[GOAL] Open Access Priorities: Peer Access and Public Access

[Stevan Harnad]

The claim is often made that researchers (peers) have as much access
to peer-reviewed research publications as they need -- that if there
is any need for further access at all, it is not the peers who need
it, but the general public.

1. Functionally, it doesn't matter whether open access (OA) is
provided for peers or for public, because OA means that everyone gets
access.

2. Strategically, however, it does matter, because currently OA is
*not* being provided in anywhere near sufficient numbers spontaneously
by researchers (peers).

3. This means that policies (mandates) from peers' institutions and
funders are needed to induce peers to provide OA to their
publications.

4. This means that credible and valid reasons must be found for peers'
institutions and funders to mandate providing.OA.

5. For some fields of research -- especially health-relevant research
-- public access is a strong reason for public funders to mandate
providing public access.

6. But that still leaves all the rest of research, in all disciplines,
funded and unfunded.

7. Most research is technical, intended to be used and applied by peer
researchers in building further research and applications -- to the
benefit of the general public.

8. But most peer-reviewed research reports themselves are neither
understandable nor of direct interest to the general public as reading
matter.

9. Hence, for most research, "public access to publicly funded
research," is not reason enough for providing OA, nor for mandating
that OA be provided.

10. The evidence that the primary intended users of peer-reviewed
research -- researchers -- do not have anywhere near enough access is
two-fold:

11. For many years, the ARL published statistics on the journal
subscription/license access of US research universities:
http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/arlbin/arl.cgi?task=setupstats

12. The fraction of journals that any university can afford to access
via subscriptions.licenses has since become smaller, despite the "Big
Deals:

13. The latest evidence comes from the university that can afford the
largest fraction of journals: Harvard University
http://isites.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=k77982&tabgroupid=icb.tabgroup143448

14. Researchers' careers and funding as well as research progress
depend on the accessibility, uptake and impact of the research output.

15. Open Access maximizes accessibility and enhances update and
impact. http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html

16. Hence peer access, rather than just public access, is the reason
(all) researchers (funded and unfunded, in all disciplines) should
provide OA -- and the reason their institutions and funders should
mandate that they provide OA.

Stevan Harnad
Enabling Open Scholarship
http://www.openscholarship.org