On 2013-06-17, at 9:34 AM, Tim Brody <[email protected]> wrote: > RCUK guidance [in] section3.14 of: > http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/documents/documents/RCUKOpenAccessPolicy.pdf > > Is all about monitoring for gold *and green* (including embargoes)? > > "measure the impact of Open Access across the landscape including use of > both immediate publishing (‘Gold’) and the use of repositories(‘Green’), > and" > > "For articles which are not made immediately open access ... a statement > of the length of the embargo period [will be required]" > > I spent last Friday at a workshop of UK EPrints users that was all about > how we're going to report open access compliance to RCUK.
Well it would be splendid if RCUK monitored Green as it monitors Gold! What I meant was monitoring Green *compliance* (i.e., making sure the papers are deposited), just as the money spent on Gold is being monitored. I don't think a solemn statement of the intention to deposit some day -- especially since RCUK have announced that they will not be enforcing embargo lengths for the indeterminate nonce -- is a compliance mechanism. The remedy will come from HEFCE, if their proposed immediate-deposit mandate is adopted, for eligibility for REF: It is a monitoring mechanism that ensures date-stamped immediate-deposit that is needed. Let us hope that is the compliance mechanism RCUK, in collaboration with the funded institutions, will adopt. SH
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
