The idea behind establishing the UGC CARE was to ensure that only ‘reputable’ journals were recognised for faculty selections, promotions, and research funding applications. However, the UGC-CARE list faced several criticisms, including over-centralisation
The University Grants Commission (UGC) on Tuesday announced discontinuation of the UGC-Consortium for Academic and Research Ethics (CARE) listing of journals.
In place of this, the Commission decided to develop suggestive parameters for choosing peer-reviewed journals by faculty members and students. This decision was taken based on the recommendations of the expert committee.
The suggestive parameters have been placed in the public domain for feedback at email id [email protected] till February 25.
The idea behind establishing the UGC-CARE was to ensure that only ‘reputable’ journals were recognised for faculty selections, promotions, and research funding applications. It was created in response to concerns about the quality of research publications and the prevalence of predatory journals.
However, the UGC-CARE list faced several criticisms, including over-centralisation in deciding on what constitutes high-quality research and journals, delays in including or excluding journals from the list, inclusion of predatory journals due to an inefficient approach, and lack of transparency in the decision-making process.
By discontinuing the UGC-CARE list, the UGC said it returned the journal selection process to higher education institutions (HEIs), allowing researchers to publish in journals that best align with their discipline and audience without being constrained by a centralised list.
“This restores academic freedom and autonomy to HEIs. If HEIs fail to establish efficient mechanisms to identify credible journals, they risk endorsing faculty members with publications in dubious journals. This could damage the institution’s reputation and undermine the quality of its academic output,” it added.
