INTERVIEW
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel: América Latina
wants to strengthen regional science through
new global open access configurations
un acceso abierto
diario
Germana Barata
Laboratory of Advanced Studies in Journalism (Labjor) of the Nucleus for the Development of
Creativity Creativity Development Nucleus (Nudecri),
the State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brasil
Citación: Barata, GRAMO. (2023). Interview
with Dr. Fernanda Beigel: latín
America wants to strengthen regional
science through new global open
access configurations. Quantitative
Science Studies, 4(1), 306–313.
https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00235
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00235
Recibió: 8 December 2022
Aceptado: 15 December 2022
Autor correspondiente:
Germana Barata
germana@unicamp.br
Editor de manejo:
Juego Waltman
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
.
/
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Derechos de autor: © 2023 Germana Barata.
Publicado bajo Creative Commons
Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC POR 4.0)
licencia.
La prensa del MIT
Sociologist Fernanda Beigel is an active voice on open science in Latin America.
Photo: Personal Archive.
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
Latin America is a cultural power composed of almost 40 countries (when the Caribbean is
incluido) and with over 660 million inhabitants. In spite of political instability and severe cuts
in investments in science and technology, the Latin American region shares sociocultural
richness and an open access culture that aims to democratize knowledge from nonprofit
publishers of public universities and scientific societies that work to strengthen regional
science output. Acerca de 60% of the science output indexed in international databases is
available in open access and much of it is diamond, which means that it does not include
any Article Processing Charge (APC) for authors.
Argentinian sociologist Fernanda Beigel is an active voice in open science in Latin America.
She has studied phenomena related to scientific development from a set of perspectives,
populations and fields of knowledge. She holds a PhD in Political and Social Sciences and
Fernanda is a professor at the National University of Cuyo, where she directs the Center of
Research in International Circulation of Knowledge (CECIC1), a principal researcher at the
National Council for Scientific and Technological Research (CONICET) and coordinates the
Open and Citizen Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Technology in Argentina.
En 2020 she was the Chair of the UNESCO Open Science Advisory Committee and has been
one of the key contributors to the Latin American Forum on Research Assessment (FOLEC2) de
the Latin American Council for Social Sciences (CLACSO). Apart from being notable academic
in Latin America, she is also an activist for open science, gender equity and more relevant
research output in the region. In this bilingual conversation—with questions in Portuguese
and answers in Spanish—held through Meet, Fernanda spoke from her home in Mendoza with
Germana Barata, a researcher and science journalist from the State University of Campinas
(Unicamp) in Brazil3.
Germana Barata: Fernanda, Plan S formally began in January 2021 and has been cele-
brated by the international scholarly community. It is the result of a coalition of funding
agencies that decided that results from research funded with their resources had to be
available in open access. What will be the impacts of Plan S in Latin America, considering
the pioneer policies in open access in the region?
Fernanda Beigel: I believe that Plan S had already begun to enter the international discus-
sion upon its public launch in 2018 y, until it was implemented, its evolution had several
twists and turns due to the tensions and pressures it provoked from its beginning. The first
players that this plan wished to include were evidently the European scientific publishers,
and for that reason its first impulse was to develop commercial open access, encouraging jour-
nals to change their business model towards APC. The largest publishers, for their part, emocionado
towards read and publish agreements, which also began to spread worldwide. Had this
remained intact after implementation and had the original project not suffered any fracture,
we would be facing a whirlwind—without any chance of stopping it—of an increasingly
strong commercial industry in the academic world. Sin embargo, I believe that the Covid-19 pan-
demic and the UNESCO recommendation on open science4 were key elements in the growth
of a global groundswell critical of commodification within the scientific publishing system.
That means that even though Plan S has clearly driven the transformation of mainstream
1 https://cecic.fcp.uncuyo.edu.ar/.
2 https://www.clacso.org/en/folec/.
3 The original transcript of the interview in Spanish and Portuguese is available here: https://doi.org/10.5281
/zenodo.7387195.
4 https://en.unesco.org/science-sustainable-future/open-science/recommendation.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
307
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
.
/
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
journals into the open access model with APC, this process has not been free from fractures
and criticism, both from the South and from the North.
One of the paths that contribute to this critical movement of the commoditized trends of
scientific publishing is the problem of hypercentralization of the English language. There is an
increasingly strong current—with France leading the way in Europe—that discusses the loss of
interculturality it means for scientific development, especially when the need to replace the
evaluation of production through the impact factor of journals with an evaluation of the social
impact of research begins to spread. The Organization of Ibero-American States has also
contributed with a strong campaign for multilingualism. De este modo, I believe that Plan S, cual
is created with a clear perspective from funding and governmental agencies to favor open
access in a commercial manner, also needs to acknowledge these other tensions that have
arisen, facing, Por ejemplo, a study first, and then lines of funding for diamond access journals.
Unlike other regions of the South, Latin America has a very long history of publishing
initiatives alternative to the mainstream circuit, which involves many governmental resources
and has a different impact on the publication practices of researchers in that region. There is an
elite of academics who are definitely very oriented to this type of mainstream publication, y
for that reason the growth of APC journals is directly affecting certain scientific areas, and not
all of them equally. It will be important to evaluate the different aspects that this policy may
afectar. Por ejemplo, in Argentina, where we recently conducted an empirical study, biological
and health sciences are the areas most affected by APC increases and there is no possibility
that public subsidies will cover these costs. También, it is currently not possible to finance a read
and publish agreement at the country level, let alone at the level of public universities indi-
vidually. I am not aware of how many universities in Latin America are able to do so and the
publishers clearly understand this, which is why they offer different negotiating conditions to
those proposed in the global North. Sin embargo, they are still unacceptable. Me parece que
in the region there is an increasingly strong will to regain what we have in terms of our own
scientific communication space. Al mismo tiempo, there are different initiatives to generate
agreements and academic diplomacy actions with other countries, actores, y organizaciones
promoting an alternative, noncommercial, plurilingüe, and bibliodiverse way of communica-
tion to return the management of their journals to the academic community.
Germana: So-called Bronze open access5 and higher APC for open access have increased
among large commercial publishers. In this scenario, will developing countries, such as Latin
American ones, become even more excluded?
Fernanda: Sí, definitely. If we analyze this from the perspective of the origin of the open
access movement and the 2022 Budapest Declaration6, open access was understood as being
immediate and free. Sin embargo, the transition to the APC model of the mainstream journals
circuit has colonized the golden path and generated multiple new paths for paid open access,
which generate new and more complex inequalities for scientific communities in nonhegemo-
nic countries. Sin embargo, they generate all these tensions and asymmetries because in Latin
America, the categorization systems for researchers have required publication in these types
of journals, which are precisely the most rewarded in the evaluation system. Al mismo tiempo,
there is a strong movement that is increasingly entering evaluative culture discussions. Eso es
to say, even though the [journal] impact factor, the h-index, Scopus, or Web of Science indi-
cators, and especially the indicators of European publishers remain hegemonic, there is a trend
5 Bronze open access defines papers without a defined open access policy, but which can be accessed for
gratis.
6 https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
308
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
/
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
towards reflection and differentiated trends. It seems to me that all the activism of DORA7,
FOLEC8, and other manifestos and networks are attracting the attention of our governments
and of our research agencies, and researchers are seriously considering whether it will be pos-
sible to continue publishing in these commercial circuits. Por lo tanto, I see that we are living in
complicated times, but it is also a juncture that shows potential for an in-depth discussion of
what it means to prioritize evaluation through the impact factor of journals and where we want
to redirect that evaluation.
Germana: En febrero 2022 you gave a lecture at the Paris Open Science European
Conference and stated that it is necessary to balance global standards with what is relevant
to Latin America. Is it possible to change the reward system and recognition of academic
careers towards open access and science relevant to our region when developed countries’
standards continue to be the reference?
Fernanda: I believe that the key is to rebuild the link between two systems that could
collaborate and be complementary, but which are currently going opposite directions. Sobre el
one hand, there are the researcher categorization systems used by 10 countries in our region,
and which are nationwide, where the mainstream publishing circuit prevails. Por otro lado,
there is a scientific communication ecosystem in the region that not only has thousands of
diamond-access journals, but also a huge network of institutional repositories nucleated within
LA Referencia9, which is also developed with local and proprietary technology. Several countries
in Latin America have open access laws and are slowly implementing mandatory deposit in the
repository for all institutions—I am not only referring to publications, but also to open data.
Sin embargo, when analyzed from the perspective of evaluation systems, this dominantly
public regional circuit, endowed with human resources and collaborative infrastructures,
seems alienated, in philosophical terms. The weight of uncritical internationalization policies
and fervent belief in rankings and impact indicators as a measure of international prestige
render our academic communities incapable of responding to their own reality. For that
reason, one of the most difficult tasks is to raise awareness of the need for change among
investigadores, who are the ones who form the evaluation committees.
Evaluative cultures are processes of accumulation over many years. Por lo tanto, it is essential
to take a first step from the evaluative policies, incorporating rewards that are feasible for
researchers who are in an unequal position and cannot afford APC payments for open access
journals on their own. As repositories play a fundamental role, the green [open access] camino
strategy is very relevant.
Ahora, these changes have different effects depending on the academic field. Hay
disciplines that still publish mostly in subscription journals, and for that reason it is necessary
to train and support researchers to demand that these publishers comply with national open
access laws, which require them to deposit their publications in open access. There are other
fields that are predominantly publishing in gold-access journals with APC, which are mainly
the biological and health sciences. Demanding immediate open access publication as a
requirement to enter a career or be promoted may, de este modo, deepen the pressing problems that
these subjects are currently experiencing with indiscriminate increases in APCs. De este modo, primero, I
believe that actions to change evaluation systems require targeted policies for these most
affected areas. Gradually modifying publication practices is one of several strategies to open
7 https://sfdora.org/.
8 https://www.clacso.org/folec/.
9 https://www.lareferencia.info/es/.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
309
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
.
/
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
a new landscape of intraregional and international conversations, which could contribute to
turning our gaze to research agendas more closely linked to the needs of our societies.
Germana: In a preprint10 in which you and colleagues analyzed Latin American output
de 1909 a 2019, you showed that publication patterns are highly regionalized, with greater
contributions within each country or in partnership with Latin American countries. In Human-
ities, authors publish more within Latin America and in native languages, while in the Exact,
Biológico, and Medical Sciences, there is a cultural shift towards publishing in English. Qué
is preventing Latin America’s science from making a leap?
Fernanda: Sí, this preprint you mention, which is about to be published in the journal
Dados in Brazil, is the first published11 result of the OLIVA project [Latin American Observa-
tory of Evaluation Indicators]12 to which we have dedicated 2 years of work. A few days ago,
we deposited the open data set of the first stage of OLIVA 1.0, which we hope will be a con-
tribution to the visibility of the regional circuit because there was little history of joint studies of
publications in the databases Redalyc and SciELO, as Redalyc data are not available for auto-
matic gathering.
This project seeks to show the scope of the corpus of production published in journals that
are indexed in Latin America, and which have quality standards comparable to other indexing
systems with long regional experience in the area. I could even say that these are more
dependable indicators of quality if we measure them in relation to the low incidence of
predatory journals in our region. If you compare how journals are evaluated on SciELO13
[Scientific Electronic Library Online], Redalyc14 [Network of Scientific Journals of Latin
America and the Caribbean, España, and Portugal], or in the 2.0 Latindex15 [Regional Online
Information System for Scientific Journals in Latin America, the Caribbean, España, y
Portugal] catalog with respect to how some Scopus16 journals are evaluated and the role
played by editorial committees in separating what is useful from what is not, it seems to me
that there is a difference that greatly favors the self-managed indexing by the academic
community that we see in Latin America.
The expectation and projection of OLIVA is to collaborate in the dissemination of the scope
of this Latin American corpus so that we can advance in an interoperable platform with all
indexing services. We have just finished the second stage of OLIVA, which includes the pro-
duction of journals from Spain and Portugal and is important in the battle for multilingualism.
We are also finishing an exploratory study of the crossover between BIBLAT17 [Latin Amer-
ican Bibliography] and Latindex, two very important indexing systems in the region. BIBLAT
joins the oldest indexing systems (CLASE and PERIÓDICA), which were created in the 1970s at
Universidad Nacional de México. This is being done jointly with Latindex—a much more
recent journal portal, created in the mid-1990s, which has cataloged more than 3,000 jour-
nal, many of which are neither in SciELO nor in Redalyc, and which we have analyzed from
the overlaps to locate the joint BIBLAT-Latindex core. While Latindex is a portal that does not
offer document-level metadata for journals, BIBLAT has document-level records. Just showing
10 https://doi.org/10.1590/SciELOPreprints.2653.
11 https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/handle/11336/175850.
12 https://cecic.fcp.uncuyo.edu.ar/oliva/.
13 https://scielo.org.
14 https://www.redalyc.org.
15 https://latindex.org/latindex/.
16 https://www.scopus.com/.
17 https://biblat.unam.mx/pt.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
310
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
.
/
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
the results of this exploratory exercise will demonstrate the importance of mobilizing a
regional project for all journals indexed in the Latindex 1.0 catalog and in BIBLAT to have
visibility and interoperability with other types of indexing databases. I believe that this is a very
important challenge, because if we had a regional platform like CRIS18—and I believe that
there is a will in many Latin American actors—it seems to me that the legitimacy and circu-
lation of Latin American journals would improve significantly.
Germana: The pandemic made it clear that open science is the key to democratize knowl-
edge and speed up science development. Will OS get stronger and keep growing after the
pandemic?
Fernanda: With respect to the first [pregunta] Sí, I do have the same impression that these
changes during the pandemic, and the regional and global valuation of open access as a
fundamental need, linked open access with the human right to scientific progress already
established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. This change, cual
occurred in the context of the global health crisis, will not be reversed in terms of what it
meant in terms of insertion into the public debate and for citizenship.
For the academic community, at the same time, it meant a substantial change in their own
work practices, because the use of SciHub became very widespread when remote work was
required—that is to say that universal and immediate access to scientific literature began to be
an indispensable situation for scientists, gobiernos, los ciudadanos, and the general public alike.
In Latin America, I believe that we have the opportunity to expand the open access path in
several directions. Primero, a basically noncommercial, truly collaborative, open access path that
builds bridges towards multilingualism disputing the hypercentrality of the English language.
And this may have effects on straightening the evaluation towards the social relevance of
ciencia. Because diversifying the journals, publication languages, and the discussion agenda
opens new perspectives for a science more attentive to local needs.
Latin America has much potential and tradition to develop an open and citizen science,
which goes beyond the academic discussion and enters the world of a discussion with the
público, with communities, and with different social sectors. We have a tradition of participa-
tory action research, of continuous education programs at universities, which is a tradition that
has not been developed in other continents, and which shows another form of coproduction
between science and society, where the social community is conceived as a producer of
conocimiento.
Germana: Fernanda, how is open access part of your daily scholarship? What advice would
you give to colleagues who have not yet embraced open access?
Fernanda: Por un lado, it is important to differentiate according to the field. In Latin
America, the social and human sciences may choose among a wide range of diamond
journals, and in these disciplines, books also survive dynamically. Sin embargo, to participate
in international discussions, we lack multilingual journals that allow us to publish in several
idiomas. This leads many colleagues to English-language journals, which narrow the
diamond publishing alternatives. Para «hard» sciences, the scenario is narrower and more
complicado. But to answer your question, more in the realm of experience, I would say that
I, personally, have never paid an APC and I hope I never have to pay one. Naturalmente, the APC
phenomenon is growing in the social sciences as well, but whenever I have been invited to
18 Current Research Information System (CRIS), o Sistema de Información de Búsqueda Actual, es una herra-
mienta utilizada para gestionar la información de búsqueda.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
311
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
/
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
journals that charge APCs, I have been offered waivers. And that is a very arbitrary practice,
without transparent rules, used by journals. But I think that to prioritize open access to pub-
lications, we should promote a wider circulation in different types of journals. Por ejemplo,
once or twice a year I choose a journal that is not indexed, but which has immediate dissem-
ination and circulates in other environments, not only in the academic world. I also think it is
valuable to go outside the strictly academic sphere to choose media that circulate more among
estudiantes, librarians, civil servants, and other professionals. It depends on the discipline we
work in, but there is always a margin of freedom to make decisions prioritizing open access
and letting editors and researchers who invite us to write for a dossier know that accessibility is
essential. And with those publications we have from the past, in closed access journals or
which only offered Online first for a fee, what I do is to formally request a version to deposit
in my repository. I invoke the national law and have always been successful. I talk to the
publisher and explain that there is a national law that obliges me to deposit my article in
open access in the repository, and that they must access the publication and send a version
for that purpose.
Germana: One of your scientometric studies (Beigel, Packer et al., 2022) has compared
gender issues between researchers from Argentina and Brazil, and concluded that the
so-called glass ceiling persists, and therefore women still find huge barriers to rise in their
academic careers. Have these data helped to promote equity policies or are we just verifying
that meritocracy has not been enough to promote gender equity in Latin American science?
Fernanda: En efecto, more and more detailed research is helping us to understand this phe-
nomenon. It is true that there are two well-proven gender gaps at a global level: One is the
glass ceiling that occurs in institutions, where in general there are fewer women in the highest
jerarquías; and the other refers to the level of publications and productivity, which produces
effects for promotion in academic careers and for obtaining grants for projects. We were able
to verify that for the 10,600 CONICET19 researchers in Argentina and for the more than 14,000
Productivity Scholarship Holders [in Brazil] that there is clearly higher productivity of men
over women, and that the difference in this gap is also greater when we separate the number
of publications in English, which could imply that men are capitalizing more on international
projects and networks. Sin embargo, this does not imply a directly proportional relationship with
prestige and legitimacy. To study the circulation and specifically the citation of men and
women, beyond the number of articles published, we have worked together with CoLaV20
of the Universidad de Antioquía [Medellín, Colombia] to examine Google Scholar and try
to overcome the limitations of traditional databases such as Scopus and WoS. En el uno
mano, this study shows substantial differences in the productivity gap and offers the possibility
of assuming that women choose much more where, cuando, and how they will publish. En el
mismo tiempo, we note that they participate more exceptionally in the top 10 or top 10% del
most quoted people in their fields, even in highly feminized disciplines. We have also inves-
tigated the sex ratio between first authorship, intermediate position, and the last position,
which varies according to disciplinary areas between men and women. Our sociological
acercarse, based on specific researcher universes rather than “article populations,” allows
us to relate institutional gender gaps to asymmetries in publications and quotations.
All these studies, which have been conducted using different methodologies and sources
throughout the world, affect institutional policies, although still more slowly than is desirable.
The most widespread changes are some gender policies to compensate for equity, como
19 https://www.conicet.gov.ar/.
20 https://colav.udea.edu.co/.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
312
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
.
/
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
Interview with Dr. Fernanda Beigel
maternity periods for women when they are in a career, with regard to progression. Hay
gender policies in the composition of evaluation commissions that are beginning to be
observado, but very few actions in relation to how productivity is measured and less in terms
of authorship positions in publications.
Germana: Para concluir, are you optimistic about the changes in Latin American open
ciencia, considering times of great cuts in investments in science and political instability?
Fernanda: I understand that it is difficult to be optimistic about public investment in science
and technology in countries such as Brazil or many others that have undergone serious insti-
tutional instabilities, and with restrictive economic and social policies. But at the same time,
there are public policies—which have been in place for several years and decades—in terms
of collaborative infrastructure, which are sustained and are a beacon for the region. Para examen-
por ejemplo, La Referencia21, which has been supported by 12 governments since 2012, allows
regional agreements and developments with our own technology that places us in an advan-
tageous position, which other regions of the South do not have—even those that are not so
subject to political and economic ups and downs. There are public policies on open access
and regional efforts to develop repositories, and where progress is lacking in the evaluative
policies in favor of noncommercial open access, it is a matter that is not subject to resources,
but to institutional will and changes in the mentality of our peers. This sort of divorce between
scientific policy linked to open access and science evaluation policies requires a change of
cultura, which is always slow22. But there is a growing awareness among researchers in our
region and we are seeing changes, little by little.
Germana Barata is a researcher at the Laboratory of Advanced Studies in Journalism
(Labjor) of the Nucleus for the Development of Creativity (Nudecri), at the State University
of Campinas (Unicamp), Brasil, and member of the Brazilian Association of Science Editors
board (ABEC Brasil). Correo electrónico: germana@unicamp.br.
REFERENCE
Beigel, F., Packer, A. l., Gallardo, o., & Salatino, METRO. (2022).
OLIVA: The scientific production indexed in Latin America
institutional
and the Caribbean. Disciplinary diversity,
colaboración, and multilingualism in SciELO and Redalyc
(1995–2018). In SciELO Preprints. https://doi.org/10.1590
/SciELOPreprints.4637
21 https://www.lareferencia.info/en/.
22 See FOLEC for proposals for changing research assessment in Latin America: https://www.clacso.org/en/folec/.
Estudios de ciencias cuantitativas
313
yo
D
oh
w
norte
oh
a
d
mi
d
F
r
oh
metro
h
t
t
pag
:
/
/
d
i
r
mi
C
t
.
metro
i
t
.
/
mi
d
tu
q
s
s
/
a
r
t
i
C
mi
–
pag
d
yo
F
/
/
/
/
4
1
3
0
6
2
0
7
8
3
7
6
q
s
s
_
a
_
0
0
2
3
5
pag
d
/
.
F
b
y
gramo
tu
mi
s
t
t
oh
norte
0
7
S
mi
pag
mi
metro
b
mi
r
2
0
2
3
