<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On 2013-05-02, at 4:28 AM, Fotis Georgatos <<a href="mailto:fotis@mail.cern.ch">fotis@mail.cern.ch</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">On May 2, 2013, at 9:17 AM, Andras Holl wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Regardless however right you are, Elsevier's play with words succesfully confuses <br>a large number of authors, who do not deposit because of this. <br></blockquote><br>It is the role of research institutes and university boards to step<br>forward and make an emphatic statement about the status quo and,<br>how their subordinates/affiliates are expected to behave. Taxpayers <br>do not have an excuse of confusion when they make their contributions<br>so, that puts some responsibility on the individual authors, too.<br><br>btw. -sorry if the question has been asked again over here-<br>is there an open ranking list of universities worldwide <br>as regards the clarity of their messaging in relation to Open Access?<br></blockquote><br></div><div><br></div>Dear Fotis,<div><br></div><div>We have done a <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.8174">study</a> testing the correlation (positive and significant)</div><div>between the strength of the institutional Green OA mandates in</div><div>ROARMAP and the number of deposits in the repository.</div><div><br></div><div>An earlier preprint is below. An updated version will be posted</div><div>shortly. Details available from Dr. Yassine Gargouri:</div><div><<a href="mailto:yassinegargouri@hotmail.com">yassinegargouri@hotmail.com</a>></div><div><br></div><div>The Liege mandate, the strongest, has a deposit rate of over 80%.</div><div>The Liege model -- immediate-deposit (ID/OA) designated the</div><div>mechanism for submitting publications for performance review --</div><div>is now being adopted more and more, with UK's HEFCE/REF</div><div>proposing it also for funder mandates.</div><div><br></div><div>Best wishes,</div><div><br></div><div>Stevan</div><div><br></div><div><div><b><a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.8174">Testing the Finch Hypothesis on Green OA Mandate Ineffectiveness</a></b></div><div><br></div><div>Yassine Gargouri, Vincent Lariviere, Yves Gingras, Tim Brody, Les Carr, Stevan Harnad</div><div><br></div><div>(Submitted on 30 Oct 2012 (v1), last revised 2 Nov 2012 (this version, v2))</div><div><br></div><div>We have now tested the Finch Committee's Hypothesis that Green Open Access Mandates </div><div>are ineffective in generating deposits in institutional repositories. With data from ROARMAP </div><div>on institutional Green OA mandates and data from ROAR on institutional repositories, we</div><div> show that deposit number and rate is significantly correlated with mandate strength </div><div>(classified as 1-12): The stronger the mandate, the more the deposits. The strongest mandates </div><div>generate deposit rates of 70%+ within 2 years of adoption, compared to the un-mandated </div><div>deposit rate of 20%. The effect is already detectable at the national level, where the UK, </div><div>which has the largest proportion of Green OA mandates, has a national OA rate of 35%, </div><div>compared to the global baseline of 25%. The conclusion is that, contrary to the Finch </div><div>Hypothesis, Green Open Access Mandates do have a major effect, and the stronger </div><div>the mandate, the stronger the effect (the Liege ID/OA mandate, linked to research </div><div>performance evaluation, being the strongest mandate model). RCUK (as well as </div><div>all universities, research institutions and research funders worldwide) would be </div><div>well advised to adopt the strongest Green OA mandates and to integrate institutional </div><div>and funder mandates.</div></div></body></html>