South African Universities Accused of Academic Colonialism: Prioritizing Global North Journals

Overview

Paper Summary › Explain Like I'm Five › Conflicts of Interest › Identified Limitations › Rating Explanation › Good to know › Topic Hierarchy › File Information ›

Paper Summary

Paperzilla title

The analysis reveals that South African universities, guided by the Department of Higher Education and Training's accredited journal lists, heavily favor publications in journals based in Europe and North America, marginalizing African and other Global South scholarship. This reinforces bibliometric coloniality and hinders the decolonization of knowledge production. The paper suggests promoting African journals and platforms, possibly using the SciELO model, to address this issue.

Explain Like I'm Five

This paper examines how South African universities prioritize publishing in journals from Europe and North America, reinforcing a kind of academic colonialism. It argues for promoting local and other Global South journals to decolonize knowledge production.

Possible Conflicts of Interest

None identified

Identified Limitations

Limited scope of analysis (focus on DHET lists)

The paper primarily analyzes journal lists from a single government body (DHET) which, while influential, may not fully represent all academic publishing practices in South Africa. A broader study including university-specific policies and researcher practices would strengthen the analysis.

Lack of discussion on quality control in African journals

While advocating for promoting African knowledge, the paper doesn't fully address the potential challenges of quality control and peer review processes in emerging or less established African journals.

Limited exploration of SciELO's potential as an African scholarly index

While acknowledging SciELO as a potential model, the paper lacks a detailed analysis of its strengths and weaknesses, or a concrete proposal for its implementation as a broader African scholarly index.

Rating Explanation

This paper presents a relevant critique of bibliometric coloniality, using a clear methodology to analyze journal lists. However, the limited scope and lack of deeper discussion of certain aspects (quality control, implementation of alternatives) prevent a higher rating.

Good to know

This is the Starter analysis. Paperzilla Pro fact-checks every citation, researches author backgrounds and funding sources, and uses advanced AI reasoning for more thorough insights.

Explore Pro →

Topic Hierarchy

Domain: Social Sciences

Field: Social Sciences

Subfield: Library and Information Sciences

File Information

Original Title: Bibliometric Coloniality in South Africa: Critical Review of the Indexes of Accredited Journals

Uploaded: August 20, 2025 at 02:17 PM

Privacy: Public