The results of this analysis of institutional contributions to particular South African journals reveal some disturbing trends. In the sample of 60 journals, a SINGLE institution contributed 30% or more of the article content to 21 of these journals; of these journals, a SINGLE institution contributed 40% or more of the article contents in 12 of these journals. It is also pertinent to point out that of the 10 journals with the highest single institutional contribution, nine are in the arts and humanities (only Bothalia excluded) and 4 are in the fi eld of Law. In fact, it is fair to say that journals in the fi elds of Law and Theology are particularly prominent in this listing. If one looks at the 20 journals with the highest contribution by one institution (all above 30%), it is hardly coincidence that in 11 of these cases, the journal is published by the same institution/unit that produces the majority of articles. Further research should be undertaken into this issue, and specifi cally relating the number of outputs to the size of the specifi c scientifi c or scholarly community. There are strong indications that some South African journals currently may be published for the benefi t of certain institutions only, rather than for that of a research fi eld or a national scholarly association.
Incidentally, it is also useful to look closely at this table where there are signifi cant proportions of contributions from foreign authors as an indication of an inverse pattern. In this respect, the following journals stand out:
■ Ostrich (11.4% foreign)
■ SA Journal of Geology (10.9% foreign)
■ Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research (7.4% foreign)
■ SA Journal of Science (7.3% foreign)
■ SA Journal of Wildlife Research (6% foreign)
BASIC DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSES OF SOUTH AFRICAN
ISI journals and local non-ISI journals. In each case, one wishes to see whether the age profi les of South African authored articles were signifi cantly different.
The analysis by Journal Index Category reveals only small differences. If the focus is on the highest age intervals (>50), the age profi le of articles in South African ISI-journals (predominantly natural sciences) shifts from 22.4% of authors above the age of 50 in 1990 to 47.4% in 2002. For the foreign ISI-journals, South African authored articles show a similar, if not as substantial a shift: from 23.8% of authors over the age of 50 in 1990 to 41.6% of authors over the age of 50 in 2002. For local, non-ISI journals (predominantly social sciences and humanities), there is a similar shift from 18.8% of authors over 50 in 1990 to 45.4% of authors over 50 in 2002.
Four journals (or journal categories) were selected to see whether there are large differences between them. They were selected because they were journals with substantive outputs, three of them ISI-listed, and representing different scientifi c fi elds. In each case, the percentage shift was highlighted in the above-50 years of age category between 1990 and 2002.
Figure 11: The ageing of publishing scientists: Scientifi c fi eld (1990 vs. 2002)
AH1990
Under 30 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
ES2002 ES1990
NS2002 NS1990
HS2002 HS1990
SS2002 SS1990
AH2002 5.2
36.9 39.6 1.9 16.3
2.9 14.8 36.2 33.2 12.9
6.1 34.8 42.9 15.2 1.0
2.1 21.4 37.9 33.1 5.4
2.1 26.8 45.2 22.6 3.4
2.8 15.8 32.5 34.6 14.3
8.9 31.6 38.9 18.8 1.7
4.1 19.8 32.3 28.0 15.8
7.4 38.2 23.5 27.9 2.9
4.1 23.2 32.9 25.4 14.5
Under 30 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
3.4 18.8 30.2 31.4 16.3
5.6 28.9 41.7 21.5 2.3
4.0 19.3 33.2 29.2 14.4
6.0 35.4 39.8 16.4 2.4
2.0 16.4 36.1 34.6 10.8
5.9 30.1 41.6 2.1 20.3
ISISA1990 ISISA2002 ISI1990 ISI2002 SA1990 SA2002
Figure 12: The ageing of publishing scientists: Journal Index Category (1990 vs. 2002) CHAPTER 3: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF SOUTH AFRICAN RESEARCH JOURNALS
This comparison reveals large differences between the selected journals, which undoubtedly refl ects fi eld-specifi c differences. The smaller increase in the higher-age category for LAW journals could possibly be explained by the fact that most of these journals also cater for professional practising lawyers, rather than just for academics in law faculties, which means, in theory at least, a broader pool of younger authors.
The fi nal demographic analysis is devoted to the gender profi les of South African authored articles. The overall gender distribution for all articles in SA Knowledgebase is presented in Figure 13 below; it shows a steady increase in female authorship from a low base of approximately 16% in 1990 to about 22% in 2002.
A comparison between Journal Index Categories in Figure 14 reveals no signifi cant differences in gender trends between the two ISI categories (South African ISI and Foreign ISI).
In both cases, we observe a substantive increase from around 13% to 24% and 13% to 23%, respectively. The increase in female-authored articles in local South African journals was more substantive, however, with an increase from 19% in 1990 to 20% in 2002. It is not obvious why this is the case. It might be linked with other variables such as age, viz. that younger women tend to publish in South African journals fi rst. It could certainly be correlated with scientifi c fi eld, where women are better represented in the social sciences and humanities, and these journals are more dominant in this Index category.
The demographic analyses (age and gender) of journal profi les have not revealed major deviations from the population norms. This indicates that the general ageing trend and the general increase in female-authored articles are both fairly pervasive across the science system.
There are, however, some journal-specifi c trends which are most likely correlated with fi eld differences rather than any other factor.
Table 14: Age profi les for selected journals (1990 vs. 2002)
Journal % authors above 50 in 1990 % authors above 50 in 2002 % increase
SA Medical Journal 26.8 47.8 +21.0%
SA Journal of Science 16.4 45.5 +29.1%
SA Journal of Botany 31.4 60.3 +28.9%
Three Top Law Journals 14.5 30.5 +16.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1990
Male Female
2002 2001 2000 1999
1998 1997 1996
1995 1994
1993 1992 1991
Figure 13: Gender by year of publication (1990 – 2002)