<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><base href="x-msg://144/"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:1415206647;
mso-list-template-ids:398496432;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I compiled the data on journals that Robert cites. I reran the analysis using current SHERPA/RoMEO data in July, and the results were very similar – 62% of journals allow immediate self-archiving of peer-reviewed versions, of which 18% allow the publisher’s version/PDF to be archived.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I agree that “percentages of journals” are not as helpful as we would like, for all the reasons stated, and probably more besides. Statistics based on the number of articles in a given discipline are bound to be more accurate, if suitable bibliographies are available. Percentages of journals can be useful, however, when such bibliographies are not available.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Although not quite the same thing, I prepared some statistics for OR2013 on the potential compliance of articles funded by the Wellcome Trust and the NERC with their open access policies. These used large samples (6,046 and 1,103 articles respectively). See: <a href="http://or2013.net/sessions/compliance-funders-mandates-%E2%80%93-fact">http://or2013.net/sessions/compliance-funders-mandates-%E2%80%93-fact</a> – slides 21 to 23<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>As part of this analysis (but not included in the OR2013 presentation), I compiled separate potential compliance statistics for the journals and for the articles listed in the bibliographies.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>For the Wellcome Trust, the potential archiving compliance was 35% for journals and 52% for the corresponding articles<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>For the NERC, the potential archiving compliance was 66% for journals and 71% for the corresponding articles<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>An additional analysis for an EPSRC bibliography of 9,780 articles yielded potential archiving compliances of 61% for journals and 67% for articles.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>To my mind, these figures suggest that “percentages of journals” can represent a fair approximation of the situation.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Peter Millington<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> goal-bounces@eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Jan Velterop<br><b>Sent:</b> 17 September 2013 07:35<br><b>To:</b> Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)<br><b>Cc:</b> Rick Anderson<br><b>Subject:</b> [GOAL] Re: [sparc-oaforum] Re: Disruption vs. Protection<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Robert is right. Talking about "percentages of journals" is nigh meaningless. 60% of journals can easily represent only a tiny percentage of published articles. Or an overwhelming majority of articles. It all depends on the journals, of which the variability in size is quite extreme. For example, if a random cohort of 100 OA journals includes PLOS One, then 99% of journals can quite easily represent less than 10% of articles.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Jan Velterop<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 16 Sep 2013, at 23:31, "Kiley, Robert" <<a href="mailto:r.kiley@wellcome.ac.uk">r.kiley@wellcome.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>Rick/David</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>I keep hearing this claim that “60% of journals allow immediate, unembargoed, self-archiving” and wonder how accurate this. </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>Although I’m aware of the original source of this data (<a href="http://romeo.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2011/11/24/60-of-journals-allow-immediate-archiving-of-peer-reviewed-articles-but-it-gets-much-much-better/"><span style='color:purple'>http://romeo.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2011/11/24/60-of-journals-allow-immediate-archiving-of-peer-reviewed-articles-but-it-gets-much-much-better/</span></a>) , this blog post is almost 2 years old and I suspect things may have changed.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>By way of example, I did an analysis of the 50 “top” subscription* journals (in terms of the amount of Wellcome-funded content they published) used by Wellcome authors in 2012 and found that:</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div style='margin-left:36.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#3333FF'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#3333FF'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>Just 10% of journals in this cohort allowed authors to make the peer reviewed version of their manuscript available immediately in an IR<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br><br><br></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div style='margin-left:36.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='text-indent:-18.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Symbol;color:#3333FF'>·</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#3333FF'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>Just 38% of journals in this cohort allowed authors to make the peer reviewed version of their manuscript available within 6 months of publication</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>I accept that my cohort is small – but is does include all the major publishers (e.g. Elsevier, Wiley, Springer, OUP, NPG, AAS etc).</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>And to be clear, I am talking about when content can be made available (not the date of deposition).</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>Regards</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>Robert</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'>*In doing this analysis I excluded the fully OA journals (which obviously allow immediate self archiving).</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#3333FF'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span class=apple-converted-space><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal-bounces@eprints.org</span></a><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>[mailto:goal-<a href="mailto:bounces@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>bounces@eprints.org</span></a>]<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>David Prosser<br><b>Sent:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>16 September 2013 16:07<br><b>To:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Rick Anderson<br><b>Cc:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci); SPARC Open Access Forum; Friend, Fred; LibLicense-L Discussion Forum<br><b>Subject:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>[GOAL] Re: [sparc-oaforum] Re: Disruption vs. Protection</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Rick<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I don't know if there is a way of getting a list, but I think you are conflating two things. I assume you are saying you would cancel if all of the content of the journal was available without embargo. Sherpa/Romeo doesn't tell you that - it just tells you whether or not the publisher allows green deposit without embargo.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>And lots of publishers do - for the majority of papers in the majority of Elsevier titles, for example, the author is free to make available their papers - either pre- or post-prints. But as most authors don't take advantage of that offer I guess you'll not want to cancel Elsevier's titles.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>David<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:13.5pt'><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 16 Sep 2013, at 15:31, Rick Anderson wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Is there an easy way (easier than searching title-by-title through SHERPA/RoMEO) to get a complete list of journals offering Green access with no embargo? I can't speak for the marketplace as a whole, but my library will cancel most if not all of our subscriptions to any such journals — my institution is not giving us money so that we can spend it on content that's available for free.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>---</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Rick Anderson</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Marriott Library, University of Utah</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Desk: (801) 587-9989</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Cell: (801) 721-1687</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><a href="mailto:rick.anderson@utah.edu"><span style='color:purple'>rick.anderson@utah.edu</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>From:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><Friend>, Fred <<a href="mailto:f.friend@ucl.ac.uk"><span style='color:purple'>f.friend@ucl.ac.uk</span></a>><br><b>Date:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>Saturday, September 14, 2013 5:06 AM<br><b>To:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>"Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <<a href="mailto:goal@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal@eprints.org</span></a>>, LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <<a href="mailto:LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU"><span style='color:purple'>LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU</span></a>>, SPARC Open Access Forum <<a href="mailto:SPARC-OAForum@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>SPARC-OAForum@arl.org</span></a>><br><b>Subject:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>[sparc-oaforum] Re: Disruption vs. Protection</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #B5C4DF 4.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt' id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE"><div name=divtagdefaultwrapper id=divtagdefaultwrapper><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>This is an excellent contribution from Danny Kingsley, and it would be interesting to have some real information about subscription loss from publishers, and not only from the two publishers she mentions. Very occasionally we do hear stories about a few journals ceasing publication, but the number appears very low by comparison with the total number of research journals published, and the causal link with repository deposit is obscure. A reduction in the quality of a journal (and I do not mean impact factor) or a reduction in library funding could be more influential factors than green open access. Presumably for commercial reasons publishers have not been willing to release information about subscription levels, but if they are to continue to use green open access as a threat they have to provide more evidence.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Likewise if they expect to be believed, publishers have to provide more information about sustainability. They speak about repositories not being a sustainable model for research dissemination, by which they appear to mean that their journals will not be sustainable in a large-scale repository environment. Most institutional repositories are fully-sustainable, their sustainability derived from the sustainability of the university in which they are based. If any research journals are not sustainable, the reasons may have nothing to do with repositories. Those reasons are currently hidden within the "big deal" model, the weak journals surviving through the strength of other journals. Rather than blame any lack of sustainability upon green open access, perhaps publishers should take a harder look at the sustainability of some of their weaker journals. Repositories are sustainable; some journals may not be.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Fred Friend</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'><hr size=2 width="98%" align=center></span></div><div id=divRplyFwdMsg><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span class=apple-converted-space><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal-bounces@eprints.org</span></a><span class=apple-converted-space> </span><<a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal-bounces@eprints.org</span></a>> on behalf of Danny Kingsley <<a href="mailto:Danny.Kingsley@anu.edu.au"><span style='color:purple'>Danny.Kingsley@anu.edu.au</span></a>><br><b>Sent:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>14 September 2013 08:39<br><b>To:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>[GOAL] Re: Disruption vs. Protection</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'>It is not that there is not sufficient data, it is that the 'threat' does not exist. </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'>The only 'evidence' to support the claim that immediate green open access threatens the 'sustainability' (read: profit) of commercial publishers comes in the form of the exceptionally questionable ALPSP survey sent out early last year to librarians<a href="http://www.publishingresearch.net/documents/ALPSPPApotentialresultsofsixmonthembargofv.pdf"><span style='color:purple'>http://www.publishingresearch.net/documents/ALPSPPApotentialresultsofsixmonthembargofv.pdf</span></a><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>. Heather Morrison wrote a piece on the methodological flaws with that survey <a href="http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/publishers-association-survey-on.html"><span style='color:purple'>http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/publishers-association-survey-on.html</span></a> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'>And yet, when questioned earlier this year by Richard Poynder, this is what Springer referred to as their 'evidence'<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://poynder.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/open-access-springer-tightens-rules-on.html"><span style='color:purple'>http://poynder.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/open-access-springer-tightens-rules-on.html</span></a><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'>There are, however currently two clear opportunities for the industry to collect some actual evidence either way (as opposed to opinions on a badly expressed hypothetical):</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><ol style='margin-top:0cm' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#282828;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Taylor & Francis have decided to indefinitely expand their trial of immediate green permissions to articles in their Library & Information Science journals. If they were to run a comparison of those titles against the titles in, say , three other disciplinary areas over two to three years they would be able to ascertain if this decision has made any difference to their subscription patterns.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#282828;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Earlier this year (21 March) SAGE changed their policy to immediate green open access – again this offers a clean comparison between their subscription levels prior to and after the implementation of this policy.</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'>If it is the case that immediate green open access disrupts subscriptions (and I strongly suspect that it does not) then we can have that conversation when the evidence presents itself. Until then we are boxing at shadows.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'>Danny</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>Dr Danny Kingsley</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>Executive Officer</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>Australian Open Access Support Group</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>e: <a href="mailto:eo@aoasg.org.au"><span style='color:purple'>eo@aoasg.org.au</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>p: +612 6125 6839</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>w:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="http://wwww.aoasg.org.au"><span style='color:purple'>wwww.aoasg.org.au</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'>t: @openaccess_oz</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm;border-color:currentcolor'><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>From:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>Dana Roth <<a href="mailto:dzrlib@library.caltech.edu"><span style='color:purple'>dzrlib@library.caltech.edu</span></a>><br><b>Reply-To:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>"<a href="mailto:goal@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal@eprints.org</span></a>" <<a href="mailto:goal@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal@eprints.org</span></a>><br><b>Date:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>Saturday, 14 September 2013 6:53 AM<br><b>To:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>"<a href="mailto:goal@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal@eprints.org</span></a>" <<a href="mailto:goal@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal@eprints.org</span></a>><br><b>Subject:<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>[GOAL] Re: Disruption vs. Protection</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Isn’t the fact that “</span><em><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'>The BIS report finds no evidence to support this distinction,”</span></em><span class=apple-converted-space><i><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> </span></i></span><em><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333;font-style:normal'>due to the fact that there isn’t sufficient data?</span></em><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><em><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333;font-style:normal'> </span></em><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><em><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333;font-style:normal'>I sense that we are going to have to live with (Green) OA and subscription journals for some time … and that it is the subscription model for commercially published journals will be increasingly unsustainable in the short term.</span></em><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><em><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333;font-style:normal'> </span></em><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><em><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333;font-style:normal'>An example of what could soon be unsustainable, is the commercially published ‘Journal of Comparative Neurology’ … that for 2012 cost its subscribers $30,860 and published only 234 articles.</span></em><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Dana L. Roth</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Caltech Library 1-32</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="mailto:dzrlib@library.caltech.edu"><span style='color:purple'>dzrlib@library.caltech.edu</span></a></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><a href="http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm" target="_blank"><span style='color:purple'>http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm</span></a></span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:#282828'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:#282828'><a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>goal-bounces@eprints.org</span></a><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>[<a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org</span></a>]<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></b>Stevan Harnad<br><b>Sent:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Friday, September 13, 2013 8:39 AM<br><b>To:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b><span class=apple-converted-space> </span>[GOAL] Disruption vs. Protection</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#282828'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'><a href="http://www.cilip.org.uk/cilip/news/end-gold-rush"><span style='color:#003366'>End of the gold rush? (Yvonne Morris, cilip)</span></a>:</span></strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> <em><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>"In the interest of making research outputs publicly available; shorter and consistent or no embargo periods are the desired outcome. However, publishers… have argued that short embargo periods make librarians cancel subscriptions to their journals… The BIS report finds no evidence to support this distinction."</span></em></span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span lang=EN-US style='color:#282828'><hr size=2 width="100%" noshade style='color:#333333' align=center></span></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'><br>I have long meant to comment on a frequent contradiction that keeps being voiced by OA advocates and opponents alike:</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'>I. Call for Disruption:</span></strong><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> Serial publications are overpriced and unaffordable; publisher profits are excessive; the subscription (license) model is unsustainable: the subscription model needs to be disrupted in order to force it to evolve toward Gold OA.<br><br><strong><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>II. Call for Protection:</span></strong> Serials publications are threatened by (Green) OA, which risks making the subscription model unsustainable: the subscription model needs to be protected in order to allow it to evolve toward Gold OA.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'>Green OA mandates do two things: (a) They provide immediate OA for all who cannot afford subscription access, and (b) they disrupt the subscription model.<br><br>Green OA embargoes do two things: (c) They withhold OA from all who cannot afford subscription access, and (d) they protect the subscription model from disruption.<br><br>Why do those OA advocates who are working for (a) (i.e., to provide immediate OA for all who cannot afford subscription access) also feel beholden to promise (d) (i.e. to protect the subscription model from disruption)?<br><br></span><span lang=EN-US style='color:#282828'><a href="http://roarmap.eprints.org/56/"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#003366'>University of Liège</span></a></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> and </span><span lang=EN-US style='color:#282828'><a href="http://roarmap.eprints.org/850/"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#003366'>FRSN Belgium</span></a></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> have adopted -- and </span><span lang=EN-US style='color:#282828'><a href="http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/987-The-UKs-New-HEFCEREF-OA-Mandate-Proposal.html"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#003366'>HEFCE</span></a></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> and </span><span lang=EN-US style='color:#282828'><a href="http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1040-UK-BIS-Committee-2013-Report-on-Open-Access.html"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#003366'>BIS</span></a></span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> have both proposed adopting -- the compromise resolution to this contradiction:<br><br>Mandate the immediate repository deposit of the final refereed draft of all articles immediately upon acceptance for publication, but if the author wishes to comply with a publisher embargo on Green OA, do not require access to the deposit to be made OA immediately: Let the deposit be made Closed Access during the allowable embargo period and let the repository's automated eprint-request Button tide over the needs of research and researchers by making it easy for users to request and authors to provide a copy for research purposes with one click each. <br><br>This tides over research needs during the embargo. If it still disrupts serials publication and makes subscriptions unsustainable, chances are that it's time for publishers to phase out the products and services for which there is no longer a market in the online era and evolve instead toward something more in line with the real needs of the PostGutenberg research community.<br><br>Evolution and adaptation never occur except under the (disruptive) pressure of necessity. Is there any reason to protect the journal publishing industry from evolutionary pressure, at the expense of research progress?<br><br><strong><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Stevan Harnad</span></strong></span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>--<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>--<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google<br>Groups "SPARC OA Forum" group.<br>To post to this group, send email to<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:sparc-oaforum@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>sparc-oaforum@arl.org</span></a><br>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to<br><a href="mailto:sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org</span></a><br>For more options, visit this group at<br><a href="http://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum"><span style='color:purple'>http://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum</span></a><br> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'>To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org</span></a>.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>--<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>--<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google<br>Groups "SPARC OA Forum" group.<br>To post to this group, send email to<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:sparc-oaforum@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>sparc-oaforum@arl.org</span></a><br>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to<br><a href="mailto:sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org</span></a><br>For more options, visit this group at<br><a href="http://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum"><span style='color:purple'>http://groups.google.com/a/arl.org/group/sparc-oaforum</span></a><br> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><a href="mailto:sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org"><span style='color:purple'>sparc-oaforum+unsubscribe@arl.org</span></a>.<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:13.5pt'><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='background:white'>This message has been scanned for viruses by<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><a href="http://www.blackspider.com/"><span style='color:purple;background:white'>BlackSpider MailControl</span></a><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>_______________________________________________<br>GOAL mailing list<br><a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org"><span style='color:purple'>GOAL@eprints.org</span></a><br><a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal"><span style='color:purple'>http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</span></a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div>
<br><p>This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.</p><p>This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.</p>
<br></body></html>