Print

Print
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

[W]hat if funders, governments and research institutions ceased providing money for researchers to pay to publish, and instead insisted that they continue publishing in subscription journals—but always self-archived their papers in OA repositories (green OA)? Would this not mean that publishers would have to compete with repositories in access provision? And would they not as a result lower their prices? And if they did, could we not hope to see both the accessibility and affordability problems resolved?


It's enough to cease providing money for researchers to pay to publish (gold OA) -- no need to insist that they continue publishing in subscription journals, just that the always self-archive their paper in their institutional OA repository (green OA) immediately upon acceptance for publication. Nature will take care of the rest (a transition from today's access-denial, embargoes and fool's gold to universal green OA, fair gold, and all the re-use rights for which some are so impatient (but which they have no better or faster way to reach). (By the way, the repositories' automated request-copy Button will tide over any publisher green OA embargoes with just one click from a user to request -- and one click from the author to provide -- a single copy for research purposes.)


Harnad, S (2014) The only way to make inflated journal subscriptions unsustainable: Mandate Green Open Access. LSE Impact of Social Sciences Blog 4/28http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/28/inflated-subscriptions-unsustainable-harnad/


Sale, A., Couture, M., Rodrigues, E., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2012) Open Access Mandates and the "Fair Dealing" Button. In: Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian Culture Online (Rosemary J. Coombe & Darren Wershler, Eds.) http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18511/


Stevan Harnad



On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 6:52 AM, Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
​I have had an editorial published in ecancer journal with the above title.

 

The final two paragraphs read:

 

[W]hat if funders, governments and research institutions ceased providing money for researchers to pay to publish, and instead insisted that they continue publishing in subscription journals—but always self-archived their papers in OA repositories (green OA)? Would this not mean that publishers would have to compete with repositories in access provision? And would they not as a result lower their prices? And if they did, could we not hope to see both the accessibility and affordability problems resolved?

 

Some will respond that in the wake of the pushback against the Finch Report, and the subsequent gold OA policy announced in 2013 by Research Councils UK, the trend now is in any case to introduce green OA mandates. But these mandates still sometimes expect researchers to prefer gold OA, and are usually accompanied by APC funds. Moreover, the requirements of a green OA mandate can in any case be met by paying to publish in a gold OA journal. For so long as funders offer to pay their APCs, therefore, most researchers will likely choose that option, if only because it is much easier.

 

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SPARC OA Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to [log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[log in to unmask]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [log in to unmask].