Are editorials reaping what they have not sown?

Are editorials reaping what they have not sown?

Patricia Covarrubia   February 15, 2012   1 comment:

This month I have been following news regarding ‘the Cost of Knowledge’. For those of you who are not aware of this situation, scientists all over the world are signing a petition to boycott academic publisher Elsevier. At the moment there are more than 5000 signatories of the manifesto. The point in discussion is the 'exorbitantly high' prices that Elsevier's scientific journals has in place and the 'huge profits' that they are making. Apart from the cost/value issue academics on the field also noted that publishers “often force libraries to subscribe to packages of journals, in which less relevant titles are pushed along with essential magazines”.

But why Elsevier?
I believe that there are many others publishers that should be at the end of this story (and not only Scientifics ones perhaps?). Yet the target is Elsevier been the largest publisher of scientific journals (in 2010 it published about two thousand journals and had a profit of 847 million Euros).

The boycott
Well, very simple...researchers say they will not publish more in journals of the Elsevier’s group and moreover neither will act as peer-reviewers. The petition has been supported also by Gowers, from Cambridge University, who posted here some interesting point of views ( now with more than 300 comments).

Today I noticed that my query: what about other journals/areas, is also a reservation that others academics have; Ernesto Galvão, a professor at the Universidade Federal Fluminense, Brazil and one of the signatories of the manifesto, noted: “there is something very wrong with the whole system of publishing scientific articles". Hence, we can say that some Scientific academics are discontent with publishers.

A model is needed to replace the current system, but which one?
Kenneth Campbell, State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) and editor of the Brazilian Physics, published by Uerj, and associate editor of American Journal of Public Health, United States - remembers that in some open access journals from abroad, the authors must pay a publication fee – a practice which is not common in Brazil. He explains that if this is the way to go, funding/grants will be diluted. Yet, he noted that at this point there is not a model but in any case, he does not agree with the ‘oligopolistic’ one that exists at the moment.

Ernesto Galvão mentions the model followed and applied by ‘arXiv’ which is a public repository of articles (used by sciences’ researchers). He says that this system also has a “mechanism for validating the quality of the articles”. He also suggests that there are other models and that combining some kind of peer review and a low cost of dissemination is the way to go.

What Elsevier says...
The publisher released a statement that argues that publishers are necessary for the proper functioning of science. It explained that the market i.e. research, works more efficiently and effectively because of the value added by publishers through the process of publication.

An IP point of view, if any...

Copyright and thus, economic rights: authors are not claiming that they want payment for their work; they want the work to be more ‘economic’ accessible – that is different, so not really IP related. Why then I bring this issue into your attention? Academics/professionals are the creators and authors of the work - the ones that are sowing. Yet, while they are not looking to reap what they have sown, they do indeed have the right to have a said. There is the need of a balance – the case in point; academics query ‘the cost of knowledge’.

There is the need also to consider the other side of the coin: to publish, to print, to distribute and to advertise do cost money and these costs need to be cover by someone somewhere; publishers are not charities.

What is your thought in this matter?

Read More

Chilean earthquake damaged wine production and science

Chilean earthquake damaged wine production and science

Patricia Covarrubia   March 23, 2010   No comments:

Three weeks ago, Chile suffered two incidents - an earthquake followed by a tsunami.The wine production was the most affected in terms of damages. The Chile Wine Association estimates a loss of $250 millions in just spilled wine (does not account for infrastructure damages and the current state of the plantations – approx $600 millions). A study made by the broker BCI believes that ‘Concha y Toro’ winery is the company most affected by the earthquake(newspapers here, here and here).

It has also affected science. Carlos Padilla, vice-chancellor of the University of Talca, explains that many projects and investigations have being affected. For instance, he has being developing research in plant breeding at the Institute of Plant and Biology and Biotechnology. Because genomes are materials that take years to collect they are keep in freezers and with the earthquake they were unfrozen and now unusable. Many others experiments were lost and according to Mr Padilla, this ‘could mean a drop in 5 years of science’.

While the IP blog relates only to news in a particular area of law, I cannot close this article without mentioning the social impact of the earthquake. Our sympathies to the people of Chile.

Read More

Mexico: OECD recommends science secretariat

Mexico: OECD recommends science secretariat

Patricia Covarrubia   January 13, 2010   No comments:

As you might have heard, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development(OECD) is an organisation that unites different governments around the world (currently 31 members). The aim is to support and to raise their economic growth. Hence, the OECD is observant of matters such as trade, environment, agriculture, technology, taxation, among others. It collects data and also monitors and analyses the country’s economic development.

The OECD recommended that Mexico should create a new secretariat which will enhance scientific development and innovation in the country. This suggest dividing the Secretariat of Public Education (SEP) and transforming the National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT) in the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology. The measure is proposed due to a mixture of distorted policies.

Added to this, last September, during his latest visit to Mexico, the secretary general of the world organization, the Mexican Jose Angel Gurría, presented the government of President Calderon, "Studies of the OECD Innovation Policy. Mexico ". He explained that the country’s low productivity and loss of competitiveness is due to low investment in technology and research. It also calls for reforming the National System of Researchers (SNI) due to low productivity which is measured by the number of research publications and patents registered in the country.

With both Chile and Mexico as members, and the ever closer co-operation with Brazil, the OECD has substantially strengthened its links with Latin America.

Read More