It comes as a surprise to learn that there are people in the world of
academic publishing that still believe there is just a 'small problem of
access'. Endlessly, those working with the majority of countries that are
unable to afford increasingly expensive academic journals have urged that
free and open access to publicly funded research findings is the only way
that a global knowledge base can be compiled. And this matters. If the
planet's pressing problems are to be resolved, the unique knowledge
generated in developing and emerging countries - where the main
environmental and health problems are experienced - must be part of the
package and the research base in these regions must be strengthened through
free access to international research.
Fortunately, Open Access is delivering a mechanism for global sharing of
research and, as the numbers of OA institutional repositories (now 1717 IRs
from >100 countries), OA journals (> 5000) and institutional/funder mandates
(218 from 33 countries, with 20 more under development) continue to grow,
the infrastructure for the unrestricted exchange of essential research
knowledge is in place. Although these figures have not yet reached the
optimum, the international research community is increasingly recognising
the benefits to research organisations/funders and to research itself, and
there can be no going back to the days when access was regulated by ability
to play.
Barbara
EPT for Development
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stevan Harnad" <harnad_at_ECS.SOTON.AC.UK>
To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 2:00 AM
Subject: Re: Cost of peer review
On 2010-05-10, at 7:42 PM, Joseph Esposito wrote:
> Harnad is hoping to replace the small problem of access
> with the large problem of fiscal recklessness.
> But he is winning.
With only about 100 out of about 10,000 universities worldwide yet
mandating OA over a decade after mandates were first mooted, I'd say that if
that's winning, I'd like to hear what counts as losing! (And that if
universities and funders are doing it, it's despite me, not because of me!)
But I haven't lost hope. And if OA mandates -- and hence OA -- do manage to
prevail whilst we're still compos mentis, I look forward to being able to
show Joe that the resultant growth in research productivity and progress
will vastly outweigh any downsizing OA may induce in the journal publishing
industry -- with a net "fiscal" gain that is resoundingly positive overall.
Stevan Harnad
Received on Tue May 11 2010 - 21:54:04 BST