This is forwarded with permission from Mike Giarlo. My response
follows at the end. -- SH
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 10:45:29 -0800
From: Michael J. Giarlo <leftwing_at_alumni.rutgers.edu>
To: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: The Green and Gold Roads to Open Access
Greetings Mr. Harnad,
As I wrote in my last message to you, thank you for your comments. My
replies are interspersed below.
On 3/7/06, Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> the source for the green/gold distinction is for some very odd reason
> cited as (of all people) Walter Crawford (2005) (someone who is not the
> most knowledgeable about, nor friendly to, this distinction!).
Though I do in fact cite Walter Crawford at the end of the sentence on the
green road, I previously cited you as the originator of the distinction
between the green and gold roads:
"The numerous models of open access may typically be categorized
under one of the two rubrics proposed by open access champion,
Steven Harnad. In the "gold" open access model, materials
are freely and immediately provided in universally accessible
electronic journals. The "green" open access model might be
seen as an intermediate phase between current fee-based access
models and the gold model..."
I do cite Walter in the clause that follows, but only for a definition of
the green road. His work, I now see, is not an authoritative source for
such a definition but I felt it was consistent with the others. As for my
reasoning, I was somewhat limited in the sources I could choose for this
paper - I intentionally set limits on which online databases I searched for
citations to see the coverage within certain domains.
> and first published in:
>
> Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S.,
> Yves, G., Charles, O., Stamerjohanns, H. and Hilf, E. (2004) The
> Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access.
> Serials review 30. http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/9939/
Thanks for the citation!
> Whereas Open Access (OA) via the green road of author self-archiving could
> indeed indeed be described, as Giarlo puts it, as "an intermediate phase"
> between the current toll-access model and the gold OA publishing model
> for journal cost-recovery, it is important to understand and remember that
> green OA is not "intermediate" OA! It is full-blooded, 100% OA, which
> was defined by the BOAI in 2001 as free online access to the full text of
> journal
> articles.
My intention was to relate open access to current issues in academic
libraries, namely how academic libraries might begin to broaden their
support for open access. In this sense, the green road to open access seems
like an intermediate phase; it is arguably easier to create a pre-prints
repository, or gently request that researchers publish in existing
subject-based repositories, than to completely abandon commercial journals.
If I have mischaracterized OA in so doing, I apologize, and I intend to make
this clearer in a revision.
> It is a mistake to imagine or imply that OA was defined as the gold
> OA publishing model!
I could see how one might infer that from what I have written, but I did not
intend it. I attempted to make this clear in the following section:
'There are thus many forms that open access publications may
take, each having its own costs and benefits. What they share
is the very general principle which is poignantly stated by
Harnad; "the objective of open access is to maximize research
impact by maximizing research access."'
> Nor was OA devised as a solution to the journal
> affordability crisis (although the journal affordability crisis helped
> raise consciousness about the need for OA). OA was devised as a solution
> to the research accessibility crisis -- and this solution is provided
> by 100% OA, whether via gold or green or both! ...This is certainly true,
> but, again, not an OA matter, because OA's direct
> concern is article-accessibility for users, not journal-affordability
> for subscribers.
For sure, though the issues of open access and journal affordability
certainly intersect in academic libraries. Or, at least, they could! That
financial benefit is not a stated goal of OA isn't a problem for me, as long
as I can make the case that adopting OA may or may not bring financial
benefits to academic libraries. Perhaps I have not done a good job of
making this distinction clear.
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Stevan. Feel free to forward my
response to the AmSci mailing list unless it is open for posting by
non-members.
-Mike Giarlo
Dear Mike,
Thanks for your reply. You wrote:
> Though I do in fact cite Walter Crawford at the end of the sentence on the
> green road, I previously cited you as the originator of the distinction
> between the green and gold roads:
Yes, but "cite" usually doesn't just mean to name, but to cite the
(published) source...
> I do cite Walter [2005] in the clause that follows, but only for
> a definition of the green road.
That's what I thought was ironic: because he usually only cites green
(or me) to berate it (or me)! So it seems rather odd to cite him as
the source!
> His work, I now see, is not an authoritative source for
> such a definition but I felt it was consistent with the others.
His usage and view of green is consistent with that of many others
because many others make the same mistake: to take green to be merely
a makeshift means to the real end, namely, gold -- and to imply that OA
*is* gold, and green is somehow merely partial or provisional or imperfect
OA. Yet nothing could be further from the truth: This just proves (once
again) that one can't arrive at the truth by taking a nose count!
> As for my
> reasoning, I was somewhat limited in the sources I could choose for this
> paper - I intentionally set limits on which online databases I searched for
> citations to see the coverage within certain domains.
A google search on " 'open access' gold green " gives the right
reference as the 9th hit (the first hit is right too, but not the earliest
reference).
Google Scholar gives the right reference as hit number 1.
> > SH: green OA is not "intermediate" OA! It is full-blooded, 100% OA, which
> > was defined by the BOAI in 2001 as free online access to the full text of
> > journal articles.
>
> My intention was to relate open access to current issues in academic
> libraries, namely how academic libraries might begin to broaden their
> support for open access. In this sense, the green road to open access seems
> like an intermediate phase; it is arguably easier to create a pre-prints
> repository, or gently request that researchers publish in existing
> subject-based repositories, than to completely abandon commercial journals.
> If I have mischaracterized OA in so doing, I apologize, and I intend to make
> this clearer in a revision.
Your article is fine; it just needs a bit of fine-tuning!
(1) OA means free online access to journal articles.
(2) Self-archiving (green) can give free online access to all journal
articles. Hence 100% green OA would not be an intermediate phase on the
way to OA. It would be 100% OA. 100% green OA might be considered an
intermediate phase to gold OA, but that's another matter. OA's goal is to
maximize access, and 100% green OA -- just like 100% gold OA -- would do
just that.
(3) Libraries that want to broaden their support for OA should support
green OA self-archiving by their own institutional researchers. They
can create and maintain OA Repositories, and promote and help author
self-archiving. This is a brand new role for academic librarians:
mediating institutional access-provision (to its own research output,
for researchers at other institutions, in order to maximize the usage
and impact of institutional research output); not to be confused with
the classical role of libraries, which is to provide access for their
own institutional users, to the research output of other institutions.
(4) Libraries have next to nothing to do with gold OA: Libraries cannot
advise their authors on where to publish (researchers don't usually look to
librarians for guidance on where to publish). Libraries don't subscribe
to OA journals (because they are not subscription based but free to
the user). Librarians can abandon subscription journals, but that
undercuts green journals (and usually it is researchers who advice their
libraries on which journals to cancel).
> > SH: It is a mistake to imagine or imply that OA was defined as the gold
> > OA publishing model!
>
> I could see how one might infer that from what I have written, but I did not
> intend it. I attempted to make this clear in the following section:
>
> 'There are thus many forms that open access publications may
> take, each having its own costs and benefits. What they share is
> the very general principle which is poignantly stated by Harnad;
> "the objective of open access is to maximize research impact
> by maximizing research access."'
What can take many forms is OA. Not all forms of OA are forms of OA
publication! Green is not a form Gold.
> > SH: Nor was OA devised as a solution to the journal
> > affordability crisis (although the journal affordability crisis helped
> > raise consciousness about the need for OA). OA was devised as a solution
> > to the research accessibility crisis -- and this solution is provided
> > by 100% OA, whether via gold or green or both! ...This is certainly true,
> > but, again, not an OA matter, because OA's direct
> > concern is article-accessibility for users, not journal-affordability
> > for subscribers.
> >
> For sure, though the issues of open access and journal affordability
> certainly intersect in academic libraries. Or, at least, they could! That
> financial benefit is not a stated goal of OA isn't a problem for me, as long
> as I can make the case that adopting OA may or may not bring financial
> benefits to academic libraries. Perhaps I have not done a good job of
> making this distinction clear.
Green OA in itself does not ease libraries' journal budget problems, but
it takes some of the weight of the decision (because green OA is a
back-up for all journal articles, subscribed or not subscribed).
And remember that the purpose of OA is access-provision, for
researchers, not bringing financial benefits to libraries! (Indeed, the
goal of library journal subscriptions is likewise to access-provision
for researchers!)
Stevan Harnad
Received on Tue Mar 07 2006 - 21:19:16 GMT