[GOAL] Re: Agreement on Green OA not needed from publishers but from institutions and funders

[Thomas Krichel]

  Stevan Harnad writes

> >  Can you give us an example of an institution with a mandate that has
> >  managed, for a period of a year, for example, to collect its
> >  complete research output in its IR?
> 
> U. Southampton School of Electronics and Computer Science
> (the oldest Green OA mandate). 
> (Not U. Southampton, which has a sub-optimal mandate.) 
> 
> And CERN. 

  None of them are cross-discipline, therefore they don't count.
  I would not count any of the 1400 RePEc archives many of which
   
> And Liège (with its optimal ID/OA mandate) is now coming close;

  Can somebody from Liège confirm this? There is a time period for
  which they have stored in their IR all research papers produced?
  Maybe they can also let us know about the cost this effort 
  entailed.   

> and so soon will its emulators.

  Well, assuming IRs came along in 2002, and assuming that Liege would
  indeed be full, then teh expected value of all others coming to this
  stage would be how long? Many thousands of years. Good things come
  to those wait.

> But even the 60%-70% mandates are not to be sneezed at,

  I am sneezing. I applaud. 

> This is the UK lead in OA that the Finch Report now proposes to 
> squander,

  I agree.

> in favour of a very long and very expensive gold rush.

  The "green rush" appears to be a longer rush. In fact it's no rush
  at all. Unless it gets more resources, I think. The amount spent on
  IRs appears insignificant to the amount spent a subscriptions. It
  just is not fair to compare both approaches. But that's precise what
  the Finch report is doing.

> L'appétit vient en mangeant...

  On ne fait pas d'omelette sans casser des œufs.

  Cheers,

  Thomas Krichel                    http://openlib.org/home/krichel
                                      http://authorprofile.org/pkr1
                                               skype: thomaskrichel