[OSGeo-Discuss] [Geo4All] Draft of Open Letter on the importance to protecting independent peer review frameworks for Scholarly publications of Scientific Associations

Peter Baumann p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
Sat Jul 28 10:51:51 PDT 2018 

Hi Christian,


for sure a topic with lots of facets for discussion. Allow me to discontinue
here, though - reason being that (i) there was a very wise, unsurpassable post
by Mark Gahagan and (ii) Suchith has asked to close this thread, and as it is
"his" thread I want to respect it. Hope for your understanding!


cheers,

Peter



On 25.07.2018 10:53, Christian Willmes wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
>
> good point! And fair enough for your example on SQL which is an open standard
> and thus reproducible in theory and practice. My Point is more general,
> although it may not be 100% thought through yet, so comments are welcome. My
> argumetation on this is as follows:
>
>
> Scientific publications that deal for example with a GIS analysis on a
> specific topic, should be published in a way, that any reader of that study
> can practically reproduce its analysis and its results.
>
>
> From my point of view, for > 90% of publications in the GIS domain, this is
> not the case yet, either caused by constraints in data availability or
> software availability, or mostly by just the lack of precise documentation and
> citation of the data sources and the conduct of the processing workflow of the
> study. Hardware constraints are also a thing, but I think this should not be
> the concern of the scientist, to ensure his/her research is open and
> transparent and in practice and theory reproducible.
>
> Software wise, it would be from my point of view plain unscientific, if the
> results in the publication are produced with a proprietary ("point and click"
> without detailed documentation of processing steps taken) software, and
> additionally are not reproducible without a license of that software. Thus I
> would demand, to be able to label something Open Science or reproducible
> Science, access to the software (or at least precise definitions of how it is
> implemented, for example the source code) for reproducing the results must be
> a given. For example a script executing all the commands for the analysis
> workflow conducted, would do this precisely. If the script uses closed
> software, this would be less open compared to a script that uses open software.
>
>
> But in the end I am sure, that these kinds of reproducible research
> publications, will end up using open source or at least open access (free for
> scientific use) software, because it will just generate more impact, if also
> Scientists with less access to expensive software can also built upon this
> research results and cite it accordingly...
>
>
> Think also about the positive feedback from science funding for development of
> open software instead of paying for licenses, researchers would pay
> programmers or companies that offer according programming solutions to develop
> software for their scientific needs and interests. The aspect that this open
> approach adheres also better to the understanding of how science works or
> should work in general, is also an important point.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Christian
>
>
> Am 25.07.2018 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Baumann:
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>>
>> while I could not agree more to what you say there is one point to disagree with:
>>
>>
>> On 24.07.2018 18:43, Christian Willmes wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> No. Open science and open source software are fundamentally different things.
>> For example, if you derive stats from some data set via SQL it does not
>> matter whether it comes from open-source PostgreSQL or from proprietary
>> Oracle. Because the SQL language in its syntax and semantics is standardized,
>> and it is assured thereby that both systems will deliver the same results. So
>> standards actually are a prerequisite for science to be comparable, but
>> surely not open source.
>>
>> my 2 cents,
>> Peter
>>
>>>
>>> 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 that  that 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/Organisations  to always take steps to guard and protect
>>>> independent peer review frameworks  for 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 this  letter
>>>> 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 frameworks  for Scholarly publications of
>>>> Scientific Associations in the future.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The International Cartographic Association (ICA) is my organisation for
>>>> which  I 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 has  credibility 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 frameworks  for
>>>> Scholarly publications is among the foundations of good science. However,
>>>> this is  obviously at risk now.   If a professional association takes 
>>>> agrees 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 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are also now seeing a very disturbing trend with  some vendors even
>>>> starting to trademark “ science” for marketing/sales of their  products 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 against  marketing 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 /for  highlighting 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 Mapping  building 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 is  important  we 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 to  not use   any GIS vendor controlled
>>>>     press for publishing scholarly outputs (edited books etc).  GIS
>>>>     scientific organisations should not takeany sponsorship or royalty for
>>>>     scholarly publications (books, journals etc) from any GIS vendors . If
>>>>     a scientific association takes  agrees 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 Organisations  to
>>>> guard and protect independent peer review frameworks  for 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://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
>>>> GeoForAll at 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>> -- 
>> Dr. Peter Baumann
>>  - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>>    www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
>>    mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
>>    tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>>  - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>>    www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
>>    tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
>> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
>>
>>
>
> -- 
> 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
>
>
> N�n�r����)em�h�yhiם�w^��

-- 
Dr. Peter Baumann
 - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
   www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
   mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
   tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
 - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
   www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20180728/a3eaa5cb/attachment.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list