** Cross-Posted **

*Ensuring Open Access for Publicly Funded Research*
British Medical Journal 2012

"What matters first is to use the tools we have to drive open access for
the benefit of researchers and taxpayers…. To do that on a global scale,
every research funding agency, public or private, and every university,
should require green open access for new peer reviewed research articles by
their grantees and faculty. Institutions should take that step before
adding new incentives or new funding for gold. Because green and gold have
complementary advantages, we eventually want both. But that means using the
strengths of green, not just the strengths of gold, and the major strengths
of green lie in providing a fast and inexpensive transition to free online
access. To fund the transition to gold without first harnessing the power
of green incurs premature expense, leaves the transition incomplete, and
puts the interests of publishers ahead of the interests of research…."

*Going for Gold? **The costs and benefits of Gold Open Access for UK
research institutions*
Report to the UK Open Access Implementation Group

"[For UK universities] during a transition period when subscriptions are
maintained, the cost of adopting Green OA is much lower than the cost of
Gold OA - with Green OA self-archiving costing institutions around
one-fifth the amount that Gold OA might cost, and as little as one-tenth as
much for the most research intensive university sampled. In a transition
period, providing OA through the Green route would have substantial
economic benefits for universities, unless additional funds were released
for Gold OA, beyond those already available through the Research Councils
and the Wellcome Trust…"
GOAL mailing list

Reply via email to