[GOAL] Re: Elsevier requires institutions to seek Elsevier's agreement to require their authors to exercise their rights?

[Stevan Harnad]

On 2012-05-14, at 6:28 AM, leo waaijers wrote:

> So, what is the meaning of a mandate then?

An institutional mandate is an administrative requirement, like the "publish or perish" mandate. It does not co-opt authors' free will, and whether authors comply or don't comply, they do it voluntarily (not involuntarily) -- and, as you know, especially when the mandate has not been properly formulated and implemented, many authors don't comply. 

Moreover, as Alma Swan's multinational, multidisciplinary survey shows, although most authors don't self-archive spontaneously (partly out of fear of publishers), most of them state that they would self-archive if their institutions mandated it -- over 80% of them saying they would do so "willingly."

Besides, Leo, you seem to be missing the point of my pointed questions to Alicia: 

The issue is not "free will" versus coercion. 

The issue is the self-contradiction between (1) a formal statement that a right rests with the author (i.e., does not require seeking the agreement of the publisher) yet at the same time (2) stipulating that the right to *exercise* that right requires seeking agreement from the publisher!

Stevan Harnad

> On 5/14/2012 11:55 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote:
>> 
>> An author who wishes to comply with an institutional posting mandate
>> is posting voluntarily. An author who does not wish to comply with an
>> institutional posting mandate refrains from posting, likewise
>> voluntarily.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120514/1a71d1d7/attachment.html