[GOAL] Re: Fair Golf vs. Fools Gold

Thu May 14 19:07:22 BST 2015

The subject header should of course have read "Fair Gold vs...."

Apologies for the typo. (Someone will surely find a punny in there...)

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Stevan Harnad <amsciforum at gmail.com> wrote:

> Predictably, I won’t try to calculate how much a fair Gold OA fee should
> be because (as I have argued and tried to show many times before) I do not
> think there can be a Fair Gold OA fee until Green OA has been universally
> mandated and provided: Pre-Green Gold is Fools Gold
> <http://j.mp/foolsGOLDoa>.
>
>
> Before universal Green OA, there is no need for Gold OA at all — not,  at
> least , if the purpose is to provide OA, rather than to spawn a pre-emptive
> fleet of Gold OA journals (indcluding many “predatory” ones), or a
> supplementary source of revenue for hybrid (subscription/gold) OA
> publishers.
>
>
> The reason is that today — i.e., prior to universally mandated Green OA —
> both subscription journals and Gold OA journals continue to perform (and
> fund) functions that will be obsolate after universal Green OA:
>
>
> Peers review for free. Apart from that non-expense, here is what has been
> mentioned “*for a small journal publishing only 20 peer-reviewed articles
> per year”*:
>
>
> *(a) “top-of-the-line journal hosting”*: Obsolete after universal Green
> OA.
>
>
> The worldwide distributed network of Green OA institutional repositories
> hosts its own paper output, both pre and post peer review and acceptance by
> the journal. Acceptance is just a tag. Refereeing is done on the repository
> version. Simple, standard software notifies referees and gives them access
> to the unrefereed draft.
>
>
> *(b) “a senior academic to devote just a little less than one full day per
> article”*: This is a genuine function and expense:
>
>
> The referees have to be selected, the reports have to be adjudicated, the
> author has to be informed what to do, and the revised final draft has to be
> adjudicated — all by a competent editor. The real-time estimate sounds
> right for ultimately accepted articles — but ultimately rejected articles
> take time too (and for a 20-accepted-articles-per-year journal there will
> need to be a no-fault submission fee
> <http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july10/harnad/07harnad.html> so that accepted
> authors don’t have to pay for the rejected ones. (Journals with higher
> quality standards will have higher rejection rates.)
>
>
> *“(c) a part-time senior support staff at a nice hourly rate to provide
> over 2 days' support per peer-reviewed article”*: Copy-editing is either
> obsolete or needs to be made a separate, optional service. For managing
> paper submissions and referee correspondence, much of this can be done with
> form-letters using simple, standard software. Someone other than the editor
> may be needed to manage that, but at nowhere near 2 days of real time per
> accepted article.
>
>
> But perhaps the biggest difference between post-Green Fair Gold and
> pre-Green Fools Gold is the fact that Gold OA fees will be paid out of a
> small portion institutional subscription cancellation savings post-Green,
> whereas pre-Green they have to be paid out of extra funds from somewhere
> else, over and above subscription expenses.
>
>
> That, and the fact that there is no need for pre-Green Gold OA and its
> costs, since Green OA can provide OA at no extra cost.
>
>
> To summarize: pre-Green Fools Gold is (1) overpriced and (2) unnecessary,
> whereas post-Green Fair Gold will (3) fund itself, because Green will have
> made subscriptions unsustainable.
>
>
> And, no, there is no coherent gradual transition from here to there other
> than mandating Green…
>
>
> Harnad, S (2014) The only way to make inflated journal subscriptions
> unsustainable: Mandate Green Open Access
> <http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/28/inflated-subscriptions-unsustainable-harnad/>.
> *LSE Impact of Social Sciences Blog 4/28 *
> http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/04/28/inflated-subscriptions-unsustainable-harnad/
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Reckling, Falk <Falk.Reckling at fwf.ac.at>
> wrote:
>
>> That data are supported by an initial funding programme of the Austrian
>> Science Fund (FWF) for OA journals in HSS, see:
>> http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16462
>>
>> best falk
>> ________________________________________________
>> Falk Reckling, PhD
>> Strategic Analysis
>> Department Head
>> Austrian Science Fund (FWF)
>> Sensengasse 1
>> A-1090 Vienna
>> Tel: +43-1-5056740-8861
>> Mobile: +43-664-5307368
>> Email: falk.reckling at fwf.ac.at
>>
>> Web: https://www.fwf.ac.at/en
>> Twitter: @FWFOpenAccess
>> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1326-1766
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> Von: goal-bounces at eprints.org [goal-bounces at eprints.org]&quot; im
>> Auftrag von &quot;Heather Morrison [Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca]
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Mai 2015 15:43
>> An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
>> Betreff: [GOAL]  $1, 300 per article or $25, 000 annual subsidy can
>> generously support small scholar-led OA journal publishing
>>
>> Drawing from interviews and focus groups with editors of small
>> scholar-led journals, I've developed one generous model that illustrates
>> how $1,300 per article or a $25,000 / year journal subsidy can generously a
>> support small open access journal. In brief, for a small journal publishing
>> only 20 peer-reviewed articles per year, this amount could fund
>> top-of-the-line journal hosting, free up the time of a senior academic to
>> devote just a little less than one full day per article, hire a part-time
>> senior support staff at a nice hourly rate to provide over 2 days' support
>> per peer-reviewed article, with an annual budget of $2,500 for extra costs.
>>
>> Calculations here:
>>
>> http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2015/05/14/1300-per-article-or-25k-year-in-subsidy-can-generously-support-quality-scholar-led-oa-journal-publishing/
>>
>> best,
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Heather Morrison
>> Assistant Professor
>> École des sciences de l'information / School of Information Studies
>> University of Ottawa
>> http://www.sis.uottawa.ca/faculty/hmorrison.html
>> Sustaining the Knowledge Commons http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/
>> Heather.Morrison at uottawa.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GOAL mailing list
>> GOAL at eprints.org
>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20150514/50e2ae79/attachment.html 