Use made of African-published journals
Impact of African-published journals on research
Use of journals in general compared to African-published journals
Libraries and their role in journal provision
ICT and journal provision
Changes in use and impact of African-published journals
Using the findings of the survey, it has proved possible to offer conclusions on:
· the use that is made of African-published journals in African universities, for teaching learning and research;· the impact of African-published journals on research in African universities;
· the use of African-published journals compared to those published elsewhere;
· the role of African university libraries in journal provision;
· ICT and journal provision;
· changes in the use and impact of African-published journals, over the period of the research.
African-published journals are considered important to academic work, both in teaching and research. This finding is more positive than the views expressed by academics in interviews undertaken in 1995 for University Libraries in Africa. Then, on the whole, academics did not show any special interest in African material nor a recognition of the value of locally generated information and South-South information transfer.
The majority of staff (just under 70%) at both universities considered African-published journals equally or more important than journals published elsewhere, with most (49%) rating them equally important (Table 2). The reasons given were that journals published in Africa are contextual and the results presented and discussed are relevant to the African environment and conditions. Over 80% of staff consulted at least one African-published title regularly, with over half consulting two or three titles (Table 4).
African-published journals were heavily used to assist research, both ongoing research and in the identification of future research topics (73% at UGL and 78% at UNZA) (Table 5). At both universities, research was given by 61% of the staff in 1998 as the primary reason for using African-published journals.
As far as teaching was concerned, the journals were mostly used to update lecture notes and, to a lesser extent, as recommended reading for students and as a basis for a lecture (Table 5). The exception was that staff in Medicine at UNZA did not use journals, whether from Africa or elsewhere, a great deal in teaching.
These conclusions on the importance of African-published journals to the work of academic staff, and in particular to their research, apply equally to the humanities, social sciences and applied sciences.
The staff interviewed or returning questionnaires indicated that the importance of African-published journals to their work was limited by three main factors. And it was factors such as these that led to between 25% and 30% saying that African-published journals were less important to their work than journals published elsewhere. And which led some to state that their comments were made in the context of the potential importance of African-published journals.
· lack of knowledge
Staff admitted to not knowing what titles were published in Africa and whether there were any that were relevant to their subject interests. When listing African-published titles they consulted regularly, they often included titles published elsewhere with the word 'African' in the title. Some, who considered African-published journals as important, failed to be able to name any titles which they consulted regularly. Only a minority (in 1998, 23% at UGL and 30% at UNZA) could name titles which they had wanted to consult but failed; even then many of the titles named either did not exist, had long ceased publication, or were published elsewhere. "I hardly consult any African-published journals, because they are virtually non-existent" was typical of the comments made.
Locally published journals figured prominently in the titles regularly consulted: at UGL, 49% included one or more Ghanaian titles and at UNZA, 53% included one or more Zambian titles (Table 4). Of the African-published journals cited in UGL projects, theses and papers, 67% were published in Ghana (Tables 12 to 14). As one Ghanaian said "Apart from those published in Ghana, I do not even know what is available." It is little wonder that better marketing figured prominently in the improvements suggested to make African-published journals more useful. 49% at UGL and 60% at UNZA included better marketing and distribution among the most wanted improvements (Table 10). At UNZA, this was considered to be the improvement most needed. "African journals need to be highly promoted."
The ways which staff used to identify relevant journal articles were also unlikely to systematically increase their knowledge of what is published in Africa (Table 6). Recommendation from a colleague featured high on the list, as did references in other publications and browsing the current issue. Personal recommendation (33%) was ranked primary method used at both universities, followed by browsing the current issue (22%). At UGL, 14% of staff said that they had no way of identifying journal articles. Although current contents/indexing/abstracting services were used, their rating was comparatively low. And though used, it was pointed out that articles from African-published journals were rarely found in such services. Amongst the improvements (albeit not the most popular) suggested was the inclusion of African-published journals in international bibliographical databases and the establishment of a separate current contents, indexing or abstracting service for African-published journals (Table 10). The latter was more favoured at UNZA, where 20% of staff considered it to be the most needed improvement. It is interesting to note that the Africana Librarians' Council of the USA has also recognized this as a need and is considering consolidating indexes of Africana and, in particular, articles published in African journals, to create a 'virtual catalogue' of African indexes.
· lack of access
As one member of staff in the Department of Soil Science at UNZA said "Access and availability are the problem". Most staff felt that their access to African-published journals was very limited. Many different methods - university and departmental libraries, personal contacts, other libraries and subject networks - had to be used to acquire journal articles, with no one method appearing to be markedly more successful than another (Table 7).
There was a considerable reliance on personal contacts to supply needed articles; this method was used by 46% of staff at both universities (Table 7). In 1998, it was ranked highest at UGL (32%) and second highest at UNZA (20%). Such a method of access is not very reliable as a long-term solution. Significantly, 12% at UGL and 16% at UNZA said that they had no method at all through which to obtain articles from African-published journals.
Quite a few staff (32% at UGL and 14% at UNZA) claimed that they acquired African-published journals through personal subscriptions. Better and more targeted marketing by journals might well increase access and at the same time augment their subscription base and financial viability.
· shortcomings in the journals
Some staff were also highly critical of the journals that were published in Africa, making comments like "They need to be more regular"; " Their coverage of subject matter is insufficient"; "Some of the quality of research is below standard"; "Some are not very well edited". These opinions were reflected in the improvements that were suggested (Table 10).
More regular publication was mentioned as one of the most needed improvements by 40% of those at UGL and 52% of those at UNZA; at UGL it was ranked the improvement favoured by the most staff (30%). The need for better researched articles was cited by 16% of those at UGL and 35% of those at UNZA, whilst the need for better refereeing and editorial control was included by 13% of those at UGL and 39% of those at UNZA. However, it should be said that some three staff made the point that "Availability and not quality was the problem".
Such findings are supported by those of University Libraries in Africa. There it was concluded that only a quantum leap in African publishing and distribution could reverse attitudes to local and African-published material.
A conclusion already made is that African-published journals are valued most of all for their research potential. In particular they are used to assist in on-going research, to identify possible topics of future research and to publish the results of completed research. An indication of how much these journals are actually used can be found in the citations given in undergraduate projects, postgraduate theses and academic staff publications (Tables 12 to 14).
At UGL, in Arts and Social Studies, between 20% and 37% of journals citations came from African-published journals. At UNZA, figures were lower, between 5% and 24%. In Medicine, 24% of the citations in undergraduate projects and 18% in postgraduate theses came from African-published journals but only 7% in staff papers. In Agricultural Sciences, the figures were 21% in undergraduate projects, but only 5% in postgraduate projects and 7% in staff papers. Compared to the relative number of African-published journals available in the university libraries, their research usage is very high. At UGL only 5% of back files are African and only 9% of current titles. At UNZA, 5% of back files are African and 15% of current titles.
It has already been pointed out that locally produced journals featured highly in the citations, especially at UGL, where between 57% and 82% were from Ghana. In Zambia, local journals only amounted to between 1% and 27%. However the figures do relate to the stocks in the libraries: at UGL 39% of African-published back files are Ghanaian and 58% of current titles; at UNZA the corresponding figures are 23% and 17%. Staff and students therefore use what is available.
An average of around a third (actual percentages ranging from 0% to 100%) of all the African citations came from journals published from 1990 onwards. In Medicine the percentage was highest, as to be expected from a discipline relying on up to date information, and lower in the Arts, where more reliance is placed on historical data. One would have expected figures from Social Sciences and Agricultural Sciences to be more similar to those from Medicine, whereas they were comparable to Arts.
African-published journals do obviously play a significant part in research, but much less so in Agriculture and Medicine than in the Arts and Social Studies. This is surprising, in that all four subjects are contextual in nature; and given that approximately the same percentages of staff said that they considered African-published journals to be important to research.
The results of the citation analysis must also be viewed in the context that the amount of research being undertaken at African universities is now minimal and not often based on literature review. This can explain some of the low numbers of journal citations per publication. At undergraduate level, very few departments demand a research project as part of the degree. Where it is optional, as in many departments at UGL, very few undergraduates choose to submit. Academic staff at both universities stated that they could not undertake much research because it was difficult to get funding, teaching loads were too heavy and salaries so low that it was necessary to take other paid work, like consultancies, leaving little time for research. The use of journals is therefore lower than it might be, were the climate of research to improve.
The greater importance of non-African journals to teaching and research remains undisputed. As previously indicated, between 26% and 30% of academic staff deemed African-published journals to be less important (Table 2). In their lists of most used journals, between 70% and 77% named journals not published in Africa (Table 3). Moreover staff placed more importance on the role of non-African journals in their teaching and research (Table 5), e.g. for ongoing and future research (at UGL, 89% compared to 73%; at UNZA, 95% compared to 78%); for updating lecture notes (at UGL, 90% compared to 61%; at UNZA, 88% compared to 72%); for recommended student reading (at UGL, 80% compared to 59%; at UNZA, 43% compared to 41%).
This finding is backed by evidence from the University Libraries in Africa review. Academics, whilst wanting to see more African-published material, did not consider it vital for teaching and research.
And, in the libraries, the use was predominantly of non-African journals (85% at UGL, 92% at UNZA Main Library and 78% at UNZA Medical Library) (Tables 15 and 16). (However this usage is roughly in proportion to the numbers of non-African and African journals held by the libraries.)
One reason for the lesser use of African-published journals may be that staff found it much easier to identify and acquire articles from non-African journals. Although the same methods were used, all were less effective for those published in Africa (Tables 6 and 7). For identification of the articles, the use of systematic methods like current contents, indexing and abstracting services were far more productive for non-African journals and much favoured by staff in Social Studies and Medicine. Where African journals were concerned, staff were more reliant on the more haphazard method of waiting for a recommendation from a colleague. Articles from African-published journals were also much harder to obtain. Many more staff said that they had no way at all of obtaining articles from African-published journals (14%), compared to those published outside of Africa (4%).
Even so, comments such as "Most of the important articles about Africa appear in the known international journals" and therefore it is not necessary to consult African-published journals were rare (and made by just three respondents). Most staff considered that journals published in Africa were complementary to those published in the West and that each had a role to play. International journals were strong on theory and methodology, but only those from Africa could provide the coverage of subjects relevant to the continent and offer appropriate solutions to problems. Over the three years of the research, increasing numbers of staff included one or more African-published journals in their lists of the three journals most consulted on regular basis (34% at UGL in 1998 compared to 19% in 1996 and 35% at UNZA in 1998 compared to 13% in 1996). Some African-published journals appeared on almost everybody's list, within specific subject areas - for the Department of Library and Archival Studies it was the African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science; for the Department of Psychology it was Ife Psychologia; for the Department of Soil Science it was the South African Journal of Plants and Soil; for the Faculty of Medicine it was the East African Medical Journal. This shows that African-published journals, if directed towards a niche market, can successfully compete with those produced in the West.
A point made in 1998, and not in previous years, was that the attitude of university authorities to African-published journals can effect their use vis á vis other journals. The University of Ghana has official reservations about journals published in Africa and does not rate articles published in them as high as those published in overseas journals, for the purposes of promotion. This has led to an acceptance by staff that African-published journals are not so important. The opposite is true at UNZA, where the authorities give equal recognition and senior staff promote their use. These attitudes have encouraged staff to read such journals and publish their work in them.
The Ghanaian attitude to local publication is not unusual. The pamphlet Scientific Journals published in Developing Countries? describes how some countries in the developing world carry out assessments of their journals, so as to identify those that can properly be called 'journals of the international level'. These are then officially supported and publication in them is an indicator of 'quality' of research. What this attitude ignores is that local journals constitute (or should constitute) in many cases the natural channels for the publication of research relevant and valuable to the country concerned but not necessarily of interest to the main clients of research worldwide. Certainly academics interviewed during the present research clearly recognized that a diversity of journals must be produced and promoted, in order to respond to a variety of requirements and the interests of readers. It is dangerous to adopt and apply measuring standards defined abroad, regardless of whether they correctly measure performance according local objectives, needs and conditions. Those in charge of African universities need to revise the criteria they use to assess and support local publications.
Both the libraries have extensive back files of journals and, in recent years (thanks to donor support) have much improved their holdings of current titles (670, out of which 60 are African-published, at UGL and 398, out of which 58 are African-published, at UNZA). Given that over 90% of academic staff considered journal literature in general to be of key importance to their work, over half considered journals to be more important than other types of literature and only some 5% considered journals to be less important (Table 1) one would have expected journal usage in the university libraries to be high.
Yet these periodicals were not well used (Table 15). Usage figures remained much the same or showed a slight decrease over the three years. At UGL (where staff numbers averaged 575 and students 8, 250 over the three years), 88 titles were used 130 times in a week, an average of 22 times a day. This means that the use per student per annum was less than one. The researcher himself has noted that the Periodicals Room is mostly used by students for consulting their class notes. At UNZA (where the potential clientele is much smaller with an average over the three years of 470 staff and 3, 906 students), in the Main Library 55 titles were used 121 times, an average of 19 times a day. At the Medical Library (with a student clientele of around 230), usage was healthier with 23 titles being used 279 times during the week. Here fewer titles were used more times. At UGL the titles used are mostly current. At the Medical Library, usage was almost evenly split between current and back files, whilst at UNZA Main Library, back files made up 90% of the usage.
These figures are in accord with the answers provided by staff as to how they acquired journal articles (Table 7). The university library remained an important method, but it was not the only method and not necessarily the major method. Personal contacts were used almost as much. Departmental libraries were preferred to the university library where available and subject networks were also used by staff in Social Studies and Agricultural Sciences. At UGL, the trend was to use means other than the university library more and more. Making journals available in the university library did not appear high on the list ways to improve the usefulness of African-published journals (Table 10).
Nor was the university library necessarily ranked as the primary method of journal acquisition. In 1998 at UGL, 37% gave personal contacts as their primary method and only 19% named the university library. Staff in Agriculture (78%) preferred to use departmental libraries. Only in Medicine did staff (82%) continue to use the university library as their main method of access (and this library was a branch one and therefore somewhat similar to a departmental library).
The university library has always been just one of several sources of information available to the academic community. And the growth of ICT has opened up many more pathways of information flow. But comments made by staff at the end of the questionnaire indicated that they felt let down by their university libraries and that it was the failure of the libraries to obtain and make the journals they needed available that has led them to seek other ways of access. They still hoped that their libraries will be able to order more journals, both general and African. At the same time, the point was made that just one copy in the library of an essential journal (like BMJ or Lancet) was not enough; copies also needed to be available at departmental level. The marginalization of the university library in Africa, the growth of departmental libraries and the increasing adoption by academics of alternative ways to obtain information was also one of the main conclusions of University Libraries in Africa. University libraries need to re-define their role in journal provision.
As has been indicated, staff felt that their lack of knowledge about African-published journals was crucial to their being unable to make more use of this resource. The university library could play a role here. One useful means of promotion would be the circulation of new issues or tables of contents. Overall over 40% of staff favoured this and those in Social Studies ranked it as the second most important improvement. In fact, libraries could do much more to make academics aware of what titles are published in Africa, for example by publicizing the various indexing tools that are available and the titles which the library holds. Academics did not seem aware of the indexing tools for African-published journals that do exist, e.g. the APEX Catalogue, Index of South African Periodicals (now available on CD-ROM and the Internet), Quarterly Index to Periodical Literature, Eastern and Southern Africa, African Journals Online. They were also not aware of what titles were held by their own library. The failure of librarians to recognize the importance of African-published material and to promote its use was also pointed out in University Libraries in Africa.
Librarians have a duty to ensure that the money spent on journals, whether by their own institutions or by donors, is reflected in journal use. This means that they need to organize their collections more efficiently and effectively and promote use through exhibitions and publicity. Holdings lists need to be maintained and easily accessible by users. Subscriptions provided at departmental level need to be catalogued so that they are more widely known throughout the university and are co-ordinated with holdings at university level. Journal usage needs to be monitored. For example the finding that only 25% of the journal usage at UGL is of pre-1990 journals questions the need to hold so many long runs of back files.
Introduction of ICT has followed different timing and patterns at UGL and UNZA. In the latter university, e-mail was introduced in 1993, followed by Internet connectivity in 1994. There is a university-wide network. CD-ROM searches have been available in the libraries only at both UNZA and UGL since 1994. At UGL, ICT has been a later introduction and much more limited. E-mail services have been offered since 1996, through the Balme Library. The library has extended e-mail to some, but not all, departments, at their request. Internet connectivity did not arrive until a branch of the World Bank's Virtual University was set up in 1998. This is restricted service at the moment.
Journal articles can be identified and acquired quickly through these means. The data gathered in 1996 and 1997 revealed a low (but increasing) usage of ICT, especially at UGL. Only in the School of Medicine, did staff make regular use of the new technologies. In 1998, it was decided to ask separate questions on the use of ICT in the identification and acquisition of journal articles, so as to provide a more complete picture (Tables 8 and 9).
Although usage again increased in 1998 (there was an increase of around 10% between the 1996 and 1998 figures), it was still low, especially for African-published journal articles. At UGL, 64% of staff never used ICT for the identification of journal articles and 77% never used ICT for their acquisition. For African-published journals, the figures were lower, 91% in both categories. And the figures from UGL would have been even lower, without the inclusion of staff from the Department of Library and Archival Studies, where all (bar one) used ICT. At UNZA the figures were higher, particularly for staff in Medicine. Only between 20% and 25% did not use ICT, although for African-published journals, the figure rose to between 60% and 65%.
At UGL, CD-ROM was the most popular tool for the identification of journals articles and e-mail for acquisition: "I use e-mail to obtain free copies of articles from their authors, if they will oblige"; "I simply send e-mails to friends in America or Europe to send me photocopies of articles desired". Internet was not much used and often only when outside of Ghana: "I use Internet as and when opportunities arise for travelling overseas". In comparison, at UNZA, where there had been connectivity since 1994, Internet and the Web were the most used of the electronic media, by between 50% and 55%. Medical staff regularly consulted MEDLINE, PubMed and BMJ in this way. A soil scientist subscribed to SoilChem. E-mail was used to acquire articles through subject networks (like ICRAF), through professional bodies (like the Royal College of Psychiatrists) and through personal contacts. Staff would have liked to be able to find more full text services on the Internet. The evidence is that once the Internet becomes available, it is used more than other electronic means for journal access.
At both universities (and the statistics bear this out), staff
pointed out that ICT was not a great deal of help for identifying and obtaining
articles appearing in African-published journals. Staff made comments like: "I
do not find African journal articles in the CD-ROM services"; "It is rare to
find an abstract of an African journal article"; "No African articles are
available on the Internet". One staff member in Medicine said that he now relied
on the Internet and, therefore, would only use African-published journals if
they were abstracted in PubMed. Those who used ICT favoured either a
separate indexing service for African-published journals or their inclusion in
international databases: "Inclusion of African journals on the Internet will
make it easier to access information";
"For someone who only uses the Internet, it is important for
African journals to be included in international databases".
The reasons given by staff for not using ICT reveal that lack of know-how and lack of easy access remain the key problems. Some staff said that they were not yet computer literate and were not yet familiar with the new technologies. Just having facilities in the library was not enough. What was wanted was access at departmental level, so that facilities were freely available whenever needed. Library facilities were criticized in that one had to queue to use them, hardware was frequently broken down, CD-ROMs were out of date and e-mail not reliable. Cost was also mentioned as a factor restricting use at UGL; there staff pay for e-mail and Internet services. Those at UNZA who used the Internet and e-mail, all said that they used departmental or personal facilities. It was generally agreed that "access must be at office level". The researcher at UNZA confirmed that it was only when e-mail and the Internet became available at office level that it began to be widely used. This conclusion is supported by evidence provided by the recent CHEMS survey on Internet and e-mail access in Commonwealth universities. In that publication, the frustration experienced when access is limited to a few common terminals within an institution are graphically described.
But although staff at UGL criticized the monopoly that the library seemed to have on ICT and thought that this limited its use, at the same time they thought that libraries should have a training and facilitating role. In the past, the few hours that the library had offered on CD-ROM training had not been enough and had not been followed up. In future, librarians needed to play much more of an active training role "going round department to department to educate the academic staff on how to access information on the facilities that were available". It goes without saying that hardware and software once introduced need to be maintained and kept up to date.
In 1997, it was reported that the data showed an overall increase over 1996 in journal use and, more significantly, a marked increase in the importance being placed on African-published journals.
The figures for 1998 did not show the same sort of increase. In some cases there were marginal increases, in some cases decreases and in most cases they remained much the same, whether for journals in general or those published in Africa.
For example, 35% of staff, compared to 18% in 1997, considered African-published journals to be less important than journals in general and, in the libraries, only 12 African-published titles were used compared to 33 in 1997. At the same time awareness of and use of such journals showed some increase. 35% of staff included at least one African title amongst their most consulted journals compared to 23% in 1997 and 16% in 1996.
For most staff, the importance of African journals to their work and their use of them had not changed over the past three years (Table 11). Where staff did indicate changes had taken place, these had to do with availability and access. The same problems were faced with all journals, but to a higher degree with those published in Africa.
Importance could increase in the future if access improved. Use depended on the ease with which journals could be identified and obtained and many staff found that this was getting harder not easier. "They are less important, because there is less access"; "Having more African-published journals with African experiences would be beneficial to African scholars and researchers"; "African journals are not easy to obtain; their importance may increase if more are available"; "Access is the problem - they are irregularly published, few copies are available and it is difficult to obtain individual copies"; "My research is focussed on Africa and I need more information. But African journals are harder to identify and obtain". Some academics recognized the growing importance of the Internet in the identification and acquisition of journals; if journals emanating from Africa did not publish online, then they would be less used.
