Re: Poynder on OA in Europe

From: Ept <ept_at_BIOSTRAT.DEMON.CO.UK>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 17:48:17 -0000

Richard Poynder's article is extremely helpful in outlining the current
status of OA, as he sees it:

I read it from the point of view of researchers in developing countries
and at the end I wondered whether the OA-detractors are thinking atall
about the huge global problems we face in this interconnected world, and
how they are to be solved. As governments and citizens begin to take on
board the importance of international efforts to solve climate change or
infectious new diseases (for example), they also begin to recognize that
sharing research findings is an essential part of reaching solutions.

I am interested to know how the EU commissioners felt well-informed
enough to reject their expert committee^Òs recommendations. The unproven
difficulties of the publishing industry hardly compare in substance with
the huge multidisciplinary developments from research output that are
delayed through access restrictions. And, as Richard says, this resembles
the rejection of the UK S&T Committee^Òs OA recommendations following
lobbying - recommendations happily now adopted independently by the
research councils^Ò OA mandates. We should hope that the EURAB and other
EU organisations are able to persuade the Commission to see beyond the
perceived concerns of a service industry to the immense R&D benefits from
research applications. The incredible support shown by the petitions
should provide them with incontestable evidence of the support from the
research world.

Turning to a specific point made in Richard^Òs article, most OA journals
do not require Article Processing Charges (APCs). Moreover, NO developing
country publisher charges authors, for very obvious reasons. Costs are
recovered in other ways, and perhaps Dr Sahu, MedKnow Publications, could
report how his costs are met without charging authors. He has good
statistics to show how OA journals quickly become ^Ñinternational^Ò
through OA (increased submissions ^Ö including from non-national authors,
increased impact, increased subscriptions ^Å..). There are other ways to
meet costs, and it would seem that publishers of the future will be those
that embrace the new technologies and adapt, as are the telephone, film,
music and other media industries. As we well know, OA offers huge
technical possibilities for linking articles and data and building new
knowledge. As the petitions are showing so clearly, Stevan^Òs voice is in
no way a lone voice, and researchers in developing countries are becoming
increasingly informed, aware and active in the establishment of IRs and
true OA journals (without APCs).

It is a sad time that has brought the publishers (many the good friends
of the research community) into conflict with their authors. Sad, because
it seems unnecessary. The green route to OA changes little else in
established practices, and requires the continuation of journals; there
is no evidence as yet that the publishers will suffer from OA mandates;
and if there comes a time when sales reduce, then they will adapt. The
distribution of research information is hugely more important to the
planet, and increasingly urgent.

Barbara
Received on Sat Mar 17 2007 - 21:01:27 GMT