Re: On Throwing Money At Gold OA Without First Mandating Green OA, Again!

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum_at_GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:29:56 -0400

    [ The following text is in the "windows-1252" character set. ]
    [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ]
    [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]

      On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 4:30 AM, David Prosser, Director
      of SPARC-Europe, wrote in the American Scientist Open
      Access Forum:
            As all of the UK research councils, as well
            as some of the major UK funding charities,
            have green mandates in place I don?t see how
            this can possibly be described as
            ?pre-emptive gold fever?.

      I'm so glad you said that, David! Here is the very
      specific reply that should fully elucidate this question,
      which cuts to the very heart of what is at issue:

      (1) There are two kinds of Green OA mandates: funder
      mandates and university mandates.

      (2) Yes, the UK is the only country in the world in which
      all 7 of its national research funders (plus 7 more
      charities and intercouncils) mandate Green OA (and that
      is just wonderful: a global inspiration and example in
      every respect!).

      (3) However, UK funder mandates only
      cover funded research output.

      (4) UK university (and research institution) mandates, in
      contrast, cover all UK research output, funded or
      unfunded, across all fields.

      (5) And the UUK/RIN advice on Gold OA funding was from
      and to UK universities, not funders. 

      (6) Most UK universities do not yet mandate Green OA.
      (Only 6 UK universities plus two departments do --
      although that is still the largest number of university
      mandates of any country in the world today!).

      (7) Therefore my point -- that on no account should
      funding Gold OA be recommended until and unless Green OA
      has been mandated -- stands, for the intended recipients
      of the UUK/RIN advice: UK universities.

      (I might add that even funding councils that mandate
      Green OA for the research they fund can help more by
      stipulating that the default locus of the mandated Green
      deposit should be the fundee's own institutional
      repository -- from which it can be exported/harvested to
      central repositories if desired -- rather than mandating
      direct central deposit. That creates a synergy between
      the two kinds of mandates, with the funder mandates
      encouraging and facilitating the adoption of university
      mandates at each of the fundees' institutions, so as to
      cover their unfunded research output too.)

      Stevan

Stevan Harnad
American Scientist Open Access Forum

       

      David

       

      David C Prosser PhD

      Director

      SPARC Europe

       

      Tel:      +44 (0) 1865 277 614

      Mobile: +44 (0) 7974 673 888

      Web:    www.sparceurope.org


____________________________________________________________________________


From: Repositories discussion list
[mailto:JISC-REPOSITORIES_at_JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Stevan
Harnad
Sent: 28 March 2009 22:14
To: JISC-REPOSITORIES_at_JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: On Throwing Money At Gold OA Without First Mandating
Green OA, Again!

Pre-emptive Gold Fever seems to be spreading. 

 

Following hard on the heels of University of California's
Gilded New Deal with Springer -- UC subscribes to the Springer
fleet of journals for an undisclosed fee, but, as part of the
Deal, UC authors get to publish their articles as Gold OA for
free in those same Springer journals -- now Universities UK
(UUK) and the Research Information Network (RIN) are jointly
dispensing advice on the payment of Gold OA fees (which is
fine) but without first giving the most important piece of
advice: 

 

Universities should on no account spend a single penny on Gold
OA fees until and unless they have adopted a Green OA mandate
for all of their refereed journal article output.

 

There is still time for UUK and RIN to remedy this, by
prominently setting the priorities and contingencies straight.
I fervently hope they will do so!

 

(Peter Suber is expressing the very same hope, but in his
characteristically gentler and less curmudgeonly way.)

 

Stevan Harnad

American Scientist Open Access Forum
Received on Mon Mar 30 2009 - 14:30:45 BST