Font size:
Print
UGC Discontinues UGC-CARE List
Context:
The University Grants Commission (UGC) has decided to discontinue the UGC Consortium for Academic and Research Ethics (UGC-CARE) list, which was introduced in 2018 as a means of recognising quality academic journals.
More on News
- The UGC-CARE list will now be replaced by a set of suggestive parameters for choosing journals based on eight criteria.
- Stakeholders, including institutions and academics, have been invited to submit their suggestions on the new guidelines by February 25, 2025.
What Do the New Parameters Say?
- Under the draft notification titled “Suggestive Parameters for Peer-Reviewed Journals,” the UGC has outlined 36 parameters across eight broad criteria.
- These parameters aim to guide institutions in the selection of reputable journals for academic publication.
- Journal Preliminary Criteria: The UGC emphasises the need for basic details such as the journal’s title, international standard serial number (ISSN), periodicity, continuity, and transparency in the review policy.
- Editorial Board Criteria: Authors are encouraged to ensure that the journal makes its editorial board details and composition publicly available, ensuring transparency in the publication process.
- Other Criteria: Additional parameters focus on aspects such as the journal’s editorial policy, academic standards, visibility, and adherence to research ethics.
Why Did UGC Withdraw UGC-CARE?
- Over-centralisation Issues – Critics argued that the UGC-CARE list lacked transparency and was slow in updating journals.
- Exclusion of Regional Language Journals – Many respected journals, particularly in Indian languages, were left out.
- Decentralisation of Journal Selection – Institutions will now establish their own mechanisms to evaluate journals.
- Combating Predatory Journals – The new approach aims to prevent fake, low-quality, and predatory journals.
Institutional Responsibility in Journal Selection
- Higher education institutions (HEIs) will be responsible for evaluating and selecting academic journals.
- Institutions can develop custom evaluation models aligned with UGC’s suggestive parameters.
- The decentralised system allows for discipline-specific evaluation and evolving academic fields.
Concerns and Criticism
- Risk of Low-Quality Journals – Academics fear the absence of central oversight may lead to proliferation of substandard journals.
- Student Opposition – The Students’ Federation of India (SFI) condemned the move, citing lack of consultation with research communities.
- Impact on Academic Integrity – Critics argue this decision is part of broader deregulation under the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
- Inconsistencies in Journal Evaluation – Different institutions may have varying standards, leading to arbitrary evaluations.
Way Forward
- With the UGC-CARE list scrapped, institutions must set up robust journal evaluation systems.
- The effectiveness of the new parameters will depend on how well institutions implement quality control.
Academic communities continue to push for a balanced approach that ensures quality research without excessive centralisation.
