Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Methodological study demonstrates multidimensional tracking of bibliodiversity using the OpenAIRE Graph, highlighting open infrastructure capabilities to capture diverse scholarly outputs.
Bibliodiversity has emerged as a central concept in debates on open science, scholarly communication, and research evaluation, highlighting the need to sustain linguistic, geographic, epistemic, and infrastructural diversity in knowledge production and dissemination. While its normative foundations are well established, operationalising bibliodiversity at scale remains methodologically challenging and strongly dependent on the availability of inclusive, interdata infrastructures. This paper presents a methodological demonstration of how bibliodiversity can be systematically analysed using the OpenAIRE Graph, a large-scale, open Scholarly Knowledge Graph that aggregates metadata from publishers, repositories, and research infrastructures worldwide. Drawing on the multidimensional framework proposed in the literature, we illustrate how key dimensions of bibliodiversity—linguistic, geographic, disciplinary, publisher, business model, and infrastructure diversity—can be operationalised using the OpenAIRE data model and queried reproducibly in Google BigQuery. Through a series of exploratory analyses, we show how the Graph captures the “long tail” of scholarly communication, including non-English products, diverse research formats such as datasets and software, and contributions from institutional and thematic repositories, particularly beyond the Global North. Rather than identifying new empirical trends, this work demonstrates the analytical potential of the OpenAIRE Graph as an open, community-governed infrastructure for bibliodiversity research. By making diversity measurable across multiple, interconnected dimensions, the OpenAIRE Graph provides a robust empirical basis for future studies and supports evidence-informed policies to foster a more inclusive and equitable scholarly communication ecosystem.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Angioni et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: