Re: The EC Petition and the EC Poll

From: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:57:26 +0000

The question was about whether researchers were for or against EC
Recommendation A1, to mandate open access self-archiving.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Velterop, Jan, Springer UK wrote:

> Les,
>
> Is this really what was asked: "Are you FOR or AGAINST open access to
> research results?" If that is so, the result is dismal. It means that
> 14% of the self-archiving mandate's specific target constituency is
> *against* open access!
>
> Asking if people are FOR or AGAINST open access is like asking if they
> are FOR or AGAINST good health. It would be, rightly, seen as
> astonishing if 14% were against.
>
> I guess that the question FOR or AGAINST the principle of open access,
> if asked of publishers, would get you a similar outcome and quite
> probably a better one (fewer than 14% against). Most publishers are not
> against open access per se, but they feel that their wish to be paid for
> their services is a reasonable and fully justified desire. Authors who
> don't wish to use publishers' services can just put their stuff on the
> web, and they don't need to bother a publisher. There's no publisher who
> forces them to publish in their journals. But if they do come to a
> publisher, and request the publisher's services, it's reasonable to
> expect them to support some form of payment for the service of arranging
> and facilitating peer review and all else that goes with formal
> publication of their articles, which is what they -- and the science
> community -- not only want, but need for their careers and future
> funding prospects. That's why a mandate for open access per se is fine,
> but a mandate for subversive self-archiving is not if it comes instead
> of a constructive dialogue approach to some form of economically
> sustainable open access publishing.
>
> The question is not open access yea or nea. The question is -- if
> formally publishing in peer reviewed journals is indeed valuable to the
> scientific community -- how it can best be sustained in an economically
> viable way.
>
> Best,
>
> Jan Velterop
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
> > [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAX
> I.ORG] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr
> > Sent: 14 February 2007 00:42
> > To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
> > Subject: The EC Petition and the EC Poll
> >
> > The European research and academic community has demonstrated
> > overwhelming support for the European Commission's proposed
> > Open Access Self-Archiving Mandate (A1). A petition, launched
> > jointly on January 14th 2007 by research organisations in a
> > number of European countries, has drawn over 20,000
> > signatures from Europe and worldwide in support of the EC's
> > proposal. The response includes almost 1,000 institutional
> > signatories from National Academies of Sciences,
> > Universities, Rectors' conferences, Learned Societies,
> > national and private research funding councils, and
> > industries that apply research.)
> >
> > In conjunction with the petition, a separate poll has been
> > conducted of the EC Open Access Mandate's specific target
> > constituency. The administrators of currently active EU FP6
> > projects were asked to register a vote FOR or AGAINST open
> > access to research results. The result was overwhelming:
> > 85.8% in favour of open access, 14.2% against (based on a
> > healthy 8.22% response rate from 2652 email invitations to vote).
> >
> > Previous research has demonstrated the increased impact that
> > Open Access to Research Results offers the research industry.
> > The petition and the poll demonstrate that Open Access now
> > receives broad-based and popular support as a mainstream
> > requirement of the European research industry.
> > ---
> > Les Carr
> > University of Southampton
> >
>
Received on Wed Feb 14 2007 - 16:31:39 GMT