A terrific paper, well argued and cogent. I urge everyone to read it. Joyce Ogburn
Sent from my iPad > On Apr 15, 2020, at 10:53 AM, Kathleen Shearer (via scholcomm Mailing List) > <scholc...@lists.ala.org> wrote: > > > (Apologies for the cross posting) > > Dear all, > Today, my colleagues and I are issuing a “Call for Action!” > > With the publication of this paper, Fostering Bibliodiversity in Scholarly > Communications: A Call for Action, we are calling on the community to make > concerted efforts to develop strong, community-governed infrastructures that > support diversity in scholarly communications (referred to as > bibliodiversity). > > Diversity is an essential characteristic of an optimal scholarly > communications system. Diversity in services and platforms, funding > mechanisms, and evaluation measures will allow the research communications to > accommodate the different workflows, languages, publication outputs, and > research topics that support the needs and epistemic pluralism of different > research communities. In addition, diversity reduces the risk of vendor > lock-in, which inevitably leads to monopoly, monoculture, and high prices. > > We are living through unprecedented times, with a global pandemic sweeping > the world, leading to illness, death, and unparalleled economic upheaval. > Although our concerns about bibliodiversity have been growing for years, the > current crisis has exposed the deficiencies in a system that is increasingly > homogenous and prioritizes profits over the public good. > > Stories abound about the urgent need for access to the research literature, > as illustrated, for example, by this message by Peter Murray-Rust posted to > the GOAL mailing list on March 31, 2020 > > “My colleague, a software developer, working for free on openVirus software, > is spending most of his time working making masks in Cambridge Makespace to > ship to Addenbrooke’s hospital. When he goes to the literature to find > literature on masks, their efficacy and use and construction he finds paywall > after paywall after paywall after paywall ….” > > For those who were not in favour of open access before, this global crisis > should settle the debate once and for all. > > We must move away from a pay-to-read world in which researchers, > practitioners and the public cannot afford to access critical research > materials, or have to wait for embargo periods to lift before they can > develop life saving techniques, methods and vaccines. Access to the research > is simply too important. Yet, pay-to-publish, the open access model being > advanced by many in the commercial sector, is also inappropriate as it places > unacceptable financial barriers on researchers’ abilities to publish. > > It is time to reassess some of the basic assumptions related to scholarly > communications, including competition, prestige, and the role of commercial > entities. The same values that underlie our research and education systems > should also guide research communications. > > To that end, we are calling on researchers, policy makers, funders, service > providers, universities and libraries from around the world to work together > to address the issue of bibliodiversity in scholarly communication. > > The problems we encounter have never been more complex and urgent, nor has > the need for solutions been greater. There is a real danger that new budget > constraints and an increasing proportion of funds directed towards large > commercial entities could lead to greater homogeneity and monopolization, > further hampering the free flow of research needed to address the critical > challenges we face. > > Read the blog post here and full paper here > > > Kathleen Shearer > Executive Director > Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) > www.coar-repositories.org > > >
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
