Search for a command to run...
In the context of international sanctions and Russia’s commitment to strengthening its scientific and technological sovereignty, national lists of scientific journals are becoming a key tool for developing an independent system for evaluating scientific activity. This article provides a comparative analysis of methodological approaches to compiling such lists in Russia and abroad to identify best practices that contribute to improving the quality of Russian scientific periodicals. An original multifaceted classification has been developed and applied, considering the level of integration of international databases into national lists, subject coverage, ranking methodology, the regulator responsible for compiling the lists, and journal selection criteria. Our study compares current Russian lists, such as the Higher Attestation Commission List, the Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI), the Russian Index of Science Citation Core (RISC Core, which includes journals indexed in RSCI, Scopus, and the Web of Science Core Collection), and the Unified State List of Scientific Publications (the «White List»), as well as national lists from foreign countries: Australia, Brazil, India, Italy, Kazakhstan, and Norway. Alternative approaches to creating regulatory and expert systems for assessing scientific performance are considered. The analysis systematizes the strengths and weaknesses of current Russian lists and identifies key systemic problems inherent in existing approaches to their development. The findings of this study can be used by government agencies to develop a more balanced and flexible model of state science policy aimed at improving the quality of domestic scientific journals and building a national system for assessing scientific performance. The implementation of such measures will contribute to strengthening scientific sovereignty and developing scholarly communication on a national scale