Article-Processing Fees and Subsidies: The Colonial Entanglement of Knowledge Production in South Africa—The Case of Gender-Based Violence Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25159/2957-3645/14377Keywords:
article processing fees, subsidies, knowledge production, publishing practices, gender-based violence (GBV), feminist decolonialAbstract
In this article, we studied the contribution of the current South African publishing ecosystem to the hierarchisation, elitism and monopolisation of knowledge production in social-justice studies, taking as an example the research area of gender-based violence (GBV). We examined the Sabinet database of articles published in South African journals on GBV between 2018 and 2022, and reviewed the pre- and post-production value chain related to the publication of these articles (especially the article page-fee structure and the governmental subsidy system). In addition, we couched this discussion in feminist decolonial critique. We conclude that the current publishing ecosystem—with the more or less active involvement and/or support of the government, journals and academics—greatly limits the diversity of voices able to contribute to the production of knowledge on GBV. This ecosystem hampers, minimises or even excludes the first-hand knowledge and experiences of those located outside of academic institutions (particularly, local researchers unaffiliated with South African universities, grassroot activists and members of non-governmental organisations). It conversely renders academics and the tertiary educational institutions which employ them as the only actors capable of benefiting financially from or contributing to the knowledge-production chain and, in return, feeding it. This cycle seems to propel the creation of an echo chamber of views, perspectives and opinions with academics and their tertiary educational institutions de facto acting as the only knowledge producers in the country. We propose that the solution to such an unjust situation is a radical decolonisation of the deeply epi-colonial South African publishing ecosystem.
References
Andrason, A. (2022). An organizational “mini” monster: An anarchist critique of the hyper hierarchization of a small department at a South African university. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 28(3), 31–65. http://www.jceps.com/archives/13938
Andrason, A., Lange, H., & Gysman, V. (2023). Doing—reflecting—comprehending, or: how we found resonance with anarchist pedagogy. Anarchist Studies, 23(1), 82–109. https://doi.org/10.3898/AS.31.1.05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3898/AS.31.1.05
Andrason, A., & Van den Brink, J. (2023). Publishing (mal)practices and their (re)colonising effects: Double affiliations in academic publishing. Journal of Education, 91, 70–93. https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i91a05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17159/2520-9868/i91a05
Boonzaier, F. (2017). The life and death of Anene Booysen: Colonial discourse, gender-based violence and media representations. South African Journal of Psychology, 47(4), 470–481. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246317737916 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246317737916
Boonzaier, F., & Van Niekerk, T. (2019). Introducing decolonial feminist community psychology. In F. Boonzaier & T. van Niekerk (Eds.), Decolonial feminist community psychology (pp. 1–10). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20001-5_1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20001-5_1
Bunting, I. (2004). The higher education landscape under apartheid. In N. Cloete, P. Maassen, R. Fehnel, T. Moja, H. Perold & T. Gibbon (Eds.), Transformation in higher education: Global pressures and local realities in South Africa (pp. 35–52). Kluwer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4006-7_3
Department of Higher Education and Training. (2015). Research output policy. https://www.dhet.gov.za/Policy%20and%20Development%20Support/Research%20Outputs%20policy%20gazette%202015.pdf
Department of Higher Education and Training. (2003). Policy and procedures for measurement of research output of public higher education institutions. https://www.dhet.gov.za/Policy%20and%20Development%20Support/Policy%20and%20procedures%20for%20measurement%20of%20Research%20output%20of%20Public%20Higher%20Education%20Institutions.pdf
Grosfoguel, R. (2011). Decolonizing post-colonial studies and paradigms of political-economy: Transmodernity, decolonial thinking, and global coloniality. Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.5070/t411000004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/T411000004
Grosfoguel, R. (2013). The structure of knowledge in westernized universities. Epistemic racism/sexism and the four genocides/epistemicides of the long 16th century. Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self-Knowledge, 11(1), 73–90. https://scholarworks.umb.edu/humanarchitecture/vol11/iss1/8/
Kessi, S., & Boonzaier, F. (2018). Centre/ing decolonial feminist psychology in Africa. South African Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246318784507 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246318784507
Kessi, S., Marks, Z., & Ramugondo, E. (2020). Decolonizing African Studies. Critical African Studies, 12(3), 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2020.1813413 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2020.1813413
Lugones, M. (2010). Toward a decolonial feminism. Hypatia, 25(4), 742–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2010.01137.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2010.01137.x
Maldonado-Torres, N. (2016). Outline of ten theses on coloniality and decoloniality. Frantz Fanon Foundation and website of the Caribbean Studies Association. http://fondation-frantzfanon.com/outline-of-ten-theses-on-coloniality-and-decoloniality/
Malherbe, N. (2018). Expanding conceptions of liberation: Holding Marxisms with liberation psychology. Theory & Psychology, 28(3), 340–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318767757 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318767757
Malherbe, N. (2022). For an anti-capitalist psychology of community. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99696-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99696-3
Matutu, H. (2019). “On the way to Calvary, I lost my way”: Navigating ethical quagmires in community psychology at the margins. In F. Boonzaier & T. van Niekerk (Eds.), Decolonial feminist community psychology (pp. 111–128). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-20001-5_8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20001-5_8
Muthama, E., & McKenna, S. (2020). The unintended consequences of using direct incentives to drive the complex task of research dissemination. Education As Change, 24, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.25159/1947-9417/6688 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25159/1947-9417/6688
Tomaselli, K. (2018). Perverse incentives and the political economy of South African academic journal publishing. South African Journal of Science, 114(11–12), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2018/4341 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2018/4341
Vaughan, C. L. (2008). Alternatives to the publication subsidy for research funding. South African Journal of Science, 104, 91–96. http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/sajs/v104n3-4/a0110404.pdf
Warren, L., Van den Brink, J., Sekowe, C., Ribeiro, L., Asante, M. K. O., & Andrason, A. (2022). MASIVULE I-ANTIEKE STUDIES: From trauma to change. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7499208
Wild, S. (2020). Researchers decry “pay to publish” system—but don’t want it to stop. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03483-y#:~:text=Under%20the%20scheme%2C%20researchers%20can,2005%20to%2025%2C371%20in%202018
Woodiwiss, A. (2012). Publication subsidies: challenges and dilemmas facing South African researchers. Cardiovascular journal of Africa, 23(8), 421–427. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3721321/
Wulfekühler, H., & Andrason, A. (2023). “We don’t need another hero!”: Whistleblowing as an ethical organizational practice in higher education. Education Philosophy and Theory, 55(7), 844–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2022.2152672 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2022.2152672