[GOAL] Re: The open access movement slips into closed mode

[Richard Poynder]

I don't think it matters whether or not it is a rubbish argument. If that is
what politicians believe, or how they want to justify their decisions, then
the strength or weakness of the argument is not the key factor. And as
Andrew Odlyzko points out, it may be more a case of protecting jobs than tax
receipts. Certainly the UK has talked in terms of supporting the publishing
industry, and The Netherlands will (as you say) have that in mind. Both
these countries are in the vanguard of pushing for national deals with
publishers, and both are seeking to persuade other countries to do the same
- as was doubtless what the UK sought to do in 2013 when it had G8
Presidency:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g8-science-ministers-statement.

 

That said, this CNI presentation argues that the US and Europe could be
moving in different directions with OA:
https://www.cni.org/topics/e-journals/is-gold-open-access-sustainable-update
-from-the-uc-pay-it-forward-project. But even if that is true today, for how
long will they drift apart?

 

The fact is that the OA movement has spent the last 13 years arguing with
itself. During that time it has convinced governments and research funders
that OA is desirable. What is has not done is shown how it can be achieved
effectively. In such situations, at some point governments inevitably step
in and make the decisions. And that is how Dutch Minister Sander Dekker
expressed it last year: "[W]hy are we not much farther advanced in open
access in 2014? The world has definitely not stood still in the last ten
years. How can it be that the scientific world - which has always been a
frontrunner in innovation - has made so little progress on this? Why are
most scientific journals still hidden away behind paywalls?"
https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/toespraken/2014/01/28/open-acess-goi
ng-for-gold

 

In the absence of unity in the OA movement, who better for governments to
work with in order to achieve OA than with publishers, either directly, or
by instructing national research funders to get on with it (as the UK did
with RCUK). 

 

This suggests to me that the OA is set to slip into closed mode, with
behind-closed-doors meetings and negotiations. As Andrew points out, "Secret
national-level negotiations with commercial entities about pricing are not
uncommon."

 

Richard Poynder

 

 

 

 

From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] On Behalf
Of Velterop
Sent: 30 December 2015 16:05
To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) <goal at eprints.org>
Subject: [GOAL] Re: The open access movement slips into closed mode

 

What a rubbish argument! This can only be true of a small country with a
disproportionally massive commercial scholarly publishing sector (that isn't
avoiding taxes via some small island tax haven). 

The Netherlands? Perhaps Britain? That's it.

Jan Velterop

On 30/12/2015 12:25, Richard Poynder wrote:

As Keith Jeffery puts it, "We all know why the BOAI principles have been
progressively de-railed. One explanation given to me at an appropriate
political level was that the tax-take from commercial publishers was greater
than the cost of research libraries." http://bit.ly/1OslVFW.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20151231/3f6e9194/attachment.html