All -
Could I suggest that this admirable suggestion fits very closely with
the objectives of EOS
http://www.openscholarship.org/jcms/j_6/home
Best Keith
----------------------------------------------------------
Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeffery_at_stfc.ac.uk
Director Information Technology & International Strategy
Science and Technology Facilities Council
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Harwell Science and Innovation Campus
Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK
T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147
President ERCIM & STFC Director:
http://www.ercim.org/
W3C Office at CLRC-RAL
http://www.w3.org/
President euroCRIS
http://www.eurocris.org/
VLDB Trustee Emeritus:
http://www.vldb.org/
EDBT Board Member
http://www.edbt.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
The contents of this email are sent in confidence for the use of the
intended recipient only. If you are not one of the intended recipients
do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but return this
email to the sender and delete your copy of it
The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in accordance with
the policy available from
<
http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
[mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On
Behalf Of Heather Morrison
Sent: 27 September 2009 20:04
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: COPE, HOPE and OA
On 27-Sep-09, at 5:56 AM, Les Carr wrote:
[Re] the Compact for Open Access Publishing Equity (COPE)
http://www.oacompact.org/
In these straitened times I wonder if it would be better for the HE
sector to launch "CORE", the "Compact for Open Access Research Equity",
replacing concerns about publishers with concerns about
researchers: "We the undersigned universities recognize the crucial
value of the services provided by scholarly RESEARCHERS, the
desirability of open access to the scholarly literature, and the need
for a stable source of funding for RESEARCHERS...."
Comment:
In my opinion, this is a great idea and fits with my notion of building
on the leadership of COPE to expand the mandate, to include equity for
open access publishers, but more broadly to make a real commitment to
open access, as well as to providing the funding that OA in all of its
flavors needs to thrive.
That is, the mandate could be both to develop and implement green open
access policy, and to commit to responsible transitioning of funding
from subscriptions to open access, including equity for open access
publishers but also support for open access archives (both institutional
and disciplinary) and metasearch services, beginning with pilot projects
as COPE members have done. Given the outstanding OA institutional
policy leadership of COPE members (especially Harvard and MIT), this
strikes me as something worth asking about.
As others have pointed out, flipping all scholarly publishing from
subscriptions to open access quickly is unlikely since academic library
budgets are very tied up in subscriptions. This means that careful
exploration and smaller pilot projects will make more sense in the short
term than wholesale transition. From my perspective, there
are benefits to this approach. While open access policies and
repository developments address the access problem, we can
simultaneously work towards economic support for open access endeavours,
including OA publishing, archives, and free public meta- search
services.
Support for OA publishing benefits green OA. Full open access
publishing is the most compatible approach to filling archives; there
are no barriers, no restrictions, no embargoes.
Heather Morrison, MLIS
The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com
--
Scanned by iCritical.
Received on Mon Sep 28 2009 - 03:06:08 BST