Discover the world's scientific knowledge

Greeting,

this is the translation of Persian language of this site: http://isid.research.ac.ir/AboutUs.php

perhaps it is not the correct translation. we evaluated by google scholar and scopus not for articles which published in pubmed and PMC.

how can we solve this problem? is there any site or database for The Iranian Scientometric Information Database (ISID) which use for pubmed and pmc databases?

Sincerely

Pls consider the following.

Hasan Siamian

Scientometrics is the science of science measurement and analysis that measures the scientific output of researchers, universities, and countries in the form of quantitative variables. Scientometric indices include indicators for assessing the quantity and quality of scientific output of researchers that can be the basis for evaluation, ranking and promotion of faculty members.

The Iranian Scientometric Information Database (ISID) in 1394=2014 with the aim of extracting and displaying the scientific determinants of faculty members of Iran's medical sciences universities by the Center for the Development and Coordination of Information and Scientific Publications of the Ministry of Health and Science Deputy Research and Technology , Medical treatment and medical education has been designed, implemented and implemented. In the ISID system, the general information of the faculty members of the medical sciences universities including the name, university, faculty and research center of the place of employment, the scientific rank, the field and the last level of education are included by the scientific experts of the research and technology departments of the medical universities. . Scientometric indices of faculty members in this system include the number of published articles, the total received citations, the average citations per article, the h-index index, the h-index without self-citation, the h-index index without self-citation of the authors and the index h -Index without citation of the book.

Method of collecting and providing information

The ordering of the results in the ISID system is by default based on the h-index of individuals. It should be noted that the arrangement can be changed by clicking on the arrow next to the title of each one on the home page.

In Scientometric system, faculty members can filter information based on the name of the university, research center, discipline, and academic level. In addition, people's search by name is also possible.

The hirsch index is one of the important indicators of science metrics that was presented by Dr. George Hirsch, a professor of physics at the University in 2005, in order to compute and display the quantity and quality of scientific output of researchers. Thus, the researcher h's index h is h of the number of his papers, each of which has at least h times counted.

The basis for calculating the scientometric indices in the ISID system is the latest data extracted from the Scopus database. Other information of each faculty member in this system, such as a photo, individual address in Google Scholar, CV, if the information is entered by the relevant University Scientific Scientist, is displayed by clicking on the name of the faculty member.

Feedback

Dear members of the faculty, if you see any errors in the information in the system, you can request the correction of your information by sending a feedback form that is visible on the individual page of each person, or by contacting the University of Science Scientists Asking for correction of their information and follow up.

Agriculture in India has shown an increase in its average agricultural output (per hectare), in the last 60 years. This is in addition to the growth in total output.

This increase in agricultural productivity is directly related to India’s green revolution mission, developed infrastructure of road and power generation, management of agri-inputs and supply chain, knowledge of agri-processes and other reforms.

As per the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (2013), India is among the top few producers of rare agricultural produce.

Interestingly, the quality of agri-produce is better because of a wide diversity of soils and climate in the country, across three seasons. Despite these recent happenings, crop yields in the country are still just 30 to 60 percent of the best sustainable crop yields achievable in the farms of developed and other developing countries.

Additionally, losses after harvest happen due to poor storage infrastructure and unorganised retail. Recent observations show that in spite of logistic support and incentives by State governments, Indian farmers still face difficulties like low price of farm produce, uncertain weather, low rainfall, inappropriate storage facility, absence of skilled labour workforce, lack of agri-services and want of technology.

After Independence, the government laid major emphasis on achieving self-sufficiency in food production. Even though Central and State governments have initiated several agricultural development programmes for this sector’s development, there is a huge gap to be filled by young minds.

There is a strong need to incorporate local knowledge, indigenous wisdom and skill of farmers into modern farm technologies being developed by scientists. The difficulty in building extension contact with farmers lies in the fact that, generally, an extension agency does not have a sound understanding of all the farmers as their clients. There is also a gap in the working knowledge of their perceptions and tendencies, needs and interests or their strengths and weaknesses.

In view these facts, there is a need for business startups in technology, IT, online retail, online bookings, home deliveries and supply and distribution business. Agriculture and its allied activities could be sought after as business opportunities for start-ups.

According to studies, it is also evident that agricultural problems can be solved by small ticket investments and business models.

This article suggests some of the probable business opportunities where startups can be launched to attain growth and agricultural development and how the farmer, rural Indian citizen, agricultural labourer and society could be benefited too.

It is critical for farmers to use high-quality inputs, fertilisers and agro-chemicals to improve productivity and yield. This would be the major focus area. Observing the scenario, business startups could be planned to procure and arrange agri-inputs at the desired end user of this sector. Research shows that farmers are still not able to get agricultural inputs on time like seeds, pesticides, fertilisers and agro-chemicals.

Hence, there is scope for agri-market environment analysis, segmentation of agricultural inputs, positioning of agri-products, designing of distribution channels and many other opportunities for startups. Agriculture science, biotech and agriculture engineering students could be motivated to lend their support to launch startups. 

Agri-business counselling and guidance are envisaged to provide expert services and advice to farmers on cropping practices, technology dissemination, crop protection from pests & diseases, market trends, prices of various crops in the markets and also clinical services for animal health, which would enhance productivity of both crops and animals.

Agri-business counselling and guidance startups are equipped to provide information and guidance on availability of input and its supply, availability of farm equipment on hire and other services.

Currently, Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) provide counselling and guidance at the farm level but the varieties and set of information required every day is difficult to come in the existing system.

Students with an education in agronomy, plant breeding, post-harvest technology, horticulture, agri-extension & communication and animal husbandry could be trained with ICT knowledge and be motivated to start counselling and guidance centres at village, block or district levels. Later, these centres could also provide services like soil testing, compost making and plant nursery.  

The agri-business sector’s supply and value chain spans over input management, farmers, agri-produce traders, food processing units and retailers; all of whom must ultimately satisfy the varying demands of the customer in a workable manner.

This sector encompasses huge diversity and variety at each stage, from research and development-based agri-business companies to common manufacturers, from subsistence farmers to high technology agro -holdings and from biotech boutiques and small and medium-sized enterprises to multinational corporations. Today, building a suitable value chain is a need for the development of agriculture, farmers and every other stakeholder.

In this context, startups could think of having an inclusive market system development approach focused on building capacity and resilience of the local market and business scenario, leveraging incentives and resources of the farmers and agri-businesses, ensuring beneficial inclusion of the small farmers and stimulating change and innovation that continues to grow.

Startups could also provide services like farmer’s landholdings and cropping patterns (which are useful for processors), types and quality of farm produce and timeline of quantity production, customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction in the case of new products and suitable supply chain management from farm to retail store.

Warehousing in India is linked to food security and agricultural growth. Three public sector agencies are involved in building large-scale storage and warehousing capacities in the country. These are the Food Corporation of India (FCI), Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC) and 17 State Warehousing Corporations (SWCs).

Currently, the country has a total agricultural warehousing capacity of around 91 million metric tonnes, to store and conserve large quantities with state agencies. They own 41 percent of the capacity and the balance distributed among private entrepreneurs, cooperative societies, farmers etc. Despite public sector warehousing and private players, including cold chains, millions in farm produce goes to waste every year.

To prevent perishability, there is a strong need for startups at the local level to manage farm produce. Over the last two decades, the need for warehousing has also been felt in sectors other than agriculture, such as retail commerce.

Warehousing is now seen as an integral part of the supply chain where goods are not only stored for safekeeping but also where other value processes are implemented, thereby, minimising wastage and costs. In fact, warehousing in agriculture is part of the larger agricultural ecosystem.

However, just like agriculture, the warehousing market is local, unorganised and fragmented. Many small and medium landholding farmers use the services of public warehouses, also known as third party logistic companies. These warehouses help farmers by storing and, sometimes, in packing and shipping produce.

Warehousing and cold chain co-operatives at the village level; cleaning, processing and packaging of vegetable and fruit by village women at the village level; collection, processing and packaging of milk in different quantities at the local level and building warehouses in co-operation with villagers can be developed within a public-private partnership model.

It is not surprising that tourism has been recognised as one of the major sectors for providing employment opportunities to the less developed or developing countries. Several countries across the globe plan their tourist spots to attract millions of tourist every year and the whole economy runs on revenue earned from the tourism sector. One of the newest and popular tourism segments today is agri-tourism or eco-tourism. However, Indian agriculture is still far away from its tourism exposure.

Agri-tourism captures multiple other business opportunities viz. handicrafts, food processing, hospitality and can have significant benefits for local rural areas. Few states in India like Rajasthan, Assam, Haryana, Uttar-Pradesh and Kerala have been trying to attract tourists to their villages and agri-farms but there is still a lack of new entrants as business startups.

Developing agri-tourism entrepreneurship in our country may improve economic backwardness in rural and agri-dominated areas. Future agri-tourism startups could provide customers with the opportunity to pick their own farm produce at a savings, to both the customer and the farmer who would normally have to pay for the labour involved. At the same time, this kind of start-up can offer visitors an education in agriculture including how crops are grown and which crops thrive the best in a given climate.

Experiencing different seasonal events such as Lohadi, Sankranti, Holi, Deepawali, Navaratra, Navakalever, Bihu, Pongal and Dussera could be planned in villages. Educational tours could be a part of brand building and will educate visitors about Indian culture, tradition and farming. In some countries, the practice of hosting overnight guests, for them to get a traditional taste of the great outdoors, could also be thought of.

An increasing number of business startups are much needed to help farmers, across the agricultural cycle. The current union budget has very significant allocation of funds to develop the agriculture and allied sector.

The fund allocation for agriculture and farmer welfare is about Rs 35,000 crore and, to recharge the ground water, Rs 60,000 crore is allocated to focus on drought hit areas and cluster development for water conservation.

Observing the situation, one can sense that there are several opportunities available for entrants to start a business for the welfare of farmers and development of agriculture sector.

College graduates, especially those in agriculture science, agriculture technology, animal husbandry, post-harvest technology, biotechnology and agri-business management could explore business ideas that can be further developed as business models, aimed for the betterment of the agriculture sector in India.

15 May 2009

Economic and Social Council

ENV/DEV/1052

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York

Commission on Sustainable Development

Seventeenth Session

13th & 14th Meetings (AM & PM)

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ADOPTS POLICY OPTIONS, ‘SHARED VISION’ DOCUMENT

STRESSING URGENT NEED FOR BOLD, DETERMINED, INNOVATIVE RESPONSE TO WORLD CRISES

Chair Says Consensus Caps ‘Two Tough, Remarkable’ Weeks of Work;

Delegations Have ‘Planted the Seeds for a Green Revolution to Become a Reality’

(Issued on 18 May 2009.)

Convinced of the urgent need for a “bold, determined and innovative response” to the serious parallel crises affecting the world today, the Commission on Sustainable Development concluded its seventeenth session this evening, adopting a set of policy options to speed up agricultural development, along with practical measures to address drought, desertification, land use, rural development and lasting development in Africa.

“The dream has come true! We have found consensus and adopted a final outcome document and finalized a ‘Shared vision’ –- two documents [that] can set the scene for change,” said Gerda Verburg, Chairperson of the Commission and the Netherlands’ Minister of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, who prepared both texts. In her closing remarks, she said the Commission, which had been meeting in New York since 5 May, had just completed “two tough, remarkable” weeks of work.

While it had been vital for the 53-member body to adopt a set of policy options on its priority themes -– agriculture, rural development, land, drought, desertification, and Africa –- which would help drive action on the ground, she was certain that the energy and dedication shown by delegations throughout the session would make sustainable agriculture and rural development a reality on the ground.

Indeed, she said, Commission delegations had placed agriculture and rural development at the heart of the sustainable development agenda. By approving the policy document they had also acknowledged the notion that a paradigm shift was required to ensure lasting development for all. Now, delegations and other relevant stakeholders must evince the credibility, cooperation and commitment to guide implementation of the decisions they had taken tonight. That would take dedicated leadership, and “there is no time to waste,” she said, adding: “Tonight, you have planted the seeds for a green revolution to become a reality.”

Among other things, the Commission expressed its deep concern at the impact of the current financial crisis and global economic downturn and that developing countries and transition economies risked suffering serious setbacks to their development objectives, including achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Delegations pledged to that end their determination to craft a response “that protected development gains of past decades and which accelerated progress towards lasting development for all.”

Emphasizing the urgent need to increase food security and agricultural development, the Commission stressed that agriculture lay at the centre of sustainable development and farmers must be at the heart of a global “green revolution”. Governments and other relevant stakeholders must, therefore, mobilize the political will to revitalize agricultural sectors in developing countries. To that end, delegations called for enhancing agricultural production, productivity, and sustainability, through, among other ways, employing science-based approaches and local indigenous knowledge; expanding investment incentives, in particular for small farmers; and encouraging and supporting safe integrated pest management.

On rural development, the Commission noted that rural communities in developing countries still faced challenges regarding access to basic services and economic opportunities. Investments in environmental protection, infrastructure, and health and education were critical to sustainable rural development and could enhance national well-being. Therefore, success depended on developing and implementing comprehensive strategies that addressed climate change, drought, desertification, and natural disasters. Delegations pledged to promote equitable access to land, water and technologies by rural women, indigenous people and other vulnerable groups; strengthen the human capacities of rural people, by, among other ways, training and increasing the number of health professionals and educators in rural communities, and stimulating the creation of new jobs.

By the text, the Commission underlined the crucial role land played in achieving poverty eradication, food security and sustainable development, and the multiple benefits of sustainable land management, such as, among other things, providing ecosystems services, sequestering carbon and contributing to climate regulation. Actions were thus needed to promote sustainable and integrated land use planning and management practices; reduce land degradation and rehabilitate degraded land; promote policies to manage water and land resources in an integrated manner; and promote equitable access to land and clear and secure land tenure, in particular for women, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups.

Noting that drought continued to threaten the livelihoods of millions of people as well as the heightened drought risk posed by climate change, the Commission called for action aimed at creating a robust enabling environment for drought preparedness and mitigation, strengthening the knowledge-base and information-sharing on drought, water stress and drought risk management, and enhancing the resilience of communities to drought. This required, among other measures, the mobilization of funding for research and development of drought-tolerant seed varieties, the promotion of technical solutions and practices in combination with traditional knowledge for drought forecasting, impact assessment, and early warning systems.

Emphasizing the need for a global response to the global problems of desertification and land degradation through concerted efforts recognized by the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, the Commission called for actions to strengthen the institutional framework for policy implementation and to take practical measures in those efforts. It called on Governments to use the Global Environment Facility (GEF), among other multilateral organizations, to integrate desertification and land degradation into national sustainable development plans. Further actions were needed to promote scientific research on desertification and drought, strengthen existing disaster management capacities, and encourage developed countries to provide, in the fifth replenishment of the GEF, adequate, timely and predictable financing for those efforts.

Underlining strong economic performance in Africa as a necessary enabling environment for sustainable development, the Commission called for a green revolution on the continent to help boost agricultural productivity and food security in ways that supported ecosystem functions. To this end, action was required at local, national and global levels to revitalize agriculture as a basis for rural development and integrate African farmers and local entrepreneurs into agricultural supply chains. Further steps were needed to promote an environment conducive to sustainable development, ensure Africa’s integration into world trade and continue the reduction of its debt burden. Development aid to the continent should be increased, as should domestic and foreign investment. Action was also needed to improve income distribution and promote social development, especially of rural communities and women, and to promote, enable and support climate change adaptation mechanisms.

Among the follow-up measures included in the text, Commission delegations called on Member States to strengthen the capacities of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and the World Food Programme (WFP), within their mandates, to provide increased assistance to developing countries, especially Africa, on sustainable agriculture and rural development and food security. The Commission also decided to devote, in 2012 and 2016, and without prejudice to its organization of work, a separate segment at its review sessions to monitor and follow-up implementation of its decisions on Africa taken at its current session.

Earlier in the day, Ms. Verburg presented a wide-ranging summary statement on the future of sustainable development –- her “Shared vision” -- compiled from the discussions held among the various delegations participating in the session. It touched on the Commission’s priority themes and recognized that today’s multifaceted challenges, from climate change to food insecurity and economic recession, required an integrated response. The response must address short-term emergencies while developing long-term strategies within the sustainable development framework. She encouraged delegations to comment on the text, which would have the status of a “Chair’s Summary.”

“Nothing less is needed than a revolution in ideas and a revolution in technologies, supported by a revolution in trade policies and market access and the financial means to implement,” she said, underscoring the urgency and sense of cooperation that Ministers had exhibited to bring about a paradigm shift and realize a truly sustainable green revolution that would reverse widespread trends of declining agricultural productivity and incomes. The Commission had, thus, underlined the centrality of agriculture, as understood in a broad sense to include husbandry, agroforestry and mixed systems, to sustainable development.

The shared vision formed by delegations revealed that sustainable farms, food, feed, fuel, and funds were all needed to chart a sustainable path to the future. But, she said, the most important ingredients in the recipe are farmers, especially women farmers, and rural communities, whose empowerment is the key to poverty eradication and to sustainable development. With the world on the cusp of a potential agricultural and rural revival, it was her hope that delegations would all be guided in their endeavours towards sustainable development “by a shared vision –- one of shared well-being for all people and of common stewardship of this planet which we all share and which sustains us”.

Turning to other business, the Commission adopted a resolution on “preparations for the high-level meeting to review progress made in addressing the vulnerabilities of small island developing States through the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for Implementation” (document E/CN.17/2009/L.3). By that text, introduced earlier by the representative of Grenada on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), the Commission decided to use the Small Island Developing States Day at its eighteenth session as a preparatory committee meeting for the high-level review.

Also today, the co-Chairpersons of the parallel interactive round tables that took place during the Commission’s High-Level segment presented summaries of those discussions. Oliver Dulić, Minister of Environment and Spatial Planning of Serbia, and Alexander Müller, Assistant Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), provided their summaries of the panel on “Responding to the food crisis through sustainable development”. (Please see Press Release ENV/DEV/1048.)

Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, Minister of Environment and Tourism of Namibia, and Matthew Wyatt, Assistant President, External Affairs, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), summed up the round table on “Realizing a sustainable green revolution in Africa”; Louis Alberto Ferrate, Minister of Environment and Natural resources of Guatemala, and His Royal Highness Willem Alexander, Prince of Orange, in his capacity as Chairman of the Secretary-General’s Advisory Board on Water and Sanitation, provided their summaries of the round table on “Integrated management of land and resources for sustainable agriculture and rural development”. (Please see Press Release ENV/DEV/1050.)

Next, a representative of farmers’ organizations presented a brief summary of a dialogue held between the major civil society groups and heads of United Nations agencies and programmes on “implementing sustainable development”. A representative of scientific and technological organizations next provided a summary of a round table held on the same topic, but which included among its participants representatives of the international policy research community.

Before wrapping up its work, the Commission also approved the provisional agenda for its eighteenth session (E/CN.17/2009/L.4). According to the agenda, the thematic cluster for the implementation cycle 2010-2011 review session would include matters related to transport; chemicals; waste management; and mining. Delegations also decided that the eighteenth session would be held from 3 to 14 May 2010. In 2011, the Commission’s Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting would be held from 21 to 25 February, while its nineteenth policy session would take place from 2 to 13 May.

The Commission also took note of the draft programme of work for the biennium 2010-2011 for the Division for Sustainable Development (A/CN.17/2009/11). Finally, the Commission adopted the draft report of its current session (E/CN.17/2009/L.2), introduced by its Rapporteur, Tania Valerie Raguz ( Croatia).

According to its tradition, the Commission briefly opened its eighteenth session to elect the Chairperson and Bureau that would guide its work for 2010. Alberto Ferrate, Minister of Environment and Natural Resources of Guatemala was elected to Chair the Commission, and Hilario Davide ( Philippines) and Mohamed Alahraf ( Libya) were elected as two of its four Vice-Chairs. The remaining Vice-Chairpersons, from the Group of Eastern European States and the Group of Western European and Other States, will be elected at a later date.

Background

The Commission on Sustainable Development met this morning to conclude the high-level segment of its seventeenth session, focusing on the priority themes: agriculture, rural development, land, drought, desertification and Africa. Today’s programme is expected to include summary presentations on the session’s parallel interactive round tables and its ministerial dialogues, presentation of the Chairperson’s summary “Shared vision”, and action on the session’s final report. Action was also expected on a draft text entitled “Preparations for the high-level meeting to review progress made in addressing the vulnerabilities of small island developing States through the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for Implementation” (document E/CN.17/2009/L.3).

For more information, please see press release ENV/DEV/1041 of 4 May 2009.

Presentation of the Chairperson’s “Shared vision” summary

Presenting her summary, Commission Chairperson GERDA VERBURG, Minister of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality of the Netherlands, said the various delegations to the current session had presented a shared vision on the future of sustainable development across the priority themes of agriculture, rural development, land, drought, desertification and Africa. That vision recognized that the multiple challenges the world was facing –- among them, climate change, ecosystem degradation, food insecurity, financial meltdown and economic recession –- required an integrated response. That response needed to address short-term emergencies, while developing long-term strategies within the sustainable development framework.

She stressed that, to feed a growing population adequately and improve nutrition under conditions of growing water scarcity, climate change, soil depletion and ecosystem degradation, business as usual would not suffice. Indeed, a revolutionary paradigm shift was required. In that, the Commission had recognized the centrality of agriculture to sustainable development. Indeed, farmers were central in building a resilient and sustainable agricultural sector. The Commission had also reiterated the importance of sharing experiences, innovative technologies, training and education frameworks, and other agricultural practices. It had further stressed the need for increased investment in the agricultural sector and rural infrastructure; the challenge of biofuel production; the need for a successful conclusion of the Doha Round of trade negotiations, particularly in its development dimensions; and the role of integrated water and land resource management in achieving sustainable development and food security.

As delegations prepared to return home, they had the daunting task of discussing those issues and implementing the agreed measures. She hoped that they would all be guided by a shared vision of the well-being of all people and a common stewardship of the planet, which all humanity shared and which sustained it.

Following the presentation, Ms. Verburg opened the floor for comments.

The representative of the United States appreciated the Chair’s text, but believed that it should have included more emphasis on ways to manage the long-term ecological potential of land; ensuring that research was carried out in tandem with, and responsive to, the needs of farmers; and improved opportunities for organic agriculture in the African Green revolution, such as organic pest management. He also said that the document should include some mention of the Global Bioenergy Partnership, which many delegations during discussions had mentioned as a key actor in the field.

The representative of the Czech Republic, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the discussions had been well-structured and had provided helpful information. He highlighted key issues of importance for his delegation, including agricultural development and climate change, and stressed that the shared vision provided “very good guidelines for responsible people and responsible States”.

Guyana’s representative said that, while there was some mention in the Chair’s “Shared vision” of the impacts of climate change, the text should more strongly demand tackling the phenomenon in all its aspects, especially to help developing countries and small island developing States strengthen mitigation measures. He also wondered why there was no mention of the Barbados Programme of Action, which had this year turned fifteen, but which still needed reinforced political will if it was to be fully implemented. He also called for more emphasis on trade-related issues.

The representative of Lebanon said rural development and the challenges facing rural farmers were repeatedly raised during the Commission’s discussions, but had not been adequately highlighted in the Chairman’s text. That was cause for concern, since all the issues on the agenda of the Commission affected small-scale farmers in some way.

Italy’s representative joined the United States in calling for a mention in the Chair’s text of the Global Bioenergy Partnership, which was the main worldwide entity working to join bioenergy production and consumption practices with the environmental sustainability agenda.

The representative of Brazil appreciated Ms. Verburg’s efforts to translate the discussions that took place over the past two weeks into a shared vision. The call that should be made was for the elimination, rather than only a reduction, of agricultural subsidies, if Doha was to have any meaning for developing countries. She also called for introducing a reference to the Global Bioenergy Partnership.

India’s representative said that, as he understood it, the “Shared vision” would not be adopted as an official outcome of the Commission and that his delegation planned only to highlight some issues it found important to the overall discussion, including the need to step up global efforts to eradicate poverty, and the need for a more integrated approach to climate change. India also believed that every nation should be allowed the necessary policy space to elaborate, adopt and implement its own development programmes. Prescriptive measures and “one size fits all” plans should be avoided. Above all, he said, an enabling international environment for sustainable development must be created, including through strengthening capacity-building and market access.

Next, the representative of Cameroon said that, in all its efforts, the Commission must press for more emphasis on research and access to technology, especially to help developing countries cope with climate change.

Argentina’s representative said too much time was being spent discussing documents and prescriptions, rather than means of implementation. The work had become “documents, documents and more documents”, while implementation time frames went all but ignored. At the same time, more attention should be paid to costs and research, especially when discussions turned to adaptation and mitigation of climate change.

The representative of the Republic of Korea said that his delegation “fully supported” the summaries and the “Shared vision”. Nevertheless, he called for more emphasis on water issues, which required “immediate attention”, as water, as well as the sustainability and integrated management of water sources, impacted every aspect of the Commission’s agenda for the current session.

Pakistan’s representative said one more notion that could be added to the Chair’s “Shared vision” regarded the nexus between climate, trade, technology and finance. That convergence, and the manner in which the respective issues were dealt with, directly impacted the well-being of billions of people. The issues were especially important, as the international community sought to craft poverty eradication measures. He added that the decisions taken by the Commission at this session should be seen as important building blocks in the run-up to the climate change talks in Copenhagen this coming December.

Israel’s delegate said that inclusive policies and development management should be strengthened to promote sustainable agriculture and rural infrastructure. Thoughtful use of technologies, research and development was critical in providing sustainable solutions. Efforts to increase food production should focus on small farmers. Policies and action plans to address the global water crisis should be strengthened. The private sector should be better integrated into the development process.

The representative of Sweden said more investments in agriculture and rural infrastructure were needed. Coordination was also needed to combat climate change and food insecurity, and ensure development. Adaptation and mitigation measures should go hand-in-hand with development and that work should take place on different levels and in multiple regions. Water management needed more attention on national and regional levels. Stable legal and political systems could aid development. Globally, more trade was needed. Work on bioenergy should continue, in parallel with efforts to ensure food security.

A representative of business and industry said sustainable agriculture was a continuous journey. Best practices should be studied and refined, as they were implemented. It was imperative to tackle the challenges of sustainable development through a mosaic of solutions. Knowledge should be the cornerstone of sustainable agriculture. She called for improved extension services and cooperation among farmers, who needed access to a wide array of technology and knowledge.

A representative of workers and trade unions said it had been made clear that the food, fuel and financial crises reinforced one another to the detriment of the world’s poor and marginalized. The benefits of growth had been unevenly distributed around the world and investments and trade must be re-regulated at the national and international level to promote decent work and eradicate child labour. Social protection systems should be adapted to the lives of seasonal workers. The right of access to land must be part of an ambitious strategy for sustainable development. Organized workers could undoubtedly contribute to the shared vision for future sustainable development.

A representative of local authorities said the issue of urban food security was too invisible. Cities occupied 2 per cent of the world’s land, but consumed over 70 per cent of its resources, and it was necessary to understand the impact and import of increasing urbanization. That knowledge should be shared through South-South and triangular cooperation. Regional and subregional networks should be created to scale up potential solutions to food insecurity and the problems facing small-scale farmers. He urged the Commission to agree on a text that would encourage concrete steps towards sustainable development.

The representative of Grenada, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), then introduced the draft resolution entitled “Preparations for the high-level meeting to review progress made in addressing the vulnerabilities of small island developing States through the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy for Implementation” (document E/CN.17/2009/L.3).

Speaking ahead of action on the resolution on implementation of the Mauritius Strategy, the representative of Venezuela reiterated his delegation’s well known position on references in the Mauritius Plan of Action to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. He also raised that issue ahead of the Commission’s adoption of its draft report on the seventeenth session.

Making comments on the text were representatives of Sudan (on behalf of the Group of 77 and China), Czech Republic (on behalf of the European Union), United States, Russian Federation, United Republic of Tanzania, Switzerland, France and Brazil.

The Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine also commented.

Also speaking were representatives of major groups: women, children and youth; indigenous peoples; non-governmental organizations; local authorities; workers and trade unions; business and industry; and scientific and technological communities.

Following a request from the Czech Republic on behalf of the European Union that the dates for 2011 be coordinated within the United Nations system, particularly to ensure that there was no conflict with the meeting of the governing council session of United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Secretariat assured him that would be done.

Commenting earlier on the Chair’s “Shared vision” were the representatives of the United States, Czech Republic (on behalf of the European Union), Guyana, Lebanon, Italy, Brazil, India, Cameroon, Argentina, Republic of Korea, Pakistan, Israel and Sweden.

Also speaking were representatives of business and industry, local authorities, and workers and trade unions.

* *** *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For information media • not an official record

By Jeffrey Beall 3rd edition / January 1, 2015

The criteria below are intended to provide a framework for analyzing scholarly open-access publishers and journals. The criteria recognize two documents published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers

Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

Evaluating scholarly open-access publishers is a process that includes closely, cautiously, thoroughly, and at times skeptically examining the publisher's content, practices, and websites: contacting the publisher if necessary, reading statements from the publisher's authors about their experiences with the publisher, and determining whether the publisher commits any of the following practices (below) that are known to be committed by predatory publishers, examining any additional credible evidence about the publisher, compiling very important "back-channel" feedback from scholarly authors, and taking into account counter-feedback from the publishers themselves.

Some journals of course are "single titles." They publish independently of any multi-title publisher. In most cases, however, we evaluate journals that are part of a publisher's multi-title platform. This is very often described as a "fleet," a term meant to clarify that even a new publisher suddenly launches a large number of new journals, ranging from several dozen to hundreds of titles all at once.

The practices described below are meant to apply both to single-title independent journals and to publishers with or multiple or "fleet" journals in their portfolios.

·The publisher's owner is identified as the editor of each and every journal published by the organization. ·No single individual is identified as any specific journal's editor.

·The journal does not identify a formal editorial / review board.

·No academic information is provided regarding the editor, editorial staff, and/or review board members (e.g., institutional affiliation).

·Evidence exists showing that the editor and/or review board members do not possess academic expertise to reasonably qualify them to be publication gatekeepers in the journal's field.

·Two or more journals have duplicate editorial boards (i.e., same editorial board for more than one journal). ·The journals have an insufficient number of board members , (e.g., 2 or 3 members), have concocted editorial boards (made up names), name scholars on their editorial board without their knowledge or permission or have board members who are prominent researchers but exempt them from any contributions to the journal except the use of their names and/or photographs.

·There is little or no geographical diversity among the editorial board members, especially for journals that claim to be international in scope or coverage.

·The editorial board engages in gender bias (i.e., exclusion of any female members).

·Demonstrates a lack of transparency in publishing operations.

·Has no policies or practices for digital preservation, meaning that if the journal ceases operations, all of the content disappears from the internet.

·Begins operations with a large fleet of journals, often using a common template to quickly create each journal's home page. 3

·Provides insufficient information or hides information about author fees, offering to publish an author's paper and later sending an unanticipated "surprise" invoice.

·Does not allow search engines to crawl the published content, preventing the content from being indexed in academic indexes.

·Copy-proofs (locks) their PDFs, thus making it harder to check for plagiarism

· The name of a journal is incongruent with the journal's mission.

·The name of a journal does not adequately reflect its origin (e.g., a journal with the word "Canadian" or "Swiss" in its name when neither the publisher, editor, nor any purported institutional affiliate relates whatsoever to Canada or Switzerland).

·In its spam email or on its website, the publisher falsely claims one or more of its journals have actual (Thomson-Reuters) impact factors, or advertises impact factors assigned by fake "impact factor" services, or it uses some made up measure (e.g. view factor), feigning/claiming an exaggerated international standing.

·The publisher sends spam requests for peer reviews to scholars unqualified to review submitted manuscripts, in the sense that the specialties of the invited reviewers do not match the papers sent to them. · The publisher falsely claims to have its content indexed in legitimate abstracting and indexing services or claims that its content is indexed in resources that are not abstracting and indexing services.

·The publisher dedicates insufficient resources to preventing and eliminating author misconduct, to the extent that the journal or journals suffer from repeated cases of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, image manipulation, and the like.

·The publisher asks the corresponding author for suggested reviewers and the publisher subsequently uses the suggested reviewers without sufficiently vetting their qualifications or authenticity. (This protocol also may allow authors to create faux online identities in order to review their own papers).

A predatory publisher may...

·Re-publish papers already published in other venues/outlets without providing appropriate credits.

·Use boastful language claiming to be a "leading publisher" even though the publisher may only be a startup or a novice organization.

·Operate in a Western country chiefly for the purpose of functioning as a vanity press for scholars in a developing country (e.g., utilizing a maildrop address or PO box address in the United States, while actually operating from a developing country).

·Provide minimal or no copyediting or proofreading of submissions.

·Publish papers that are not academic at all, e.g. essays by laypeople, polemical editorials, or obvious pseudo-science.

·Have a "contact us" page that only includes a web form or an email address, and the publisher hides or does not reveal its location.

The following practices are considered to be reflective of poor journal standards and, while they do not equal predatory criteria, potential authors should give due consideration to these items prior to manuscript submissions:

·The publisher copies "authors guidelines" verbatim (or with minor editing) from other publishers.

·The publisher lists insufficient contact information, including contact information that does not clearly state the headquarters location or misrepresents the headquarters location (e.g., through the use of addresses that are actually mail drops).

·The publisher publishes journals that are excessively broad (e.g., Journal of Education) in order to attract more articles and gain more revenue from author fees.

·The publisher publishes journals that combine two or more fields not normally treated together (e.g., International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology).

·The publisher charges authors for publishing but requires transfer of copyright and retains copyright on journal content. Or the publisher requires the copyright transfer upon submission of manuscript.

·The publisher has poorly maintained websites, including dead links, prominent misspellings and grammatical errors on the website.

·The publisher makes unauthorized use of licensed images on their website, taken from the open web, without permission or licensing from the copyright owners.

·The publisher engages in excessive use of spam email to solicit manuscripts or editorial board memberships. ·The publishers' officers use email addresses that end in .gmail.com, yahoo.com, or some other free email supplier.

·The publisher fails to state licensing policy information on articles or shows lack of understanding of well-known OA journal article licensing standards, or provides contradictory licensing information.

·The publisher lacks a published article retraction policy or retracts articles without a formal statement (stealth retractions); also the publisher does not publish corrections or clarifications and does not have a policy for these issues.

·The publisher does not use standard identifiers such as ISSNs or DOIs or uses them improperly.

·For the name of the publisher, the publisher uses names such as "Network," "Center," "Association," "Institute," and the like when it is only a solitary, proprietary operation and does not meet the definition of the term used or implied non-profit mission.

·The publisher has excessive, cluttered advertising on its site to the extent that it interferes with site navigation and content access.

·The publisher has no membership in industry associations and/or intentionally fails to follow industry standards.

·The publisher includes links to legitimate conferences and associations on its main website, as if to borrow from other organizations’ legitimacy, and emblazon the new publisher with the others' legacy value.

·The publisher displays prominent statements that promise rapid publication and/or unusually quick peer review.

·Evidence exists showing that the publisher does not really conduct a bona fide peer review.

·The publisher appears to focus exclusively on article processing fee procurement, while not providing services for readers, or on billing for fees, while abdicating any effort at vetting submissions.

·The publisher creates a publishing operation that demonstrates rapacious entrepreneurial behavior that rises to level of sheer greed. The individual might have business administration experience, and the site may even have business journals, but the owner seems oblivious to business ethics.

·The publisher or its journals are not listed in standard periodical directories or are not widely cataloged in library databases.

·The publisher copies or egregiously mimics journal titles from other publishers.

·The publisher includes text on its website that describes the open access movement and then foists the publisher as if the publisher is active in fulfilling the movement’s values and goals.

·None of the members of a particular journal's editorial board have ever published an article in the journal. · There is little or no geographic diversity among the authors of articles in one or more of the publisher's journals, an indication the journal has become an easy outlet for authors from one country or region to get scholarly publications.

·The publisher has an optional "fast-track" fee-based service for expedited peer review which appears to provide assured publication with little or no vetting.

1-Beall Jeffrey Google Scholar page :

2- Beall Jeffrey Scopus Page :

1-استكمال دور النشر من ناحية المحتوي والتطبيق والموقع الالكتروني للمعايير الاخلاقية والادبية

التي حددتها المنظمات ذات العلاقة وهي OASPA و COPE و International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM) .

2-مراعاة الامور المخالفة التي ترتكبها دور النشر الوهمية وهي مصنفة كالاتي:

-المحرر و هيئة التحرير

أ-مالك دار النشر هو نفسه المحرر لجميع المجلات التابعة له

ب-محرر واحد للمجلة

ج-المجلة ليس لديها مقيمين معتمدين

د-ليس هناك معلومات اكاديمية عن هيئة التحرير او الهيئة الاستشارية او المقيمين، مثلا احيانا يكون المحرر فقط اسم بدون لقب دكتور او استاذ مساعد او استاذ.

هـ-المعلومات المعطاة عن المحررين او المقيمين تدل على انهم ليسوا متخصصين في حقل المجلة

و-هيئة تحرير واحدة لاكثر من مجلة ضمن دار النشر

ز-بعض المجلات لديها هيئة تحرير وهيئة استشارية متكاملة، لكن قد يجوز ان بعضهم لايعلم انه في هذه الهيئة، او ان بعضهم وضع اسمه فقط كهيكل الا انه لايعمل في المجلة ولايساهم فيها.

-ادارة الاعمال

الناشرين

أ-انعدام الشفافية في عملية النشر

ب-انعدام سياسات او ممارسات الحفظ الرقمي

ج-الاعتماد الكلي على الاجور الواردة من الباحثين، وانعدام خطة طويلة الامد لتسويق النتاجات العلمية.

د-تبدأ دور النشر بعدد كبير من المجلات جميعها مؤسسة في نفس الوقت، بالاعتماد على برامج القوالب الجاهزة.

هـ-تقديم معلومات غير كافية عن اجور النشر ثم فيما بعد وقبيل قبول النشر يستلم الباحث فاتورة بمبلغ غير قليل.

-الرصانة العلمية

أ-اسم المجلة يتعارض مع مهمتها.

ب-اسم المجلة لايعكس مكان تاسيسها او عملها مثلا اسم المجلة Canadian Journal وهي ليست في كندا او Australian Journal وهي ليست في استراليا.

ج-تدعي المجلة زورا ان لديها معامل استشهاد، او تستخدم مقاييس اخرى وتعتبرها معامل استشهاد.

د-الناشر يرسل رسائل البريد غير المرغوب فيه Spam الى اشخاص غير مؤهلين لتقييم البحوث العلمية.

هـ-الناشر يدعى ان مجلاته مفهرسة في مواقع رصينة او يذكر اسماء وهمية لمواقع فهرسة.

و-الناشر لايخصص موارد كافية للقضاء على الاستلال والسرقة ولايقوم بتدقيق البحوث المقدمة للنشر بواسطة البرامج المعتمدة لكشف الاستلال، وبالتالي فان هذه المجلات التابعة للناشر تعاني من السرقة والانتحال والانتحال الذاتي في نفس دار النشر ومعالجة الصور المختبرية وما الى ذلك.

ز-الناشر يسال الباحث عن اسماء المقيمين (وهذا الشي متبع لدى المجلات الرصينة ايضا)، ولكنه يقوم بارسال البحوث الى المقيمين اللذين اقترحهم الباحث، وقد يقوم الباحث بوضع اسماء وهمية وبريد الكتروني وهمي لكي يقوم بتقييم بحثه بنفسه.

اخرى

الناشرين اللصوص قد

أ-ينشرون بحوث منشورة في مجلات اخرى

ب-يدعي ان داره هي دار نشر رائدة على الرغم من انها حديثة التاسيس

ج-فتح دار النشر في دولة اوربية لمنحها صفة ورصانة علمية على الرغم من ان مؤسسها والعاملين فيها هم من دول نامية.

د-الحد الادنى من حقوق النشر او انه لاتوجد حماية لحقوق النشر اصلا

هـ-نشر مقالات ليست اكاديمية وكتابها ناس عاديين ليس لهم مكانة علمية

و-تحت علامة تبويب "اتصل بنا" ليس هناك اتصال فعلي او ان الناشر مخفي وغير محدد مكان عمله.

كما على الباحثين اخذ الامور التالية بعين الاعتبار

-المجلة تقوم بنسخ تعليمات النشر حرفيا او مع تغيير بسيط من مجلات اخرى

-سرد عناوين اتصال غير واضحة

-جعل المجلات ذات عناوين واسعة مثل مجلة التربية، او مجلة العلوم، من اجل جذب اكبر عدد من الباحثين وجباية رسوم النشر.

-جعل المجلات بعنوان يجمع بين اكثر من تخصصين ليس بينهما ارتباط وللسبب المذكور في الفقرة اعلاه مثل مجلة الاعمال والعلوم الانسانية والتكنولوجيا.

-الناشر يطلب تحويل حقوق النشر من المؤلف ويعيدها على محتوى المجلة او يطلب تحويل حقوق النشر على البحث المقدم.

-ضعف صيانة الموقع مع وجود وصلات لاتعمل واخطاء املائية واضحة.

-يسمح الناشر باستخدام صور من على موقعه من دون الحصول على ترخيص من اصحابها.

-كثرة ارسال الرسائل غير المرغوب بهاSpam الى الباحثين من اجل ارسال البحوث او من اجل ان يكونوا في هيئة التحرير.

-استخدام الناشر او المحرر ايميلات مجانية مثل ياهو وجي ميل وغيرها من الايميلات المجانية وغير الرسمية.

-فشل الناشر في تعريف سياسة الترخيص او قواعد Open Access journal

-ضعف الناشر في مراجعة المقالات المنشورة او عدم وجود سياسة له للمراجعة العلمية او المنهجية للبحوث، وعدم ارسالها الى مقيمين

-عدم استخدام ISSN و DOI او يستخدمها بشكل غير صحيح.

-يستخدم الناشر اسماء مثل شبكة او مركز او مؤسسة او معهد في حين انه لايمتلك الصفة الرسمية لهذه المؤسسات.

-هناك اعلان مفرط عن محتوى الموقع لدرجة وجود تداخل في الوصول الى محتويات الموقع.

-الناشر ليس لديه عضوية في المؤسسات الرصينة التي تعطي تراخيص لدور النشر.

-الناشر ينشر على موقعه روابط لمؤتمرات ومؤسسات رصينة وينشر معها روابط لمؤسسات غير رصينة.

-وضع اعلان عن ان المجلة سوف تنشر البحث خلال اسبوعين او شهر وهذه العملية غير ممكنة اذا كان هناك تقييم جيد للمقالة.

-يركز الناشر على الباحثين وعلى الحصول على اجور النشر، ولايوفر للقراء خدمات مثل RSS Feeds و Hotlinked References وغيرها.

-الناشر يقوم بمفرده بادارة عملية النشر، وقد يكون متخصصا في تخصص احدى المجلات الا انه ليس متخصصا في تخصصات المجلات الاخرى الموجودة على موقعه.

-الناشر او المجلات في موقعه غير مضمنين في الادلة القياسية الدورية او في قواعد بيانات المكتبات واسعة النطاق.

-نسخ او تقليد اسم المجلة من موقع نشر رصين او غير رصين.

-يضع الناشر في صفحة النشر الرئيسية نصوصا تصف حركة سير الوصول المفتوح open access movement في حين انها غير متحققة اصلا.

-لايوجد احد من اعضاء هيئة التحرير نشر بحثا في المجلة او المجلات التابعة لدار النشر هذه، مما يدل على عدم قناعتهم برصانتها.

- يوجد تنوع جغرافي ضئيل أو معدوم بين مؤلفي المقالات في واحدة أو أكثر من مجلات الناشر، وهو مؤشر على أن المجلة أصبحت منفذًا سهلاً للمؤلفين من بلد أو منطقة ما للحصول على منشورات علمية.

-لدى الناشر خدمة اختيارية تعتمد على رسوم "المسار السريع" (رسوم عالية – مقابل نشر سريع) للمراجعة السريعة من المقيمين والتي يبدو أنها توفر النشر المضمون مع تدقيق ضئيل أو معدوم.