Tom Wilson, the editor of an OA journal (Information Research) 
    http://informationr.net/ir/index.html
has just written an article in a CILIP magazine entitled "Institutional
open archives: Where are we now?" Library and Information Update. April
2006.
http://www.cilip.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/7E2C4BAD-1F83-460A-B2A5-B50AD060C4D0/0/TomWilson.pdf

This is a fine and fair survey of the un-fine, un-fair pace of progress in
OA self-archiving in the UK, but Wilson draws altogether the wrong
conclusions!

    (1) It is a fact that UK Institutional OA Repositories (OAIRs)
    are not being filled with OA content anywhere near quickly enough.
    http://archives.eprints.org/?action=analysis

    (2) It is likewise a fact that OAIRs are not being filled with OA
    content anywhere near quickly in any country in the world (except
    possibly the Netherlands, where DARE has provided a very promising
    incentive system).
http://archives.eprints.org/?action=home&country=nl&version=&type=&order=recordcount&submit=Filter   

    (3) It is a further fact that there are four institutions and
    one department that not only have OAIRs but that also have an
    institutional mandate to deposit in them: Unlike the rest of the
    world, those OAIRs are growing very robustly.
    http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/

    (4) This outcome confirms resoundingly the finding of two
    international JISC author surveys that found that 95% of authors
    report that if their institution or funder mandated OA self-archiving,
    they would comply.
    http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11006/

(Wilson cites this JISC study, but only to confirm that 92% of researchers
worldwide support OA and that -- of those that have *already* published
in an OA journal -- 71% are likely to do it again: Alas, fewer than
10% of journals are OA journals -- http://www.doaj.org/ --  and only a
minority of authors have ever published in one of them!)

So, although praising actual funder self-archiving mandates (Wellcome
Trust) and promised (but not yet adopted) funder self-archiving mandates
(RCUK), Wilson draws the conclusion that the only way for OA is to
promote OA journals!
    http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTD002766.html
    http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/access/index.asp

It is quite puzzling why Wilson would draw this conclusion from the
evidence he himself cites, since the logical and practical conclusion is
so obvious: UK institutions (and funders) need to mandate OA
self-archiving! That way they will fill their near-empty OA archives.

Wilson remarks on the fact that the University of Southampton -- and
especially one particular department at the University of Southampton
-- seems to be providing the lion's share of the UK's OAIR content, but
he neglects to mention that that particular Department has the only UK
self-archiving mandate!
http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/fullinfo.php?inst=University%20of%20Southampton%20Department%20of%20Electronics%20and%20Computer%20Science

We have already wasted 5 precious years of lost research access and
impact on a foolish "gold rush" focussed primarily on OA ("gold") journals
instead of OA ("green") self-archiving. 
    http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/self-faq/#31.Waiting

Now is not the time to swing back again to that low-yield,
low-probability option. Authors are spontaneously publishing articles
in OA journals even less than they are spontaneously self-archiving,
but self-archiving (green) can be mandated by research institutions and
funders whereas publishing in (or creating) OA journals (gold) cannot be
mandated *and spontaneous growth levels of both are clearly insufficient*.

Green and gold are complementary, but it is clear that 100% green is
within immediate reach, and awaits only the institution/funder mandates;
researchers will comply with self-archiving mandates, but they will not
self-archive spontaneously.

The best hope for Wilson's own OA journal (Information Research) is to
support OA self-archiving mandates. Once we reach the long-overdue goal
of 100% OA through self-archiving, the landscape and prospects will look
different for all concerned.

Stevan Harnad

AMERICAN SCIENTIST OPEN ACCESS FORUM:
A complete Hypermail archive of the ongoing discussion of providing
open access to the peer-reviewed research literature online (1998-2005)
is available at:
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/
        To join or leave the Forum or change your subscription address:
http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
        Post discussion to:
        [log in to unmask]

UNIVERSITIES: If you have adopted or plan to adopt an institutional
policy of providing Open Access to your own research article output,
please describe your policy at:
        http://www.eprints.org/signup/sign.php

UNIFIED DUAL OPEN-ACCESS-PROVISION POLICY:
    BOAI-1 ("green"): Publish your article in a suitable toll-access journal
            http://romeo.eprints.org/
OR
    BOAI-2 ("gold"): Publish your article in a open-access journal if/when 
            a suitable one exists.
            http://www.doaj.org/
AND  
    in BOTH cases self-archive a supplementary version of your article
            in your institutional repository.
            http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/
            http://archives.eprints.org/
            http://openaccess.eprints.org/