Communication of Research Results,
Local Science Journals, and
Evaluation of Scientific Performance:
One or Three Divergent Issues?
Anna María Prat
Head of the Information Department
CONICYT-Chile
Some general considerations to begin with
• Science is universal, the results of scientific
research must be disseminated and accumulated.
• Science and scientific research are two important
issues for any country, and also for developing
countries.
• Today, being part of global research networks
affects local science.
• New communication patterns influence and will
continue to influence local scientific research,
Some data
• In Latin America a systematic national research
policy begins only in the 60’s.
• Research is being carried out mainly by
academic institutions.
• The resources allocated to R&D are still low.
• The number of scientists and engineers devoted
to R&D are scarce.
• But good research is being carried out.
Distribution of the World Total
Investment in R&D
Rest of the World
4%
Europe an Union
22%
North Ame rica
44%
Latin America
2%
Asia
28%
Source: IMD Executive summary 2000.
Average Percentage of GDP devoted
to R&D
2,5
2
1,5
1
0,5
0
North America European Union Asia Latin America
Source: OECD, PECC, RICYT
Scientists & Engineers engaged in
R&D per Thousand of Labor Force
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
European EEUU Japan- Latin
Union Korea America
Source: OECD, PECC, RICYT
World distribution of scientific
papers published in 1995-1997
Rest of the
World
13%
Latin America
2%
United States
Former Sov. 35%
Union
4%
Asia
14%
European
Union
Source ISI Database 32%
How do we communicate scientific
results?
• In the exact sciences, almost only through
mainstream journals
• In the natural sciences through mainstream
and local journals
• In applied science mainly through local
journals
• In the social and human sciences almost
entirely through local journals
Publications output of Basic and Applied
Research Funded by CONICYT
Reports
28%
Foreign J.
3%
Thesis
11% Foreign J. ISI
Journals 10%
Nonographs 20% National J. ISI
4% 2%
National J
7%
Congress F. Congress Nat.
23% 12%
Scientific papers distributed by discipline
MAINSTREAM JOURNALS LOCAL JOURNALS
Arts
Social /Beh. /Human.
3% Math. Math. Physics/Astr.
3% 1% Chemistry
3% Arts/Human. 3%
5%
Agriculture Physics/Astr. 14%
3% 15%
Biological Sc.
13%
Medicine Social /Beh.
22% Geosciences
25%
3%
Chemistry
14% Eng. / Comp
Sc.
9%
g. / Comp Sc.
5% Agriculture Medi cine
Geosciences 11% 19%
Biological Sc.
3%
26%
Mainstream v/s Local Journals
• Good local journals are being published in the
region.
• Some of them have been included in the
“mainstream” list.
• Others will never be included for different
reasons
• Many more are struggling to survive
• Some should disappear
Science Journals in the LATINDEX
Data Base
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
o
ay
rú
a
a
a
a
le
il
tin
ic
l
ub
bi
as
hi
ue
gu
Pe
ex
om
Br
C
C
en
ez
ru
M
en
rg
ol
U
C
A
V
Latin American Serials in the
ISI Data Bases
25
20
15 ARTS / H.
S.SCIENCE
10 SCIENCE
5
0
A
O
EN E
EZ NA
A A
LO LA
L
A
RU
R
SI
R HIL
I
EC UB
C
O
IC
O MB
E
EN TI
RI
PE
D
A
EX
U
C
A
BR
C
U
M
ST
G
O
C
A
V
C
The struggle of local journals
• Published by scientific societies and academic
institutions fighting for budgets
• Edited by small teams of scientists that
voluntarily take care of the entire editorial work,
including peer review, proof reading, dealing
with printers, distribution policies, etc.
• Very poor distribution, and hence a very difficult
availability, even for those in the Mainstream.
• Yearly struggle for public funds
Evaluation and Rankings
• For the last past ten years, individual scientists,
institutions and even in some cases, disciplines,
have been evaluated, only according to their
publication output in mainstream journals.
• Local scientific journals are not considered
valid for evaluation purposes.
• No ranking of local journals has been been,
until now, recognized as valid, at national or
regional level.
A National Policy for Scientific
Communication (some assumptions)
• The first assumption is that in many areas of
knowledge we need good local (or regional)
science journals.
• Periphery science (and periphery journals) don’t
have to be mediocre.
• We should have, fewer journals in the different
areas, but of better quality.
• These journals need official budgetary support
from government.
A National Policy for Scientific
Communication (some assumptions)
• We need a valid and widely recognized ranking
and evaluation system.
• We must be able to distribute the good scientific
local journals
• We must explore all possibilities to make these
journals openly available and known. We have to
assure their visibility, and hence, their use.
• We must be part of national, regional or
international scientific communication networks.
Some steps in the case of Chile
• Creation of a National Fund for Journal Editing
• Creation of a methodology of journal
evaluation, evaluation criteria and an evaluation
team.
• Search of other possibilities of journal
publishing
• Implementation of Scielo-Chile, the program
for electronic publishing of existing local
science journals.
Experiencing the new possibilities of
electronic publishing
The pilot project to create a new scientific
journal, only in electronic format:
EJB Electronic Journal of Biotechnology,
http://ejb.ucv.cl or http://www.ejb.org
edited by the Universidad Católica de
Valparaíso, has proved very successful.
In one year it has accumulated over 112.500
visits.
Experiencing the new possibilities of
electronic publishing
New communication methods are being tested
in the site:
– BIP Biotechnology in Public.
– Site for the publishing of international
biotechnology congresses proceedings.
– Specialized fora in biotechnology areas.
– Incorporation of multimedia possibilities to
scientific communications.
But once more, scientific quality is the requisite.
Scielo Chile, today
• Developed with the Bireme-Fapesp
Methodology, selects local science journals to be
incorporated into the system.
• The methodology was selected because of its
structure that allows the publication of complete
edition of scientific journals, built specialized
data bases and compile scientometric indicators,
and built a regional network.
Scielo Chile, today
• Begun in 1999, to-day it includes 16 journals. By
the end of the year we will reach 20.
• From March 2001 the evaluation module will be
put into place to allow the evaluation and ranking
of journals and individual articles.
• By the end of 2001, we expect to include 35 titles.
But, whichever the method, scientific
quality remains the main issue
• To receive funding or to be included in Scielo-
Chile, the only requirement is scientific quality.
• A methodology for ranking local journals is
being put into place, according to the
characteristics of each area of knowledge and
internationally accepted standards.
• The methodology will be complemented with
the Scielo statistical and scientometric module
Scientific quality, availability, visibility,
and new communication patterns
• Our mainstream science will continue to be
published through mainstream journals. And
this is something we consider very important
• We need to stimulate and maintain the good
local scientific journals in many disciplines,
where this journals are needed and where
communication in Spanish is important
• We need good and accepted evaluation
indicators for these journals and their articles
Scientific quality, availability, visibility,
and new communication patterns
• This means that we must insist the scientific
evaluation and work towards a better visibility
of our research efforts to improve scientific
communication
• We believe that national and regional rankings
should be put into place, recognized by the
scientific community itself . A program like
Scielo.org encompassing the region, is the
answer?
What comes next?
•Where is Scielo going?
•Should it be a portal to Latin American Science?
•A communication and information network?
•A community of scientists?
•Undoubtedly, part of the global research
community.