The university should be the place demonstrating socioecological change, serving as a site of experimentation and praxis (see Dunlap et al., 2023). This, however, could not be further from the truth. Beside advancing technologies of digital, political and military control (Chatterjee & Maira, 2014), not to mention genetic dissection and animal vivisection—or some degree of this (Pellow, 2014)—universities fail to enact real examples of socioecological of renewability and sustainability. How come universities are not overflowing with agroecology, permaculture and forest gardens on and inside universities? How come universities are not self-generating their own electricity needs through wind, solar and other lower-carbon infrastructures? We, unfortunately, are witnessing the opposite at university campuses around the world.

https://www.grassrootsjpe.org/view/resource.php?resource=26

  • VeganPizza69 Ⓥ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    sighs from Eastern Europe

    You’d think that they’re using the money for prizes for reviewers or as scholarship prizes. What are they doing with all that money? Hosting a journal can’t be that expensive.

  • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    One should do a study about much these supposedly open access journals are profiting and who are their shareholders and what not

  • Frogodendron@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Why isn’t Brazil on the list of countries that have their fees waived? Are they on the “rich” side of the spectrum for that to be considered or is there simply no agreement between Brazilian government/publishers?

    Yes, I know this is treating a symptom rather than illness itself, but for the sake of today’s science and not the science of tomorrow, at least such an option should be available.

    • xthexder@l.sw0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Brazil’s approach for fostering innovation and technology is to tax all outside tech at 100%, even though no local industry for the products even exists. I don’t have high expectations for them investing in scientific publishing.

  • Kallioapina@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is also a big reason why I’m few weeks from submitting my masters for inspection, and 90% of my references/sources are from Annas Archive / Zlib. Our uni library, in supposedly rich nordic country Finland, just cant afford all the licenses. Luckily all our professors and researchers are in on the “secret”, but its just a fucking joke.

    Most of the world economy is on the same fucking joke. Just leeches upon leeches upon leeches… And so few people giving anything usefull to the world. I fucking try, but god damn these useless money leeches in the middle try to make it hard as possible. Fuck. So fucking angry, but what can I do but try yo minimize the damages on my personal part.

  • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    If the research was conducted with public money, it should be freely accessible by the public, change my mind…

      • qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Very cool. I know someone, in a fairly small but funded field, who had this sort of requirement — Elsevier had the relevant publication, but they couldn’t publish there due to access policies (or it was going to be painful to do so at any rate). So they started their own publication!

        I forgot the specifics, but it essentially uses arXiv as the backend, and there’s a (commercially available?) frontend that lets editors and reviewers do their thing. “Publishing” in this journal is essentially just endorsing an arXiv paper; so it’s open access by design.

        Really cool stuff. Their field is small enough that iirc they could kinda get critical mass to give Elsevier the finger and adopt this new platform. Warm fuzzy feeling thinking about it!

      • daddy32@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You forgot the part where this resulted in giving even more money to the publishers for the “Open access”. World is fucked.

  • BluesF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Academic publishing seems like a problem that should be easy to solve. It’s a situation where greed is outright making the service worse for everyone, so it seems like a new journal that does things differently (e.g. by not charging researchers) could become wildly successful… So why doesn’t that happen? Are there barriers to creating new journals?

  • BilboBargains@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Libgen and Scihub exist for this exact reason. How is it we’ve arrived at a situation where capitalists are deciding how knowledge is propagated?

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    also a lot of research work in brazil disallows you to get a second job. you are forced to live with the little money they pay you.

    its almost like they don’t want there to be research here.