[GOAL] Re: Where now for OA in the UK?

Fri Nov 29 06:53:20 GMT 2013

Dear Stevan,

Just a couple of points. I'm on the side of OA, period. Gold and green 
are just means for achieving it. I also think that even access with a 
delay is better than no access, that access to the version of record is 
better than access to an author copy, and that libre access is better 
than gratis. Anyway the "market"  will decide, but its of course 
important that stakeholders have good information about the status quo 
and developments. That's what my group has been trying to do recently.

The big publishers will try to cash in, either via the hybrid route 
(there are now already some 8,000 hybrid journals, doubled in a couple 
of years), new APC full OA journals emerging weekly, or if the green 
route via mandates starts to grow rapidly, by bundling conditions and 
compensating income (for foreseeable reductions in income from lowering 
numbers of toll gated articles)  with their subscription big deals with 
the universities in question.

Concerning mandates the important metric is the number of articles that 
existing mandates cover, and here the gross number of mandates and its 
growth is less important. Small Finland, for instance, is number 5 
globally on the Roarmap list with 28 mandates, but 26 of these are from 
small regional polytechniques with extremely little output of peer 
reviewed journal articles. Also the exact formulation of mandates and 
the sticks and carrots in use matters a lot.

Bo-Christer

On 11/29/13 1:17 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Bo-Christer Björk 
> <bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi <mailto:bo-christer.bjork at hanken.fi>> wrote:
>
>     The idea that publishers would tolerate large scale mandate driven
>     green OA (say 50-60 %) of articles with no embargoes or
>     counteractions is pretty naive. Elsevier has shown the way with
>     rules stipulating that Green OA is OK, unless its mandated, in
>     which case they require special deals with the the institutions in
>     question. And many publishers who previously had no embargo
>     periods are starting to define such.
>
>
> Bo-Christer, unfortunately you have completely missed the point.
>
> /Yes, publishers can and will try to impose embargoes on Green OA, 
> especially encouraged by the perverse effete of the UK's Finch/RCUK 
> preference and subsidy for Gold./ That was not being denied, it was 
> being affirmed: "Joint 'Re-Engineering' Plan of UK Government and UK 
> Publisher Lobby for 'Nudging' UK Researchers Toward Gold Open Access 
> <http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1077-Critique-of-UK-Governments-Response-to-BIS-Recommendations-on-UK-Open-Access-Policy.html>"
>
> But the immediate-deposit 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=%22immediate+deposit%22+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg> 
> (HEFCE 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=hefce+immediate+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg>/Liege 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=liege+model++blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg>) 
> mandates are immune to these publisher embargoes. They are the 
> compromise mandate that fits all funders and institutions, regardless 
> of how long a maximal publisher embargo they allow. (Green OA after 
> one a one-year embargo has been pretty much conceded by all 
> publishers, whether or not they admit it, so that's the worst case 
> scenario: that's the target to beat). The HEFCE/Liege mandates get 
> everything deposited in institutional repositories immediately, 
> whether or not it is made OA immediately. And that means that access 
> to everything immediately becomes at most 2 keystrokes away, one from 
> the requestor, one from the author, thanks to the repositories' 
> automated "Almost-OA" Button 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=button+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg>: 
> see below.)
>
> As to Elsevier's "special deals" for mandating institutions: sensible 
> institutions will politely inform Elsevier that they are prepared to 
> negotiate with publishers about subscription pricing  "Big Deals" -- 
> but not about university policy.

>
> As to Elsevier authors (who -- not their universities! -- are the ones 
> negotiating rights agreements with their publishers): They can rest 
> assured that Elsevier is still completely on the Side of the Angels 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=angels++blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg> on 
> immediate, unembargoed Green OA, as it has been ever since 2004 
> <http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/index.html#msg3771>: 
> All Elsevier authors today retain the right to make their papers OA 
> immediately upon publication -- no embargo -- by depositing their 
> final refereed draft in their institutional repository and setting 
> access to it as OA immediately.
>
> The recently added Elsevier double-talk 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=elsevier+double-talk++blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg> 
> about "voluntariness 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=voluntary+or+voluntariness+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg>" 
> and "systematicity 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=systematic+OR+systematicity+blogurl%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg>" 
> has absolutely no legal force or meaning. As it stands, it is just 
> vacuous, pseudo-legal FUD 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=fud++blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg> 
> and can and should be safely ignored by authors.
>
> And if and when Elsevier (with its rather unhappy public image) ever 
> decides to bite the bullet and change its rights agreements to state 
> clearly that, as of today, Elsevier authors no longer retain the right 
> to make their papers OA unembargoed, then the institutional 
> repositories' automated request-a-copy Button 
> <https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&lr=&q=harnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=UTF-8&tbm=blg&tbs=qdr:m&num=100&c2coff=1&safe=active#c2coff=1&hl=en&lr=&q=button+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=active&tbm=blg> 
> will tide over researcher needs during the embargo with one click from 
> the user to request a copy and one click by the author to provide one. 
> This is not OA, but it's "Almost-OA."
>
> Once the immediate-deposit mandate, the Button, and X% Immediate-OA + 
> 100-X% Almost-OA prevail worldwide, it won't be much longer till 
> embargoes die their inevitable and well-deserved deaths under the 
> overwhelming worldwide pressure for OA, which by then will already all 
> be only one keystroke away.
>
> Meanwhile, X% Immediate-OA + 100-X% Almost-OA will already be 
> incomparably more access than we have (or have ever had) till now.
>
> If you don't mind my adding it: I do sometimes wonder whose side you 
> are on, Bo-Christer! It's one thing to objectively measure the level 
> and growth rate of Green and Gold OA, Immediate and Delayed, across 
> disciplines and time, as you do, valuably. It's a rather different 
> thing to advocate for Gold OA.
>
> Now, I am myself unambiguously and unambivalently an advocate for 
> Green OA, whether when I am objectively measuring its growth rates or 
> designing tools and policies to facilitate and accelerate mandating 
> it. And my reasons (likewise no secrets) are the many reasons that 
> Green OA can be facilitated and accelerated by mandating it.
>
> Gold OA, in contrast, costs extra money (over and above uncancellable 
> subscriptions) and can only grow on publishers' terms and timetable.
>
> Do you really have any reason to believe that OA can and will grow 
> faster via the paid Gold route than the mandated Green route?
>
> Because the reason you give above (publisher embargoes) certainly does 
> not entail that conclusion at all.
>
> And here's a new parameter whose growth rate you might now find it 
> interesting to measure: The growth rates of various kinds of mandates, 
> keeping a special eye on the most powerful and effective one: The 
> HEFCE/Liege model. Because that's where most of the action in the next 
> few years will be taking place...
>
> Stevan Harnad
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20131129/04378886/attachment.html 