Let us get back to basics instead of bickering among ourselves. How about trying to organize a high-level meeting of administrators and see what agreement could be achieved to move forward as a group and not through individual moves that keep on differing a little from each other.
We need a group definition and implementation of some form of mandate with teeth. Obviously, Bernard Rentier and the rector from Minho could give their viewpoint on this issue in support of such a move. Obviously, Stuart Shieber and others who have managed faculty self-mandating should also be present. Anyone listening? Anyone willing to cooperate on this? Jean-Claude Guédon Le jeudi 12 juillet 2012 à 18:11 -0400, Stevan Harnad a écrit : > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm...@cam.ac.uk> > wrote: > > > > *** The faculty ignore the mandates. > > This is the reality - Wellcome, who have the sanction of > withholding grants and put huge efforts into promoting, still > only get 55% compliance. > > You have spent > 10 years trying to get effective mandates and > they are hardly working. The compliance in chemistry is 0%. > > ZERO. > > > > Really? You'll have to tell that to your colleagues at, for example, > U. Liege: There seem to be 3,620 chemistry papers deposited there: > > > http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/handle/2268/151 > > > And that's the optimal ID/OA mandate (Liege model) that I recommended. > > > Wellcome could raise their compliance rate to 100% if they were > willing to listen to advice. (Admirably [indeed pioneeringly] early in > adopting an OA mandate, they have nevertheless since been deaf to > advice for years, insisting on institution-external deposit, allowing > publisher deposit, and wasting scarce research money on paying for > Gold OA instead of shoring up their Green OA mandate.) > > > Other funders are listening, however, and integrating their mandates > with institutional mandates, to make them mutually reinforcing: > > > Integrating Institutional and Funder Open Access Mandates: Belgian > Model > http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/864-.html > > > How to Maximize Compliance With Funder OA Mandates: Potentiate > Institutional Mandates > http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/891-.html > > There is no way in my or your liftetime that senior chemists > will self-archive. And that goes for many other disciplines. > What are the VCs going to do? Sack them ? they bring in grant > money? > > > > No: draw their attention to the financial benefits, as Alma Swan & > John Houghton have been doing, for Green and Gold OA: > http://ie-repository.jisc.ac.uk/610/2/Modelling_Gold_Open_Access_for_institutions_-_final_draft3.pdf > > > Yes - and probably << 5% of VCs care about it. > > > You are right that the mandate percentage is still far too small (and > the effective mandate percentage is still smaller). But the benefits > are large, and the costs are next to nothing: just effective > policy-making and implementation. > > My argument - or fairy story - is that nothing will happen if > we continue as we are. We have to get much tougher. And > university mandates are seen as next to useless - universities > can't police them and it alienates the faculty. > > > The attraction of the fairy story is that it's vastly simpler > and quicker to carry out. It even builds on the apathy of the > faculty - the less they care, the easier it is. > > I am not against green OA - I am arguing that the OA community > should unite and take decisive action. > > > I'm for reality rather than fairy tales. And reaching for the > reachable, now, rather than fulminating about the unreachable > (especially when reaching for the reachable, now, is eventually likely > to bring more of the unreachable within reach). > > > Stevan Harnad > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
