Columbia Univ Senate Endorses Open Access

From: Stevan Harnad <>
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 22:14:31 -0400

The Columbia Statement, like the NIH Policy, provides an excellent model
*not* to follow! If you want a model for a university open access policy,
it should rather be that of Kansas University:

though even that is far, far too wordy, and includes far, far too many empty
platitudes. All that is needed is the concrete core policy: (1) require OA
self-archiving of all university research journal article output and
(2) recommend/support publishing in OA journals, exactly as recommended
by Berlin-3:

     "The University of Kansas Senate... Calls on all faculty of the
     University of Kansas to [seek amendments to publisher's copyright
     transfer forms to permit the] {1} deposit[ion of] a digital copy
     of every article accepted by a peer-reviewed journal into the
     ScholarWorks repository, or a similar open access venue... {and}
     to {2} invest in the infrastructure necessary to support new venues
     for peer-reviewed publication"

The part in square brackets is also 92% superfluous:

Stevan Harnad
A complete Hypermail archive of the ongoing discussion of providing
open access to the peer-reviewed research literature online (1998-2005)
is available at:
         To join or leave the Forum or change your subscription address:
         Post discussion to:

UNIVERSITIES: If you have adopted or plan to adopt an institutional
policy of providing Open Access to your own research article output,
please describe your policy at:

     BOAI-1 ("green"): Publish your article in a suitable toll-access journal
     BOAI-2 ("gold"): Publish your article in a open-access journal if/when
             a suitable one exists.
     in BOTH cases self-archive a supplementary version of your article
             in your institutional repository.

> Begin forwarded message:
> From: Ray English <>
> Date: April 28, 2005 1:13:21 PM PDT
> To: "ACRL Scholarly Communication T.F." <>
> Subject: Columbia Univ Senate Endorsed Open Access
> Reply-To:
> Columbia University Senate Endorses Resolution on Open Access and Scholarly
> Communication
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> (NEW YORK, April 21, 2005) The Columbia University Senate endorsed
> unanimously a resolution on “Open Access” at its meeting on April 1, 2005.
> The resolution was introduced by the Senate’s Committee on Libraries and
> Academic Computing.
> James Neal, Vice President for Information Services and University
> Librarian at Columbia, applauded “this bold support by the Columbia
> community for open access to scholarly work and this endorsement of the
> University’s advocacy for reducing economic, legal, and technological
> barriers.”
> The text of the resolution follows:
> Whereas the Senate is empowered by University statutes 23 (c) and (e) to
> “work for the advancement of academic freedom... [and] initiate and review
> policies to govern the University’s relations with outside agencies for
> research, instruction, and related purposes,” and
> Whereas the principle of open access to the fruits of scholarly research is
> increasingly being adopted and pursued by universities and in the scholarly
> community at large, and
> Whereas Columbia University continues to be in the forefront of open-access
> endeavors, through its advocacy activities and its digital library
> programs, and
> Whereas technological, legal and economic barriers continue to be erected
> to obstruct or limit open access, and
> Whereas the availability of the fruits of scholarly endeavor ought to
> reflect the conditions of cooperative endeavor and common resources under
> which scholarly work is produced,
> Therefore be it resolved
> 1. That the Senate put on record its support for the principle of open
> access to the fruits of scholarly research;
> 2. That the Senate urge the University to advance new models for scholarly
> publishing that will promote open access, helping to reshape the
> marketplace in which scholarly ideas circulate, in a way that is consistent
> with standards of peer review and scholarly excellence;
> 3. That the Senate urge the University to monitor and resist efforts to
> impose digital rights management regimes and technologies that obstruct or
> limit open access, except as necessary to secure rights of privacy;
> 4. That the Senate urge the scholars of Columbia University to play a part
> in these open-access endeavors in their various capacities as authors,
> readers, editors, referees, and members of scientific boards and learned
> associations etc., (a) by encouraging and collaborating with publishers’
> efforts to advance open access, (b) by retaining intellectual property
> rights in their own work where this will help it become more widely
> available, and (c) by remaining alert to efforts by publishers to impose
> barriers on access to the fruits of scholarly research.
> Columbia University Libraries is one of the top ten academic library
> systems in the nation, with 8.2 million volumes, over 57,700 serials, as
> well as extensive collections of electronic resources, manuscripts, rare
> books, microforms, and other nonprint formats. The collections and services
> are organized into 22 libraries, supporting specific academic or
> professional disciplines. Columbia Libraries employs more than 400
> professional and support staff to assist faculty, students, and researchers
> in their academic endeavors.


This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
  The SPARC Open Access Forum.
To post, send your message to <>.
To unsubscribe, email to <>.
To switch to digest mode, email to <>.
To switch to index mode, email to <>.
Send administrative queries to <>.
Received on Sun May 01 2005 - 03:14:31 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:52 GMT