On Fri, 26 Dec 2003, Arkadiusz Jadczyk wrote:
> There are many institutions that will be happy to run [open access]
> journals, and they will always find the little money that is needed.
>
> "Charging the author or institution" opens a way to setting up a
> bureaucracy that will take costs higher and higher.
Before we get carried away with hypotheses and counter-hypotheses about
how still-nonexistent open-access journals could or should cover their
costs, may I remind commentators that this thread is about implementing
institutional open-access *provision* and not about how to fund
open-access journals?
The reason one has to keep citing the 5%/95% figure is because the 5%
solution seems to have a way of quickly co-opting all available mental
space!
UNIFIED OPEN-ACCESS PROVISION STRATEGY:
(OAJ) Researchers publish their research in an
open-access journal if a suitable one exists [5%], otherwise
(OAA) they publish it in a suitable toll-access
journal [95%] and also self-archive it in their own research
institution's open-access research archive.
Stevan Harnad
NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open
access to the peer-reviewed research literature online is available at
the American Scientist Open Access Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01 & 02 & 03):
http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/index.html
Post discussion to: american-scientist-open-access-forum_at_amsci.org
Unified Dual Open-Access-Provision Policy:
BOAI-2 ("gold"): Publish your article in a suitable open-access
journal whenever one exists.
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm#journals
BOAI-1 ("green"): Otherwise, publish your article in a suitable
toll-access journal and also self-archive it.
http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/
http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml
http://www.eprints.org/signup/sign.php
Received on Fri Dec 26 2003 - 15:28:36 GMT