OA's Problem Is Not Funding But Keystrokes: Solution Is Mandates

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:52:45 +0000

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Thomas Krichel wrote:

> As Jean-Claude knows, I am a trained economist...
> Thus, here is what Jean and his gang should do: they should argue
> that the university should cancel physics, mathematics,
> computer science, economics journals (just to name a few
> where de facto open access is very high), and hand over the
> money to them so that they can help local author build
> high-quality digital scholarly assets.

This is stunningly, breath-takingly bad advice! I hope readers of this
Forum are by now well enough informed to know that they should ignore it,
and why.

OA's problem is not funding. Nor is it journal pricing.

OA's problem is research access denial and impact loss.

And what local authors need is not "money to build high-quality digital
scholarly assets". They need mandates -- from their institutions and
their funders -- to deposit their published journal articles in their
local OA Institutional Repositories.

Forget about canceling journals until *after* we have OA (no discipline
has it yet). Otherwise you are failing to reach for the obvious, which
is completely within your grasp -- and gratuitously reducing access
instead of increasing it.

Sometimes it can be a great asset not to be a trained economist...

Stevan Harnad

If you have adopted or plan to adopt a policy of providing Open Access
to your own research article output, please describe your policy at:

    BOAI-1 ("Green"): Publish your article in a suitable toll-access journal
    BOAI-2 ("Gold"): Publish your article in an open-access journal if/when
    a suitable one exists.
    in BOTH cases self-archive a supplementary version of your article
    in your own institutional repository.
Received on Mon Feb 18 2008 - 11:24:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:49:13 GMT