Purpose: This paper examines African Journals Online (AJOL) as a bibliometric resource, providing a structured dataset of journal and publication metadata. In addition, it integrates AJOL data with OpenAlex to enhance metadata coverage and improve interoperability with other bibliometric sources.
Design/methodology/approach: The journal list and publications indexed in AJOL were retrieved using web scraping techniques. This paper details the database construction process, highlighting its strengths and limitations, and presents a descriptive analysis of AJOL’s indexed journals and publications.
Findings: The publication analysis demonstrates a steady growth in the number of publications over time but reveals significant disparities in their distribution across African countries. This paper presents an example of the possibility of integrating both sources using author country data from OpenAlex. The analysis of author contributions reveals that African journals serve as both regional and international venues, confirming that African journals play a dual role in fostering both regional and global research engagement
Research limitations: While AJOL contains relevant information for identifying and providing insights about African publications and journals, its metadata are limited. Therefore, the kind of analysis that can be performed with the database presented here is also limited. The integration with OpenAlex aims to overcome some of the limitations. Finally, although some automatic citation procedures have been performed, the metadata has not been manually curated. Therefore, if errors or inaccuracies are present in the AJOL, they may be reproduced in this database.
Practical implications: The database introduced in this article contributes to the accessibility of African scholarly publications by providing structured, accessible metadata derived from the AJOL. It facilitates bibliometric analyses that are more representative of African research activities. This contribution complements ongoing efforts to develop alternative data sources and infrastructure that better reflect the diversity of global knowledge production.
Originality/value: This paper presents a novel database for bibliometric analysis and offers a detailed report of the retrieval and construction procedures. The inclusion of matched data with OpenAlex further enhances the database’s utility. By showcasing AJOL’s potential, this study contributes to the broader goal of fostering inclusivity and improving the representation of African research in global bibliometric analyses.
Patricia Alonso-Álvarez
. A small step towards the epistemic decentralization of science: A dataset of journals and publications indexed in African Journals Online[J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 0
: 34
.
DOI: 10.2478/jdis-2025-0034
[1] Alatas, S. F. (2003). Academic dependency and the global division of labour in the Social Sciences. Current Sociology, 51(6), 599-613. https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921030516003
[2] Archambault É., Vignola-Gagné É., Côté G., Larivière V., & Gingrasb Y. (2006). Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases. Scientometrics, 68(3), 329-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0115-z
[3] Asubiaro, T. V., & Onaolapo, S. (2023). A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74(7), 745-758. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24758
[4] Asubiaro T., Onaolapo S., & Mills D. (2024). Regional disparities in Web of Science and Scopus journal coverage. Scientometrics, 129(3), 1469-1491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04948-x
[5] Babini D., Becerril García A., Costas R., Matas L., Rafols I., & Rovelli L. (2024, April 22) Not only open, but also diverse and inclusive: Towards decentralised and federated research information sources. Leiden Madtrics Blog. https://www.leidenmadtrics.nl/articles/not-only-open-but-also-diverse-and-inclusive-towards-decentralised- and-federated-research-information-sources
[6] Becerra, G. (2024). ojsr: Crawler and Data Scraper for Open Journal System (‘OJS’) (Version 0.1.5) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/ojsr/index.html
[7] Canagarajah, A. S. (1996). “Nondiscursive” requirements in academic publishing, material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written Communication, 13(4), 435-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088396013004001
[8] Chavarro, D., & Alperín, J. P. (2024). Equity in scholarly visibility: Bridging the gap for journals using open journal systems in OpenAlex. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators 2024 (STI 2024). Berlin. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13951504
[9] Chavarro D., Ràfols I., & Tang P. (2018). To what extent is inclusion in the Web of Science an indicator of journal ‘quality’? Research Evaluation, 27(2), 106-118. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvy001
[10] Harsh M., Bal R., Weryha A., Whatley J., Onu C. C., & Negro. L.M. (2021). Mapping computer science research in Africa: Using academic networking sites for assessing research activity. Scientometrics. 126(1), 305-334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03727-8
[11] Khanna S., Ball J., Alperin J. P., & Willinsky J. (2022). Recalibrating the scope of scholarly publishing: A modest step in a vast decolonization process. Quantitative Science Studies, 3(4), 912-930. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00228
[12] Larivière V., Haustein S., & Mongeon P. (2015). The oligopoly of academic publishers in the digital era. PLOS ONE, 10(6), e0127502. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127502
[13] Larivière, V., & Macaluso, B. (2011). Improving the coverage of social science and humanities researchers’ output: The case of the Érudit journal platform. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(12), 2437-2442. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21632
[14] Lillis, T. M., & Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. Routledge.
[15] Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
[16] Priem J., Piwowar H., & Orr R. (2022). OpenAlex: A fully-open index of scholarly works, authors, venues, institutions, and concepts. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.01833
[17] Rodriguez Medina,L.(2024). On epistemic decentralising: Infrastructuring knowledge beyond global North. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767724.2024.2307876
[18] Tijssen, R. J. W. (2007). Africa’s contribution to the worldwide research literature: New analytical perspectives, trends, and performance indicators. Scientometrics, 71(2), 303-327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1658-3
[19] van Leeuwen T. N., Moed H. F., Tijssen R. J. W., Visser M. S., & Van Raan, A. F. J. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51(1), 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010549719484
[20] Vera-Baceta M.-A., Thelwall M., & Kousha K. (2019). Web of Science and Scopus language coverage. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1803-1813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z
[21] Wickham H., Software P., & PBC. (2024). rvest: Easily Harvest (Scrape) Web Pages (Version 1.0.4) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/rvest/index.html
