Stevan may well be right that the repository of the U of Liege (ORBi) contains 3,620 chemistry papers. But apart from posters, most deposits of articles published in peer-reviewed journals, and even theses, are marked "restricted access" and not accessible to me, and 'libre' access seems completely out of scope. So if this is the best example of a successful OA repository, Peter Murray-Rust can be forgiven for getting the impression that compliance is essentially zero, in terms of Open Access.
Jan Velterop On 13 Jul 2012, at 00:11, Stevan Harnad wrote: > 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
