The following letters were published on February 17th 2007 in the
Guardian Newspaper and Barbara Kirsop posted the reply (last of
three, below, to the paper on February 18th.
Letter from Michael Mabe CEO, International Association of STM Publishers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,2015050,00.html
Ben GOLDACRE (Bad Science, February 10) says 'access to medical
literature in developing countries' is difficult - a claim repeated
in Guardian education (February 13th). In fact, since 2002, via
the Hinari programme, over 3,600 key medical journals have been
made available for researchers, clinicians and students in 114
developing countries by 100 international publishers working through
the World Health Organisation; access is entirely free for most of
these countries.
Since 2003, through the UN Food and Agriculture Organisations' Agora
Programme, and to the same 114 countries, 36 publishers provide free
or nominally priced access to over 900 agriculture journals. From
2006, through the OARE programme, researchers in the environmental
and related sciences now have access to 1,800 journals from 34
publishers. These initiatives do not solve all the problems; there
are still major infrastructure and technology challenges. However,
it is inaccurate and unfair to imply that science-journal publishers
have ignored providing access to those developing countries that
need it most.
Letter from Jan Velterop Director of open access, Springer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,2015050,00.html
While there undoubtedly are publishers which are against open access
to research results, there are those who embrace open access and offer
researchers the possibility to publish with open access. Springer,
the second largest academic publisher in the world, offers open
access, as an author's choice, in all of its journals.
Letter from Barbara Kirsop, posted to the Guardian February 18th
Your correspondents on Open Access to academic journals made
three omissions. Michael Mabe neglected to mention that the
UN/commercial publisher programmes are not available to countries
where collaborating publishers have sales (eg India, Brazil). These
programmes are donations and useful as sticking plaster, but can
never solve the underlying problem of information-starvation affecting
scientists in the developing world.
Your second correspondent, Jan Velterop, neglected to mention that
whereas authors may indeed choose to have open access to their papers
in some journals, this is only at a cost of between $1000 to $3000/per
paper (some publishers may waive this charge if authors are able to
prove inability to pay). Neither mentioned the alternative means to
obtaining open access to essential research findings by the author's
deposit of accepted papers in their Institutional Repositories
(open access, globally interoperable and searchable).
Fortunately, this readily achieved solution to the problem
is increasingly recognised (and even becoming mandated by some
funding organisations), as evidenced by the 21,420 signatories (as
of today) to the petition for guaranteed access to publicly-funded
research findings, including endorsement by over 1000 major research
organisations.
http://www.ec-petition.eu/
Enlightened publishers cooperating with this solution (perhaps with
an embargo period of a few months) will be rewarded when authors
vote with their feet by choosing to publish in journals that believe
in the widest possible distribution of research knowledge. Without
sharing research information we will for ever delay solutions to
the planet's problems.
Received on Mon Feb 19 2007 - 12:28:59 GMT