When listing the “B” declarations on Open Access, we should add the
“Salvador de Bahía Declaration on Open Access: the developing world
perspective”, a Declaration promoted by SciELO in 2005 which urges
governments to make Open Access a high priority in their scholary
development policies. These
Dear Barbaros;
I understand that you are planning to make a survey on Open Access within the
area/discipline of chemistry at relevant Turkish universities.
I work at the University of Bergen, Norway and are familiar with these issues.
To make a general questionnaire you would like to know:
-
I fully agree,
There would be no great harm done in the longer perspective if some of
the current major publishers dissapeared from the market, as long as the
access to older article in their electronic holdings are secured. They
would just be replaced by other. Academics need good journals
You may include the Bangalore Declaration of 2006 as well. It was adopted
at an international workshop held at IISc, Bangalore, and drafted by Alma
swan and Barbara Kirsop.
Arun
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Dominique Babini dasbab...@gmail.comwrote:
When listing the “B” declarations on
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
Rick
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
I'm on it !!
Graham
H: +44 (0)141 422 1483 (after 18.00 GMT)
C: +44 (0)7900441046
E: steelgrah...@gmail.com
Fav: http://www.plos.org - research made public
Fb: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/profile.php?id=709026752
Blog: http://mcblawg.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/McDawg
In June 2013, DOAJ announced its intention to revise its criteria for selecting
journals to be included in the directory
(http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=newsnId=303uiLanguage=en). A public
consultation period followed where feedback was received. The consultation
period incited much discussion on
Rick, in terms of subscription cancellations is that really true with big
deals? Doesn't Elsevier allow immediate deposit with most of their
journals except if your institution has a mandate. Also I believe Björk
and his colleagues found faculty often take awhile getting around to
archiving
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Rick Anderson rick.ander...@utah.eduwrote:
if I know that a publisher allows green deposit of all articles without
embargo, then the likelihood that we'll maintain a paid subscription drops
dramatically
Rick Anderson has made a public announcement that he
Would you really consider dropping a journal with say 70% percent of the
content available after a year? I'm not a librarian but I just wonder how much
of a difference allowing immediate archiving of the accepted version really
makes in subscription decisions.
It depends. Obviously, a
As the OA movement continues to gain steam, we are seeing scholars with a
background in sciences take a keen interest and even develop surveys and such.
While the enthusiasm is welcome, from what I am seeing in several instances
now, is that scientists do not necessarily understand how to go
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Rick Anderson rick.ander...@utah.eduwrote:
May I suggest, though, that such postings should not go to the GOAL,
BOAI or SPARC lists? Please keep such brilliant ideas to the library lists.
And please don't reply that it's just one factor in our cancelation
Journal cancellations are primarily about journal costs, not whether the
content is available for free.
In April of last year Harvard sent a memo to faculty informing them that they
cannot continue to afford high priced journals and asking them to consider
costs when deciding where to publish.
I should publicly acknowledge that I misread this sentence from Stevan's
message:
May I suggest, though, that such postings should not go to the GOAL, BOAI or
SPARC lists?
Please keep such brilliant ideas to the library lists.
I should not have characterized it as a call to the moderators
The problem with this analysis, from a another librarian's viewpoint, is that
...
1. Rick is suggesting that libraries reward publishers by providing
subscription funds for journals that [are] not green at all. ... and
2. It also penalizes responsible society publishers who allow quick
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Rick Anderson rick.ander...@utah.eduwrote:
The issue that was raised (by Fred) under this subject thread was the
possibility of subscription losses dues to Green OA archiving.
Yes. But not the possibility of subscription losses because the publisher
allows
May I suggest, though, that such postings should not go to the GOAL, BOAI or
SPARC lists? Please keep such brilliant ideas to the library lists.
And please don't reply that it's just one factor in our cancelation equation.
There's no need for the OA community to hear about librarians' struggles
The issue that was raised (by Fred) under this subject thread was the
possibility of subscription losses dues to Green OA archiving.
Yes. But not the possibility of subscription losses because the publisher
allows Green OA archiving.
So it's okay to discuss the impact of actual archiving, but
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Rick Anderson rick.ander...@utah.eduwrote:
Is it possible that what you really intend to do is suggest that
just because a publisher allows all articles to be archived Green doesn't
mean that the articles are actually available that way, and that it might
Good points, Heather. But surely free and open OA publications are about cost
too (i.e., free of cost). While almost all subscription journal articles that
can be freely posted do not cut into the subscription base, there must be some
correlation between the most expensive subscription journals
Stevan Harnad writes
It does not, because it is both arbitrary and absurd to cancel a journal
because it is Green rather than because their users no longer need it
It is not. There simply is not the money to buy all subscriptions, and
the more a journal's contents can be recovered from
Heather Morrison writes
Journal cancellations are primarily about journal costs, not whether
the content is available for free.
Sure.
In April of last year Harvard sent a memo to faculty informing them
that they cannot continue to afford high priced journals and asking
them to
Is it possible that what you really intend to do is suggest that just because
a publisher allows all articles to be archived Green doesn't mean that the
articles are actually available that way, and that it might be dangerous for a
library to cancel in a knee-jerk way when a publisher makes
Stevan Harnad wrote:
There's no need for the OA community to hear about librarians' struggles with
their serials budgets when
it's at the expense of OA
As previous messages in this thread clearly show, the ultimate fate of the
subscription model, and how it will unfold, is completely
Also see the Open Access Directory list of declarations in support of OA.
http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Declarations_in_support_of_OA
Note that OAD is a wiki and welcomes additions and corrections from the OA
community.
Peter
Peter Suber
bit.ly/petersuber
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 10:15
The library community has to make up its own mind whether it is OA's friend
or foe.
(1) Cancelling journals when all or most of their contents have become
Green OA is rational and constructive -- but we're nowhere near there; and
whether and when we get there is partly contingent on (2):
(2)
Couture Marc writes
As previous messages in this thread clearly show, the ultimate fate
of the subscription model, and how it will unfold, is completely
unknown,
Stevan has written many times that open access is optimal and
inevitable. If you accept this what room is there left for
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Couture Marc marc.cout...@teluq.ca wrote:
*MC:* any contribution that will help to answer the following question
“If Green OA goes from 20% to 100%, and if the demise of the subscription
model ensues, when will subscription cancellation begin?” is relevant in
Librarians are a much more collaborative profession than most, but librarians
do not all share the same opinions or work in the same environments.
At most academic libraries, librarians do not have the ability to unilaterally
cancel journals. If librarians did have this power, some of the big
The library community has to make up its own mind whether it is OA's friend or
foe.
And this is exactly the kind of rhetoric that gives certain sectors/members of
the OA community a bad name. The problem isn't OA; the problem is the
unwillingness to deal with OA as something other than
It would be interesting to see how much money Rick's library would save, and
compare this with how much they could save by cancelling a single big deal with
a high-cost publisher.
Sadly, canceling our big deal would end up saving us nothing, because we would
then have to subscribe to the
Heather
I agree with you and endorse your comments. However, there is a caveat: some
questions addressed in open access are indeed scientific, and not social
scientific. I think of measuring adoption rates, deposit delays,
bibliometrics, etc from analyses of public data on the Internet or
At a severe risk of offending Stevan, I write to say that my University has
practised an almost-OA policy for at least 15 years that falls into neither
the Green nor Gold category. (BTW did you know that these are the two
Australian sporting colours?)
We subscribe to the online journals our
34 matches
Mail list logo
