Re: The Mandate of Open Access Institutional Repository Managers

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 12:50:25 -0400

On 2010-07-31, at 11:56 AM, leo waaijers wrote:

      Yes, I think that a public discussion of your rigidity may
      advance things. Not your rigidity as a personal psychological
      feature, but as an operational or tactical factor. My point is, your
      rigidity is not a success factor. 

      Sometimes I am dreaming of an agreement between Green and Gold in
      the form of a mutually accepted simple overview of pro's and con's
      of both options. We then could stop the relentless internal debates
      in the OA movement and use the released energy to approach funders
      together and tell them that if they take OA seriously, and I am
      convinced most of them do, they can make a contingency based
      choice. 

      I always have the feeling that your rigidity prevents such
      a development. Am I right?


Dear Leo, I think you are wrong. 
The "agreement between Green and Gold in the form of a mutually accepted simple
overview of pro's and con's of both options" of which you are dreaming is in
fact precisely what prevails today; it is indeed the result of "contingency
based choice" -- and it is not advancing things, nor generating much success,
anywhere near quickly enough. Universal OA is still far away: almost as far as
it was a decade ago (though the repositories and the few green OA mandates and
gold OA journals have brought us a little closer). 

It is this simplistic, unreflective status quo that I am trying (unsuccessfully)
to challenge and disrupt. It is so far too rigid for reasoning or evidence to
penetrate it. But although it may be "an operational or tactical" futility, I
have not yet given up. (in that sense you are right that I have been
"relentless.")
My main point is so simple that it can be summarised in a single sentence:
"Institutions and funders should mandate green OA and they should on no account
promote or fund gold OA until and unless they have first mandated green OA."
(That's it; all the rest is in the reasons and the evidence on which that
stern-sounding injunction is based.)

But I am interested in knowing (preferably offline, because I doubt the
jisc-repositories list shares my curiosity) the basis on which you imagine that
my "rigidity prevents... contingency based choice": 

Do you imagine that I have any power or authority whatsoever to prevent people
from making their own choices? (For I assure you that if I did, they would not
be making the unfortunate choices they are making today -- and I bet you that
progress toward universal OA would be incomparably faster!)

But I continue to think that an on-list discussion of my rigidity is a waste of
list-member's time, whereas a (multilateral) discussion of my reasoning would be
a refreshing tactical and operational change.

(The usual pattern is that I post detailed, substantive critiques, and no one
responds -- or responds just to tell me that I am being rigid and should "stop
the relentless internal debates in the OA movement"...)

Best wishes, Stevan


                  LW: But shouldn't you accept then
                  that different repository managers may have
                  various 'mandates'? You seem so rigid in
                  this. 


            SH: Yes, I am rigid as rigid can be on what makes sense
            and what does not. But why does this trouble you? I have
            absolutely no power. It is not I who set repository
            managers' or repository managers' mandates: All I do is
            try (mostly in vain!) to help them make more sense out
            of what they are trying to do.

            But for this sort of nonsubstantive discussion, I really
            don't think this list is quite the place. 

            My prior postings were trying to point out the profound
            problems with the Chair of the UK Council of Research
            Repositories arguments for taking a "gold only route." I
            have no idea whatsoever whether anyone has taken any
            notice of the substantive points I raised. Not one
            of them has been taken up in the subsequent postings
            (except by Steve Hitchcock, but we already see eye
            to eye). 

            I really don't think, however, that a public discussion
            of my rigidity is going to advance things, do you?

                                    SH: And
                                    my
                                    mandate,
                                    Charles
                                    (if you
                                    will
                                    permit
                                    me!) is
                                    to
                                    continue
                                    describing,
                                    as
                                    clearly
                                    and as
                                    concretely
                                    as I
                                    can,
                                    what it
                                    is that
                                    I take
                                    to be
                                    the
                                    mandate
                                    of
                                    repositories,
                                    repository
                                    managers,
                                    and
                                    repository
                                    managers
                                    -- and
                                    why.
      

LW: Is this a self-imposed mandate Stevan? If so,
are we all entitled to define our own mandates?
   

                        SH: Yes, self-imposed, Leo. 
And, yes, we're all entitled to impose mandates on
ourselves. 
(Some, unfond of extended metaphors, might prefer to
call it their "mission." Mine's been open access
archivangelism 'lo these nigh on 20 years...)
Received on Sat Jul 31 2010 - 17:50:40 BST