I have read in the networks that the evaluation of university researchers has sparked a debate in Catalonia. The debate has, in any case, been small of those who wake up from time to time. It seems to me an obvious issue, because to access a job at university, or to access the academic career, the issue of accreditation agencies is a fundamental one. In short, in order to obtain space in the public university (take into account that research is carried out mainly in public universities), the curriculum of the research professor is evaluated by non-university agencies. Attention is not about achieving stable and well-paid employment, but rather about the fact that the evaluation of these agencies is also necessary in the “training” profiles. To advance in the academic career, it is also necessary to overcome a series of evaluations. It is a complex issue and has its best advantages insofar as its academic trajectory is somehow clarified and objected.

In recent decades, when the solid institutions of modernity are weakening, that is, in our increasingly neoliberal societies, characterized by deregulation, the social function of the university expert is being questioned more than before. However, this figure still has legitimacy to speak to the society of Truth, Science or Critical Thinking, among others. Therefore, taking into account who gets to these social positions and how it reaches is by no means a matter of corporativism or the working conditions of certain workers. On the contrary, I would say that this is an issue with a deeper social significance.

In the vast majority of cases, the researcher is at the same time a professor, since figures dedicated exclusively to research are minority, especially in the social sciences and humanities. In this sense, we mainly take into account the publications of scientific articles, journal articles that are increasingly owned by giant companies, or that appear in lists managed by themselves. Therefore, it is a great business to publish in this type of journals, especially research that provides public money, often without open access. This situation is reflected, moreover, in the development of a full scientific debate from these channels, and in the need to take it into account.

All this long process, however, has clear structural constraints that we cannot forget in the name of supposed excellence. Fortunately, compared to other European countries, these turbocasitist logics of the trajectory of researchers are not so clear in our country, I would say. At least in some areas. But the trends and pressures are those.

At this point, where is the research in Basque? Why should a researcher from Euskal Herria publish their works in Euskera (along with the fact of publishing them in other languages, of course) so that they are less taken into account throughout this evaluation process? Political will and militant will probably be indispensable. However, in view of all this neoliberal logic of the commodification of research, it is also a brake to strengthen the field of research in Euskera. In this sense, I believe it is fundamental that the institutions and standards that evaluate the research be decided in the Basque Country itself, in the direction of the construction of a new logic of research. Sovereignty is also essential to this end.