Jon Tennant writes
> In order to achieve this, we propose the formulation of a new type of > institutional mandate. How much chance does this have, given that the "old", "Hanard-style", mandate of deposit of research output in institutional repositories has largely failed? In the paper, the authors write > We believe that the pragmatic way to reverse this problem is the > formulation of new national and supra-national mandates, which could > be based around the Foundations for Open Scholarship Strategy > Development (Tennant, Beamer, et al. 2019). Governments and funding > bodies should provide modern, sustainable and technically > interoperable infrastructures based around existing established > repositories, and all their associated functionalities (e.g., > persistent identifiers, standardised metadata, research data > repositories, usage metrics), with immediate, unrestricted, and full > access to all research outputs Just the usual "let somebody else pay for it". It won't happen. If libraries where to stop paying for subscriptions, there would be enough funds for a head start at this repository based infrastructure. That's why the first mandate failed. The resources available for repositories were a pittance compared to what the proprietary publishers got, so the repositories could not compete. -- Cheers, Thomas Krichel http://openlib.org/home/krichel skype:thomaskrichel _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
