In addition, initiatives that aim to provide resources to scholars in the Global South by working with international publishers often have an emphasis on the fields of applied sciences, medicine, agriculture, and environment studies. And economic value is, of course, defined according to a narrow understanding of both ‘economic’ and ‘value’ where both often mean profit and loss within a neoliberal capitalist framework. The social sciences and the humanities are seen as not valuable because they are perceived as fields without economic value, hence without social and political value. Our university management does not prioritize subscriptions to journals in the social sciences and the humanities because universities managers (deans, associate deans, academic committees, boards of governors) do not value these fields and disciplines, especially in comparison to fields such as business and medicine. Not being up to date with the latest results compromises our effectiveness in designing and conducting research, submitting articles for publication, proposing special issues of journals or book series, sending book proposals to relevant presses, and successfully applying for conferences. ![]() This has adverse effects on how and what we teach, and what scholarship we are able to engage with for our research and writing. This means that we don’t know about the latest conversations happening in our disciplines, both in terms of research and teaching. One of the major issues we face is not having institutional access to journals in our fields. Third, the challenges I discuss here pertain to experiences of scholars in the humanities and social sciences, such as gender studies, literature, history, urban studies, sociology, philosophy, psychology, anthropology, and media studies. Therefore, we are not representative of how poor, working-class, and lower- to middle-class scholars in the Global South manage these problems. This infrastructure is unwieldy and precarious but it is present. This means that we have access to money and infrastructure (transport, electricity, internet, computers) which offers capacities to manage many issues. My colleagues and I are part of upper middle- to upper-class social and economic structures and we live in major urban hubs. Second, it is important to recognize and acknowledge the privileges of class and location within the Global South. Thus, I am able to recognize the difficulties marginalized scholars face in academic centers of authority, visibility, and access alongside the challenges faced by scholars in the Global South. My research involves women of color, transnational and Indigenous feminism, with the goal of developing an understanding of these networks as embedded in globalized grids of economic, social, and economic power, including historical and contemporary formations of colonialism, settler colonialism, and neocolonialism. ![]() I used this term in my Twitter discussion as a popular shorthand to indicate regions in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas which are not part of institutionalized networks of power, authority, visibility, and access in global academia. Some notes before I start: first, I understand that the term ‘Global South’ is problematic (see, for example, this article or this one) and I do not subscribe to the values that inflect this term. Here I expand on a recent discussion I had on Twitter about the problems scholars based in the Global South face, and the solutions my colleagues and I have come up with. However, many scholars face particular challenges because of their locations. As the Scholarly Kitchen continues to look at bringing more diverse geographical perspectives into our discussions about scholarly communication, and what COVID-19 has forced us all to rethink, we thought it would be interesting to revisit Naveen’s post.Īcademia is a global network of institutions, people, and projects, and the production and circulation of academic knowledge is a globalized concern and goal. However, the past year has also shed some new perspectives particularly on the area of travel. The issues raised in the post still seem very familiar for researchers in many parts of the world, and the recommendations made important points about ways to improve equity in research communication worldwide. These included issues with access, resources and travel, as well as particular tensions relating to particular research topics, especially in the social sciences and humanities. ![]() Naveen Zehra Minai (who is now at the University of Toronto) wrote based on them - talked about a range of challenges for researchers in less well-resourced countries. Note from Sian Harris: In 2018 I read an interesting Twitter thread from a researcher who at the time was working in Pakistan.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |