scholarly journals Report from the "Who Decides?" Workgroup

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivy Anderson ◽  
Mel DeSart ◽  
Lee Cheng Ean ◽  
Remi Gaillard ◽  
Susan Gibbons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
The Future ◽  
Global Coordination ◽  
The One ◽  
The Way ◽  
Publishing Practices

Who decides the future of open access, or, rather, who has the power to make decisions that can affect the future of open access? We believe that large scale, transformative, and inclusive progress on these questions can transpire when several entities, each with different complementary powers, convene to collaborate on win-win solutions. We offer three examples of such possible scenarios: the way scholars are evaluated, the way some innovations in scholarly publishing can be nurtured, and the way global cooperation can transform existing journals to open access.OSI2016 Workgroup QuestionTied to [the] question of who should decide the future of open access, who should have the power to make changes to scholarly publishing practices? Do these powers flow from publishers, institutions, tenure committees, funding agencies, authors, or all of the above? All of the above? None of the above? What are the pros, cons, and consequences of different institutions and interest groups developing and implementing their own solutions (even the one-off variety)? Is federal oversight needed? Global coordination (through an organization like UNESCO)?

scholarly journals Who Decides?

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivy Anderson ◽  
Mel DeSart ◽  
Lee Cheng Ean ◽  
Remi Gaillard ◽  
Susan Gibbons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
The Future ◽  
Global Coordination ◽  
The One ◽  
Publishing Practices

Tied to [the] question of who should decide the future of open access, who should have the power to make changes to scholarly publishing practices? Do these powers flow from publishers, institutions, tenure committees, funding agencies, authors, or all of the above? All of the above? None of the above? What are the pros, cons, and consequences of different institutions and interest groups developing and implementing their own solutions (even the one-off variety)? Is federal oversight needed? Global coordination (through an organization like UNESCO)?

The Futurists. Experts in World Futures

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Andersson
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
The Other ◽  
Futures Studies ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Images Of The Future ◽  
The Way

Alvin Toffler’s writings encapsulated many of the tensions of futurism: the way that futurology and futures studies oscillated between forms of utopianism and technocracy with global ambitions, and between new forms of activism, on the one hand, and emerging forms of consultancy and paid advice on the other. Paradoxically, in their desire to create new images of the future capable of providing exits from the status quo of the Cold War world, futurists reinvented the technologies of prediction that they had initially rejected, and put them at the basis of a new activity of futures advice. Consultancy was central to the field of futures studies from its inception. For futurists, consultancy was a form of militancy—a potentially world altering expertise that could bypass politics and also escaped the boring halls of academia.

The Public Festival: Inspiration and interconnectivity at the heart of festivals

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathrin Deventer
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Political Context ◽  
The Political ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Abstract Theory ◽  
The Public ◽  
Fertile Ground ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Way

Festivals have been around, and will always be around; no matter the political context they are embedded in, supported by, or hindered by. Why? Simply because society develops, it transforms, it is dynamic and it needs space for reflection and inspiration. Festivals are platforms for people to meet, and for artists to present their work, their creations. This gives festivals an enduring, quite independent mission and reason to exist: as long as festivals strive to offer a biotope for artists and audiences alike and point to questions which concern the way we live and want to live, they will be a fertile ground for a meaningful development of society – and an offer for serving the public wellbeing. What are the challenges festivals are facing today? There are a series of very complex questions related to festivals’ positioning us as human beings in an interconnected, global society, our relation to nature and the immediate surroundings, our stories of life so that as many citizens as possible can be part of the societal discourse, can be enriched, can be touched, can be heard, can be moved. Individuals, interest groups, nationalities, countries, even continents are interconnected. What does this mean for a festival? Travelling across Europe for work and pleasure and meeting citizens from all walks of life has taught me that citizens, a term that connects individuals to some larger constructed community, are just people, everyday people, going about their lives. People connect with other humans and their human stories, real life encounters. Abstract theory and jargon are meaningless when they lack real life connections. Meaningful festivals of the future will offer possibilities for new connections among people: they invite people to travel in time and in space; they inspire to connect human stories, enriching them with new, unexpected, colourful stories!

scholarly journals #OpenAccess: Free online, open-access crowdsource-reviewed publishing is the future; traditional peer-reviewed journals are on the way out

CJEM ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Adler ◽  
Teresa M. Chan ◽  
J. Bruce Blain ◽  
Brent Thoma ◽  
Paul Atkinson
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Way

scholarly journals Beyond Copyright and Technology: What Open Access Can Tell Us about Precarity, Authority, Innovation, and Automation in the University Today

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Kelty
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
The State ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Changing Practices ◽  
The University ◽  
The Way

In this interview, we discuss what open access can teach us about the state of the university, as well as practices in scholarly publishing. In particular the focus is on issues of labor and precarity, the question of how open access enables or blocks other innovations in scholarship, the way open access might be changing practices of scholarship, and the role of technology and automation in the creation, evaluation, and circulation of scholarly work.

scholarly journals The Future of Pulsar Research and Facilities

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (S337) ◽  
pp. 165-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Bailes
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Radio Pulsars ◽  
Fundamental Physics ◽  
The Future

AbstractRadio pulsars have been responsible for many astonishing astrophysical and fundamental physics breakthroughs since their discovery 50 years ago. In this review I will discuss many of the highlights, most of which were only possible because of the provision of large-scale observing facilities. The next 50 years of pulsar astronomy can be very bright, but only if our governments properly plan and fund the infrastructure necessary to enable future discoveries. Being a small sub-field of astronomy places an onus on the pulsar community to have an open-source/open access approach to data, software, and major observing facilities to enable new groups to emerge to keep the field vibrant.

scholarly journals Open-access mega-journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Spezi ◽  
Simon Wakeling ◽  
Stephen Pinfield ◽  
Claire Creaser ◽  
Jenny Fry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Impact

Purpose Open-access mega-journals (OAMJs) represent an increasingly important part of the scholarly communication landscape. OAMJs, such as PLOS ONE, are large scale, broad scope journals that operate an open access business model (normally based on article-processing charges), and which employ a novel form of peer review, focussing on scientific “soundness” and eschewing judgement of novelty or importance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the discourses relating to OAMJs, and their place within scholarly publishing, and considers attitudes towards mega-journals within the academic community. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a review of the literature of OAMJs structured around four defining characteristics: scale, disciplinary scope, peer review policy, and economic model. The existing scholarly literature was augmented by searches of more informal outputs, such as blogs and e-mail discussion lists, to capture the debate in its entirety. Findings While the academic literature relating specifically to OAMJs is relatively sparse, discussion in other fora is detailed and animated, with debates ranging from the sustainability and ethics of the mega-journal model, to the impact of soundness-only peer review on article quality and discoverability, and the potential for OAMJs to represent a paradigm-shifting development in scholarly publishing. Originality/value This paper represents the first comprehensive review of the mega-journal phenomenon, drawing not only on the published academic literature, but also grey, professional and informal sources. The paper advances a number of ways in which the role of OAMJs in the scholarly communication environment can be conceptualised.

Neo-Realism and the future of strategy

1993 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Warsaw Pact ◽  
Political Landscape ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The Way

To speak of the ‘future’ of strategy is to reveal a deep tension in the way we commonly think about the subject. On the one hand we are confronted by revolutionary changes in the geo-political landscape. The transformation of Europe, the fragmentation of the Soviet Union, and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, for example, encourage the belief that the Cold War—a term which has been almost synonymous with-strategy for nearly half a century—is now an historical artifact. These events, analyzed so intensively by leaders and commentators, open up significant questions about the future of strategy.

Evaluation of forest nutrition based on large-scale foliar surveys: are nutrition profiles the way of the future?

2004 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiaan Luyssaert ◽  
Mika Sulkava ◽  
Hannu Raitio ◽  
Jaakko Hollmén
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Forest Nutrition ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Way
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document