommendations begins thus:

The first international framework on open science was adopted by 193 countries attending UNESCO’s General Conference. By making science more transparent and more accessible, the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science will make science more equitable and inclusive. 

Through open science, scientists and engineers use open licenses to share their publications and data, software and even hardware more widely. Open science should, thus, enhance international scientific cooperation. 

Some 70% of scientific publications are locked behind paywalls. Over the past two years, however, this proportion has dropped to about 30% for publications on COVID-19 specifically. This shows that science can be more open. 

The framework document itself is here (21 pages). It’s a very general document, the strongest aspect of which is that it takes a broad view of open science. When I’ve talked and written about open access publishing I’ve always stressed that represents only one aspect of open science: there is a need to share data and analysis software too.

You can find an upbeat commentary on the new agreement by James Wilsdon here. Here’s a snippet:

At a time when ideologies opposed to universalism, multilateralism, and collaboration are gaining ground in many parts of the world—exacerbated by greed, corruption, and exploitation of common assets and resources—the scientific system is as vulnerable as it has always been to reflecting both the best and the worst of society’s wider tendencies.

Moves towards open research have gained significant ground over the past twenty years, but this progress remains fragile, under-resourced, and at times willfully or unintentionally blind to the fresh inequalities and pressures it can create—particularly for researchers and institutions in the global south.

For me, the greatest strengths of the UNESCO statement are its breadth and holism—unlike some declarations in this field, it speaks with an authentically international chorus of voices. It reasserts the need for cultural, linguistic, and disciplinary pluralism, and reminds us that openness is ultimately a means to more fundamental ends. The recommendation returns repeatedly to the importance of infrastructures and incentives, which need to be financed, sustained, and better aligned.

I couldn’t agree more!