Dear Suchith,
I agree with you on the matter, that publishing a book in context of
United Nations initiative by esri is bad. I would also support to
offiicialy articulate this somehow.
But the case you address was solved. As I understand, esri is no longer
considered as the publisher for the book?
I also think, that there might be a big conflict of interest, if esri
publishes a UN SDG book. But intil that is proven by some wrong doing
from esri during the editing and publication process, we are talking not
about facts. And as far as I know they didn't published an UN related
book yet? Maybe ICA and Prof. Kraak understood this problem, after you
raised your concerns about this issue last year. So, thank you very much
for your caring about this issue a year ago, and as it seems you already
won the battle!
What I see now, is at most a policy issue within ICA, that they may need
to open up the process for deciding for a publisher of a book project,
but I am not even sure about that, because they seem to have already a
policy for that case in place?
Best regards,
Christian
Am 24.07.2018 um 22:51 schrieb Suchith Anand:
Dear Christian,
Thank you for you mail and inputs. This letter is draft and I welcome
inputs from you and everyone to refine it.I fully agree with you that
we just need more transparency in science and also in the whole
process of editing/reviewing and publishing a book.
I am happy to make the edits/changes needed that you suggested and I
will request your help on this. I have provided all information that I
have on this book project that I am aware of. I just do not know the
details (what was the process of selecting the publisher, criteria
etc).If you are able to get details on this and share with the
community, it will be very helpful. I did my best to get more
information on the publisher decision process etc . Forsome
strangereason, there was no openness in the whole process which is the
main concern. So if there is no openness and transparency even in this
then how do you think we can expect transparency in editing/reviewing
process. I respectfully disagree with you that any GIS vendor if they
are also running theirpublication press, then they have no conflict of
interest.
It is the duty of scientific association to ensure there is
transparency in science. Even ICA’s publication policy for conference
proceedingsdoes not mention any GIS vendor press . Why? Please see
https://icaci.org/ica-publications-and-publication-policy-first-publication-volume-is-online/
All scholarly publications (edited books, journals, conference
proceedings) should follow similar guidelines.So I am very confused
why and how a GIS vendor press was planned for this community book
project.
I highlighted the global problem of increase in low quality
submissionsand it is not an ICA problem or any Vendor problem or any
single organisation problem.Hence it is important that we are all very
vigilant and take steps to protect the integrity of independent peer
review frameworksfor Scholarly publications of Scientific
Associations. If anyScientific Associations themselves are not open
and transparent in their decision making, then how can theyensure
independent peer review frameworksfor Scholarly publications!
I want to make it clear that I am not an author or coauthor on any
articles submitted to this book project. So I do not have any personal
conflict of interest in this. GeoForAll colleagues contributed for
this book project in good faith. I did work to get GeoForAll
colleagues to support and contribute for this book project. So I have
a moral responsibility to make sure they are provided as much
information and updates on this.I have no issue if the GIS vendor
publication press for this community book was selected by an open,
transparent process.
I want us to look at the future not focus on mistakes made in past .
Some mistakes have been made and I understand that this is corrected.
We are all human , so we all make mistakes So let us not focus on
past mistakes but look at ideas on how we can strengthen the
independent peer review frameworks for Scholarly publications of
Scientific Associations in the future.
I have worked with many properitaryGIS vendors and I have
great respect for all of them and always welcomed them.I have raised
my concern with someopen source vendors also if I find any thing that
undermines openness.I am the view that both open and properitary
systems have an important place and need to work together . We are
all part of a big ecosystem all working for Geo. I believe in open
discussions to help find better understanding. For me, Openness
means being open to different perspectives ,ideas, viewpoints,
cultures and learning and improving to be a better human every day...
Best wishes,
Suchith
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* GeoForAll <geoforall-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of
Christian Willmes <c.will...@uni-koeln.de>
*Sent:* 24 July 2018 17:43
*To:* geofor...@lists.osgeo.org; OSGeo Discussions
*Subject:* Re: [Geo4All] Draft of Open Letter on the importance to
protecting independent peer review frameworks for Scholarly
publications of Scientific Associations
Dear Suchith,
I understand your point, and I also support your views on this, but
this is from my perspective a too personal/particular issue, as to
have it as an "OSGeo open letter". Also, because this is more of an
ICA and not so much an OSGeo issue, I think.
First, I would keep it more general. You address a particular issue
(UN SDG book published by esri), and also some personal background
(this should not matter to the addressed subject). I would recommend
you keep it from being personal and denouncing proprietary GIS
vendors. If a company plays by the rules of science, there is nothing
wrong about that company publishing a scientific book. I.e. almost all
book publishers are commercial companies with interests somehow and
somewhere.
You need to “attack” scientific “wrong doing” by that particular
company in conducting the editing and publication of that book.
Publishing books if done correctly is not wrong, even by a vendor with
vested interests. But if you witness, for example, that submissions
using open source GIS solutions are disadvantaged against the
submissions using products of the proprietary GIS vendor publishing
the book, that would be the point to raise and attack.
Second, better write about how it should be done to avoid this
negative “Fake Science” things from happening. Here the idea of Open
Science and Reproducible Science is key, i.e. the most openness and
transparency possible. We just need more transparency in science and
also in the whole process of editing/reviewing and publishing a book.
And this is where OSGeo can contribute. Basically, real reproducible
and open science is not possible without open source software. If you
can’t see how something is implemented, you can not really reproduce
the results.
Third, if you accuse someone of “Fake Science” please make sure to
offer evidence about this particular misconduct. If you fail to do so,
you are creating “fake news” yourself. Sorry, no offense at you
personally, but I think its not a good idea to publish this letter in
OSGeo's or GeoForAll's name. At least not with these accusations or
even notion of "Fake Science" in it.
To be clear, I share your view that it is bad, if esri would publish a
book written by scientists in the context of a United Nations
initiative to maybe only advertise its own product, but until any
misconduct is proven, you can't accuse esri or ICA of "Fake Science".
Best regards,
Christian
Am 24.07.2018 um 11:53 schrieb Suchith Anand:
Dear colleagues,
I have prepared a draft letter with my ideas/suggestions .I am just a
volunteer and I feel sad thatthat I have to raise this issue through
an open letter. But if I remain silent on this , I will be
indirectly supporting the degrading of independent peer review
frameworks for Scholarly publications of Scientific Associations.
It is the fundamental duty of all Officers of Scientific
Associations/Organisationsto always take steps to guard and protect
independent peer review frameworksfor Scholarly publications of
Scientific Associations. I am hopeful and confident that that they
all will do this for the future.
I am not a native English speaker, so please help refine thisletter
correctly. I want us to look at the future not focus on mistakes made
in past . Some mistakes have been made and I understand that this is
corrected. We are all human , so we all make mistakes. So let us not
focus on past mistakes but look at ideas on how we can strengthen the
independent peer review frameworksfor Scholarly publications of
Scientific Associations in the future.
The International Cartographic Association (ICA) is my organisation
for whichI have volunteered for the last 15 years and continuing . I
have great respect for everyone in this great global community . The
SDG book is a community effort (not any individual’s book project) .
I have requested from the start (as soon as I came to know) for
openness and transparency in decision making for selecting the
publisher. esp. as this book is on UN SDG . I understand that ICA has
now corrected the mistake . Everyone makes mistakes and it takes
courage to acknowledge and correct the mistakes .Compassion and
forgiveness are important values .I am very grateful that ICA has
listened to my concerns and rectified this . So I don’t have any
issues with ICA or any colleagues in ICA. We might have difference in
opinions on some issues and having free and open discussions is in my
humble opinion the best way to learn each others perspectives and
find best solutions to move forward.
_
_
Please send any updates/modifications needed to the draft by 30th
July 2018. I am on family holidays ( with no internet ) in first week
of August, so I will aim to send this before I go on holidays.
===========================================
*Draft of Open Letter on the importance to protecting independent
peer review frameworks**for Scholarly publications of Scientific
Associations*
Scholarly publications (edited books, journals etc) from scientific
associations/organisations hascredibility and reputation because of
strong independent peer review frameworks . We are very fortunate in
the Geospatial domain to have many reputed Scientific Associations
and organisations (ICA, IGU, ISPRS, IEEE-GRSS, IAG etc) who have over
many decades provided strong leadership in advancement of geo science.
In times of fake news, science is usually one of those areas that can
give us orientation and we can rely on.Independent peer review
frameworksfor Scholarly publications is among the foundations of good
science. However, this isobviously at risk now. If a professional
association takesagrees to publish scholarly publications (edited
books etc)through a GIS vendor’s press then there is potential issues
with independent peer review and ensuring scientific quality. It is
only natural that any GIS vendor publication press to have vested
interests in promoting their products andagenda. It also makes it
easy for the vendor to get endorsement for theirproducts from
scientific and professional organisations using this route.
Independent peer review is the fundamental aspect of science and we
need to ensure all steps to protect this.
We are also now seeing a very disturbing trend withsome vendors even
starting to trademark “ science” for marketing/sales of theirproducts
and “science” is being misused for vendor marketing/sales! . I have
raised this issue through an open letter [1] .Science is not a
commodity to be marketed or sold by any vendor owners! I am very sad
and disappointed to see this degrading of science happening.
Scientific organisations should not endorse any specific vendor
products etc as “Science” and take strong moral stand
againstmarketing of products as “Science’ by any vendor owners!
I am a volunteer for the ICA for the last 15 years and always done my
best in my small way to support ICA . Around one year back, i/n the
light of the //International Map Year (IMY)/ <http://mapyear.org/>/,
the /The International Cartographic Association (ICA) started an
excellent initiative /forhighlighting the value of cartography by
“mapping” the //UN sustainable development goals/
<https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/>/./Building upon this, The
ICA community started work on a book on UN SDG Mappingbuilding upon
the posters of the various commissions on this [2]. This is a great
community initiative developed with inputs from all colleagues in
commissions of the ICA. The Open Source Geospatial Commission
colleagues also contributed our inputs for this. When the book
project was announced, I did my best to contact colleagues to
contribute to this in good faith. I didn’t have the faintest idea
that it was being planned to be published through a properitary GIS
vendor publication press! As soon as I came to know about this, I did
contact Menno -Jan with my concerns and requested him that as this is
a community book project to please allow open discussions and keep
the community updated [3] . I was very surprised that there was no
open and transparent discussions on selecting the book publisher was
done.
From an email from Anthony Robinson on 16th July 2018, I understand
now that ICA is not proceeding with the vendor GIS publication press
(Esri press)for the SDG book and I welcome this. But it isimportantwe
need to be learn lessons from this mistake and not repeat this in
future. We are all humans and make mistakes.
I fully respect the right of individuals publishing their personal
work [1] in any publication house that they wish. But as officers of
Scientific Organisations, esp. in times of some vendor owners
doing marketing/sales on “Science” , I request all colleagues to be
careful not to do anything that will undermine independent peer
review process.
I am suggesting some initial ideas that we all can take as a
community to help reduce this problem in the future
* All Scientific Associations and organisations should ensure that
there is full open and transparent discussions allowed before
choosing any publishers of scholarly publications (Edited Books
etc).
* It is important that GIS scientific associations/organisations
take strong moral stand against taking sponsorship/royalty etc
for scholarly publications from all GIS vendors . Independent
peer review system is the fundamental aspect of science. So I am
humbly requesting all Scientific organisations tonot use any GIS
vendor controlled press for publishing scholarly outputs (edited
books etc).GIS scientific organisations should nottakeany
sponsorship or royalty for scholarly publications (books,
journals etc) from any GIS vendors . If a scientific association
takesagrees to publish scholarly publications (edited books
etc)through the vendor’s press then there is potential issues
with independent peer review and ensuring scientific quality. It
is only natural that any GIS vendor publication press to have
vested interests in promoting their products and agenda. It also
makes it easy for the vendor to get endorsement for their
products from scientific and professional organisations using
this route. Independent peer review is the fundamental aspect of
science and we need to ensure all steps to protect this.
* Officers of Scientific Organisations and Editors of all GIS
journals declare any conflict of interest with any vendors
(funding/sponsorship/royalties etc received from any GIS vendors
currently or in the past) to ensure transparency and good
practices.They should not support any vendors interest directly
or indirectly. Scientific organisations should not endorse any
specific vendor products etc as “Science” and take strong moral
stand against marketing of products as “Science’ by any vendor
owners!
I am concerned with the wider degradation of science and education
happening in different sectors. This is a moral issue and needs all
organisations globally in science and education working together.
It is the fundamental duty of all Officers of Scientific
Organisationsto guard and protect independent peer review
frameworksfor Scholarly publications of Scientific Associations. I am
hopeful and confident that that they will do this for the future.
Best wishes,
Suchith
[1]
https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/geospatial-ig/post/open-letter-importance-scientific-freedom-and-public-good
[2] https://
<https://>icaci.org/maps-and-sustainable-development-goals/
<http://icaci.org/maps-and-sustainable-development-goals/>
[3] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geoforall/2017-June/003790.html
[4]
https://esripress.esri.com/display/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&websiteID=254&moduleID=0
This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
attachment.
Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored
where permitted by law.
_______________________________________________
GeoForAll mailing list
geofor...@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:geofor...@lists.osgeo.org>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall
--
Dr. Christian Willmes
AG GIS & Fernerkundung | GIS & RS Group
Geographisches Institut | Institute of Geography
Universität zu Köln | University of Cologne
Tel.: +49 (0)221 470 6234
http://www.geographie.uni-koeln.de/14126.html
http://www.sfb806.de
http://crc806db.uni-koeln.de
http://publons.com/a/1316706/
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5566-6542
This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
attachment.
Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored
where permitted by law.
--
Christian Willmes
AG GIS & Fernerkundung | GIS & RS Group
Geographisches Institut | Institute of Geography
Universität zu Köln | University of Cologne
Tel.: +49 (0)221 470 6234
http://www.geographie.uni-koeln.de/14126.html
http://www.sfb806.de
http://crc806db.uni-koeln.de
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5566-6542
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss