Our Recent Productions

Showing 1–3 of 3

1. Working Paper2026Open Access

   Collective action for Open Research Information: Introducing ORION-DBs and a new FORCE11 Working Group(opens in a new tab)

   

   Mazoni, Alysson; Kramer, Bianca; Neylon, Cameron; Costas, Rodrigo; van Eck, Nees Jan

   With ORION-DBs, a growing set of actors are hosting large research information datasets in shared spaces, notably in Google BigQuery. To coordinate amongst current and future contributors and work towards community standards for discovery, processing, preservation and documentation, we are starting a FORCE11 working group. The working group will also seek to build a community around future alternatives to proprietary cloud systems for data sharing at scale and identify future paths to community-led training and development resources. Our goal is to build a community with a focus on supporting the users of Open Research Information resources to make more sophisticated and complex use of these data sources. We will do this by consolidating and expanding the resources themselves through supporting providers, gathering user stories and developing training materials. Finally we will scope pathways to technological independence from proprietary systems consistent with the needs of users. This webinar will introduce the ORION-DB initiative, present a number of use cases and introduce the FORCE11 Working Group. If you are a data provider, metadata user or infrastructure developer and want to learn more about ORION-DB and the planned activities of the working group, you are invited to attend the webinar. The version of this slide deck on Google was originally: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1ua88tr2gP2HTurQPkM4-A7eWjFiDLUI_ht3MJdHxOxc/edit?usp=sharing

   DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22304573open research informationopen datadatabasesscientometricsMetadata
2. Working Paper2026Open Access

   English dominance in scholarly communication: Historical roots and bibliometric evidence(opens in a new tab)

   

   Brasil, André

   English functions as the principal shared language of international scholarly communication, but its dominance also creates inequalities in the production, dissemination, visibility, and assessment of research. Developed as a complementary output of the CoARA Working Group on Multilingualism and Language Biases in Research Assessment, this report examines the historical development of English dominance and the contemporary mechanisms through which it is reproduced. It combines evidence from the literature with descriptive bibliometric analyses based on Web of Science, Scopus, OpenAlex, and CWTS Journal Indicators. The findings show that English is especially dominant in journals with high field normalised citation impact and in the selective segments of scholarly communication most frequently used in research evaluation. However, the extent of this dominance varies considerably across disciplines and countries, and publication in national languages remains important in the social sciences, humanities, and fields directed toward local professional and societal audiences. The report also demonstrates how database selection, metadata quality, and analytical choices affect the visibility of multilingual scholarship. Web of Science and Scopus predominantly represent English language journal literature, whereas OpenAlex reveals a much broader body of multilingual research, although incomplete language, authorship, and institutional metadata remain important limitations. The report further examines the financial, linguistic, and time burdens associated with English language publication and considers how publishing infrastructures, bibliometric indicators, rankings, and assessment practices influence which research becomes visible and valued. This report contributes to the landscape analysis conducted by the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) Working Group (WG) on Multilingualism and language biases in research assessment and it complements the Implementation proposal for language-aware assessments (Annex II.3).

   DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17913690Research assessmentScholarly communicationOpenAlexMultilingualismMetadata
3. Working Paper2026Open Access

   Global research funding flows according to available grant data in Dimensions(opens in a new tab)

   

   Dudek, Jonathan; Ni, Rong; van Honk, Jeroen; Ding, Gabrielle; Bovenzi, Nicandro; Durán-Silva, Nicolau; Ràfols, Ismael; Costas, Rodrigo

   While most research funding is national, international funding plays a relatively important role, particularly for some regions of the Global South. However, the extent of funding flows between world regions remains unclear. This study represents a first attempt to map global research funding flows based on a set of grant metadata from Dimensions, augmented with data from the Gates Foundation and the European Commission (CORDIS). We find major regional gaps in the data outside of the leading scientific regions. With the data currently available, we find that Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa are the biggest recipients of inter-regional funding, with North America as main funder, and that over the last 25 years, total annual research funding has grown to above USD 60 billion, while inter-regional funding flows have stagnated at around USD 1.6 billion per year. These insights are contingent on data availability, raising the urgency for improving funding metadata infrastructures.

   DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/7de3f_v2MetadataEuropean commissionCommissionGrant funding