Interview With Eloy Rodrigues: “There Will Be No Open Science If the Excessive and Wrong Use of Metrics Is Not Abandoned”

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21814/rlec.4044

Abstract

Eloy Rodrigues is a member of the Expert Group on Science 2.0/Open Science of the European University Association, representing the Council of Rectors of Portuguese Universities. Deeply aware of open science issues and one of the main stakeholders of this movement in Portugal, he is the director of the Documentation and Library Service of the University of Minho (UMinho) and one of the main advocates for the adherence to open science practices and for the inclusion of open access in institutional policies. Eloy Rodrigues has coordinated UMinho’s participation in more than a dozen projects (such as OpenAIRE, https://www.openaire.eu/, and FOSTER, https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/) funded by the European Union and concerning repositories and open science. He is a distinguished player in implementing open access from institutional repositories. He was the Chairperson of the Executive Board of the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (https://www.coar-repositories.org/) from 2015 to 2021 and is, since 2008, the coordinator of the UMinho team that develops the project Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Open Access Scientific Repositories of Portugal; www.rcaap.pt).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Elsa Costa e Silva, Centro de Estudos de Comunicação e Sociedade, Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal

Elsa Costa e Silva is a professor of the political economy of communication and journalism at the University of Minho. Her research interests focus on the concentration of media ownership, media economics and regulation. She has published in several national and international journals. She is the coordinator of the Economics and Communication Policies Working Group of the Portuguese Association of Communication Sciences (Sopcom). She was a journalist at Diário de Notícias.

References

Bordons, M., Fernández, M., & Gómez, I. (2002). Advantages and limitations in the use of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance. Scientometrics, 53(2), 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014800407876 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014800407876

Cole, N. L., Reichmann, S., & Ross-Hellauer, T. (2022). Global Thinking. ON-MERRIT recommendations for maximising equity in open and responsible research (1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6276753

Confederation of Open Access Repositories. (s.d.). The Notify project. https://www.coar-repositories.org/notify/

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520, 429–431. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a

Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen science: A study of people, expertise and sustainable development. Routledge.

Paris Call on Research Assessment, fevereiro de 2022, https://osec2022.eu/paris-call/

Ross-Hellauer, T., Fecher, B., Shearer, K., & Rodrigues, E. (2019, novembro). Pubfair: A distributed framework for open publishing services (Versão 2). Confederation of Open Access Repositories. https://www.coar-repositories.org/files/Pubfair-version-2-November-27-2019-2.pdf

San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment, 16 de dezembro, 2012, https://sfdora.org/read/

UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science, novembro de 2021, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379949.locale=en

Published

2022-12-22

How to Cite

Costa e Silva, E. (2022). Interview With Eloy Rodrigues: “There Will Be No Open Science If the Excessive and Wrong Use of Metrics Is Not Abandoned”. Lusophone Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(2), 139–146. https://doi.org/10.21814/rlec.4044