About Quality

Characteristics of academic quality collections
In order to achieve a significant change in the evaluation of publications, it is essential to value the diverse editorial circuits that represent the multi-scale agendas that work in each discipline, according to their academic interest or social relevance.
Universal standardization and homogenized classifications based on the accumulation of impact factors have generated numerous adverse effects. Since the DORA Declaration in 2012, the main criticism is that it replaces expert review of researchers contributions with unaffordable metrics that report only on the journals themselves.
Diamond Future advocates for a transparent publishing model governed by the academic community and sets out testable criteria to ensure fair and high-quality publication. To do this, it focuses on the different evaluation criteria of journals that are present in indexing systems.

Indexing Systems by Journal Assessment Type

9 Standards for Diamond Open Access Publishing

This refers to ensuring editorial independence and cost transparency through the existence of sustainable, public, or institutional funding sources that guarantee the journal's operation without charging authors or readers. It includes support from universities, public agencies, or cooperative infrastructures, avoiding reliance on commercial logic.
This entails that the journal is owned by an academic institution or scientific society, which ensures its institutional grounding and academic mission. This criterion protects autonomy against editorial commercialization.
This refers to the publisher's leadership and editorial decision-making being in the hands of the academic community, ensuring that content selection is driven by scientific rather than commercial criteria.
This includes the existence of strong, independent editorial bodies, clear editorial policies, the professionalization of processes, and formal standards (such as publishing guidelines, publication frequency, digital preservation, and indexing, among others). 
This comprises the implementation of a rigorous, transparent, and well-defined peer review process, alongside principles of scientific integrity: honesty, reproducibility, ethics, accountability, and the prevention of misconduct.
This refers to the adoption of barrier-free open access practices: the free flow of knowledge, open licenses, and access to data. Open science promotes the opening up of all components that underpin research communication in order to accelerate the publication of findings, and to facilitate the evaluation of manuscripts, the replicability of research, and the reuse of collected data.
This entails having adequate and efficient technological infrastructure, metadata management, interoperability, and reasonable turnaround times in editorial processes for operational sustainability.
This is linked to indexing in recognized systems with rigorous curation, which requires high-quality metadata and the effective circulation of content. Visibility is central to academic legitimacy and real impact.
This entails promoting equity, diversity, inclusion, and belonging (EDIB) policies and practices, and guaranteeing the broad participation of diverse academic communities with their linguistic plurality as key elements of quality.