@acorsin.bsky.social
Anthropology of traps, technology, and captivating counterurbanisms. Co-editor, Cultural Anthropology, 2022-2026. Instituto de Lengua, Literatura y Antropología, CSIC
Excited to participate in this conference—its call for papers is now open digicommons.org
03.12.2025 13:57 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
The anthropology of...
29.11.2025 12:16 — 👍 7 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Landscape traps, involved in experiments with human-nonhuman sociality and axial transitions from hunting to domestication
28.11.2025 17:30 — 👍 6 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0
Manifiesto del personal del CSIC en apoyo a la huelga de las universidades públicas madrileñas
csicxuniversidadpublica.wordpress.com/2025/11/19/m...
Tengo sentimientos encontrados sobre el proyecto de renovación del Museo de Antropología. Por supuesto, el acento descolonizador es importante y necesario. Pero el proyecto se antoja más de gestión cultural que de museografía radical antropológica. Y el informe en sí apenas es una propuesta de salas
19.11.2025 19:35 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0Tengo sentimientos encontrados sobre el proyecto de renovación del Museo de Antropología. Por supuesto, el acento descolonizador es importante y necesario. Pero el proyecto se antoja más de gestión cultural que de museografía radical antropológica. Y el informe en sí apenas es una propuesta de salas
19.11.2025 19:35 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
Manifiesto del personal del CSIC en apoyo a la huelga de las universidades públicas madrileñas
csicxuniversidadpublica.wordpress.com/2025/11/19/m...
Just published Cultural Anthropology's @culanth.bsky.social latest issue! Articles on scale in radio astronomy, debt’s slow violence, marine inequality, fugitive kinships, financial activism, revolutionary temporalities, shifting conviviality, and contested soil.
journal.culanth.org/index.php/ca...
What is the most profitable industry in the world, this side of the law? Not oil, not IT, not pharma.
It's *scientific publishing*.
We call this the Drain of Scientific Publishing.
Paper: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Background: doi.org/10.1162/qss_...
Thread @markhanson.fediscience.org.ap.brid.gy 👇
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.
A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:
a 🧵 1/n
Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Pensar los futuros de la IA y culturas algorítmicas pasa por conocer sus contextos históricos. Aquí nuestro granito de arena a la historia de la cultura digital en España en lo que va de siglo
www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501...
Pensar los futuros de la IA y culturas algorítmicas pasa por conocer sus contextos históricos. Aquí nuestro granito de arena a la historia de la cultura digital en España en lo que va de siglo
www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/book/9781501...
El nuevo disco de Rosalía es verdaderamente prodigioso. Audaz, exquisito, hermoso. Mio Cristo Piange Diamanti es una joya. open.spotify.com/intl-es/trac...
07.11.2025 17:47 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Radiohead sonaron increíbles. Pero por muy sugerente y atmosférico que fuera el juego de pantallas, no poder disfrutar de un directo sin intermediación, sin artificios, estropeó el concierto. Tienen un directo extraordinario, pero nos dieron un vídeo de MTV
05.11.2025 06:34 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 1
Academics in Assyria in the 7th c BC complain that admin is preventing them from doing research and teaching
03.11.2025 10:04 — 👍 4468 🔁 1414 💬 55 📌 137
Autonomia ethnographica
02.11.2025 08:22 — 👍 1 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0Estas últimas semanas, a raíz de alguna presentación, me han llegado comentarios muy emocionantes, de lectores que no se esperaban "de un libro con dibujos", aportaciones teóricas sobre "urbanismo de género", "geografía urbana", "epidemiología social" o "gestión comunitaria de las emergencias" ☺️
01.11.2025 10:16 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0La primera edición se agotó hace unas semanas. Hoy hemos sabido que ya está lista la segunda edición 😊
29.10.2025 11:33 — 👍 4 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0La primera edición se agotó hace unas semanas. Hoy hemos sabido que ya está lista la segunda edición 😊
29.10.2025 11:33 — 👍 4 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0En un proyecto europeo la misma dedicación horaria de un investigador radicado en Alemania o Inglaterra cuesta el DOBLE de lo que cuesta un investigador con sede en España. El secreto a voces de la ciencia en nuestro país es que hacemos ciencia de frontera a precio de los años 90.
25.10.2025 08:42 — 👍 12 🔁 4 💬 1 📌 0En un proyecto europeo la misma dedicación horaria de un investigador radicado en Alemania o Inglaterra cuesta el DOBLE de lo que cuesta un investigador con sede en España. El secreto a voces de la ciencia en nuestro país es que hacemos ciencia de frontera a precio de los años 90.
25.10.2025 08:42 — 👍 12 🔁 4 💬 1 📌 0
Delighted to see this new Theorizing the Contemporary series now published—the second to appear in Spanish, on a wonderfully exciting topic and featuring a brilliant lineup of contributors @culanth.bsky.social
www.culanth.org/fieldsights/...
Muy contento con la publicación de esta nueva serie de "Theorizing the Contemporary" para Cultural Anthropology @culanth.bsky.social, la segunda que hacemos en español. Un lujazo de tema y contribuciones
www.culanth.org/fieldsights/...
Con el inimitable @marcuspixelart.bsky.social firmando libros en la Escuela Popular de Prosperidad (vídeo grabado y editado por Marcus)
12.10.2025 17:29 — 👍 2 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0Con el inimitable @marcuspixelart.bsky.social firmando libros en la Escuela Popular de Prosperidad (vídeo grabado y editado por Marcus)
12.10.2025 17:29 — 👍 2 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0Y se ha agotado la edición aún estando disponible para libre descarga la versión digital 🤩
12.10.2025 09:48 — 👍 3 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Ayer supimos que la primera edición del libro se ha agotado!
11.10.2025 10:46 — 👍 8 🔁 2 💬 1 📌 1
