Vinod Scaria wrote:
> There is a third variety of Open Access Journals which are Externally
> funded and have no paying involved at either ends (reader or author). The
> Calicut Medical Journal http://www.calicutmedicaljournal.org funded
> by the Calicut Medical College Alumni Association and Internet Health
> http://www.internet-health.org funded by the CCMIR belong to this
> category.
I would, personally, regard these as paid for at the production end,
because the production of the journal is, as you say, an external
subsidy. The point is that they aren't paid for by the reader/user.
In fact, payment for the production of journals is I think one very
desirable option, especially in those places where the funding for the
scientific research is also centralized. Essentially, when in the US
the NSF funds scientific research, it should be implicitedly funding
the distribution of the results. This does raise major difficulties
for workers whose projects are not funded in such a manner, and other
funding routes are of course also necessary. I also agree with those
who would think it undesirable for all the STM publishing -- or all the
research for that matter -- in a country to be funded by a single agency.
I also note that in some areas, such as taxonomy, most publication has
been by subvention of some sort from the beginning -- it this case usually
through museums.
Though it is obvious that SH and I misunderstand each other on some
things, we do not disagree (I think) on the basic issue: that no matter
how it is done, the publication should not be at the cost of the reader;
the readers' access should be open. I would even add, that if the readers'
access to research is not open, it should no longer be considered ethical
scientific publication.
David Goodman
Received on Mon Mar 22 2004 - 21:32:57 GMT