Files List

• Amrute (2019) Of Techno-Ethics and Techno-Affects  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Tobias Steiner on 27 April 2021.

  Amrute, Sareeta ‘Of Techno-Ethics and Techno-Affects’, Feminist Review 123, no. 1 (1 November 2019): 56–73, https://doi.org/10.1177/0141778919879744.

• Let’s First Get Things Done! On Division of Labour and Techno-Political Practices of Delegation in Times of Crisis  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Tobias Steiner on 9 April 2021.

  Aouragh, Miriyam, Seda Gürses, Jara Rocha, and Femke Snelting. 2015. ‘Let’s First Get Things Done! On Division of Labour and Techno-Political Practices of Delegation in Times of Crisis’. The Fibreculture Journal, no. 26.
  https://doi.org/10.15307/fcj.26.196.2015.

• ‘Nothing Comes Without Its World: Thinking with Care’  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Janneke Adema on 12 March 2021.

  Puig de la Bellacasa, Maria (2012) ‘Nothing Comes Without Its World: Thinking with Care’ The Sociological Review
  What is the significance of caring for thinking and knowing? Thinking and knowing are essentially relational processes. Grounded on a relational conception of ontology the essay argues that ‘thinking with care’ is a vital requisite of collective thinking in interdependent worlds, but also one that necessitates a thick vision of caring. A speculative exploration of forms of thinking with care unfolds through a rereading of Donna Haraway's work, specifically of its take on feminist discussions on the situated character of knowledge. The notion of thinking with care is articulated through a series of concrete moves: thinking-with, dissenting-within and thinking-for. While weaving Haraway's thinking and writing practices with the trope of care offers a particular understanding of this author's knowledge politics, the task of caring also appears in a different light.

• The Politics of Open Access — Decolonizing Research or Corporate Capture?  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Janneke Adema on 11 February 2021.

  Meagher, K. (2021), Introduction: The Politics of Open Access — Decolonizing Research or Corporate Capture?. Development and Change. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12630

  This introductory article looks beyond the conventional framing of open ac-cess (OA) debates in terms of paywalls and copyrights, to examine the his-torical processes, institutional and digital infrastructures, and political dy-namics shaping the effects of OA in development research. From a histori-cal perspective, it focuses on tensions and crises in the relationship betweenscholarly and corporate publishing ecosystems. The spectrum of open accessmodels is also examined, with a focus on green, gold, diamond and black,which tend to obscure the underlying scholarly publishing infrastructuresthat shape the parameters of openness and access. A closer look at distinc-tive for-profit and non-profit OA infrastructures reveals the inequitable andoften neo-colonial effects of for-profit models on Southern researchers andthe social sciences. Accounts of the politics of OA highlight processes ofpolitical capture of the OA agenda by Northern corporate and state interestsand draw attention to alternative interest coalitions which are more suitedto prioritizing the global public good over private profit. Reflecting on therequirements of OA in low-resource environments, this article echoes callsfor more equitable forms of openness and access in development researchecosystems, with a v iew to decolonizing as well as advancing OA.

• Decolonizing Scholarly Communications through Bibliodiversity  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Janneke Adema on 11 February 2021.

  Shearer, Kathleen, & Becerril-García, Arianna. (2021, January 7). Decolonizing Scholarly Communications through Bibliodiversity. Zenodo. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4423997

  This short form article was originally accepted to be published in a Special Open Access Collection in the journal, Development and Change, however, was withdrawn by the authors due to unacceptable licensing conditions proposed by the publisher.

  Diversity is an important characteristic of any healthy ecosystem. In the field of scholarly communications, diversity in services and platforms, funding mechanisms and evaluation measures will allow the ecosystem to accommodate the different workflows, languages, publication outputs and research topics that support the needs of different research communities. Diversity also reduces the risk of vendor lock-in, which leads to monopolization and high prices. Yet this ‘bibliodiversity’ is undermined by the fact that researchers around the world are evaluated according to journal-based citation measures, which have become the major currency of academic research. Journals seek to maximize their bibliometric measures by adopting editorial policies that increase citation counts, resulting in the predominance of Northern/Western research priorities and perspectives in the literature, and an increasing marginalization of research topics of more narrow or local nature. This contribution examines the distinctive, non-commercial approach to open access (OA) found in Latin America and reflects on how greater diversity in OA infrastructures helps to address inequalities in global knowledge production as well as knowledge access. The authors argue that bibliodiversity, rather than adoption of standardized models of OA, is central to the development of a more equitable system of knowledge production.

• The Subalternist Turn in Latin American Postcolonial Studies, or, Thinking in the Wake of What Went Down Yesterday (November 8, 2016)  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Janneke Adema on 11 January 2021.

  Williams, Gareth. ‘The Subalternist Turn in Latin American Postcolonial Studies, or, Thinking in the Wake of What Went Down Yesterday (November 8, 2016)’. Política Común 10 (2016).

• Can Open Scholarly Practices Redress Epistemic Injustice?  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Janneke Adema on 7 December 2020.

  Albornoz, Denise, Angela Okune, and Leslie Chan. ‘Can Open Scholarly Practices Redress Epistemic Injustice?’ In Reassembling Scholarly Communications: Histories, Infrastructures, and Global Politics of Open Access, edited by Martin Paul Eve and Jonathan Gray. The MIT Press, 2020. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11885.001.0001

• Papadimitropoulos-The Politics of the Commons.pdf  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Janneke Adema on 3 November 2020.

  Vangelis Papadimitropoulos, ‘The Politics of the Commons: Reform or Revolt?’, TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique. Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 15, no. 2 (5 June 2017): 563–81, https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v15i2.852.

• Knöchelmann (2020) The Democratisation Myth: Open Access and the Solidification of Epistemic Injustices  
  In category: Readings.
  Uploaded by Tobias Steiner on 14 October 2020.

  Knöchelmann, Marcel. 2020. “The Democratisation Myth: Open Access and the Solidification of Epistemic Injustices.” SocArXiv. June 9. doi:10.31235/osf.io/hw7at.

  https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/hw7at