Previous (more recent) messageNext (less recent) messagePrevious (more recent) in topicNext (less recent) in topicPrevious (more recent) by same authorNext (less recent) by same authorPrevious page (2007)Back to main AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM pageJoin or leave AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:51:36 -0000
Reply-To:     American Scientist Open Access Forum
              <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM@LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sender:       American Scientist Open Access Forum
              <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM@LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
From:         "Jeffery, KG (Keith)" <K.G.Jeffery@RL.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: Inaccessible Research Publications Versus Unpublished Research
In-Reply-To:  A<Pine.LNX.4.44.0703202139320.2421-100000@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

All -

Of course I agree with Stevan that this topic is not direcly relevant to the OA debate.

However, increasingly research funding depends on research outputs leading to wealth creation and improvement in the quality of life and so there is a strong case for partners in EU research projects (espeially the acedemics) to make their research output publications (patents and products are different things) available OA.

Of course, I would also add that when the objects in an OA repository are cross linked with a CRIS (current research information system) then the evaluation of research output is more effective and efficient and benefits everyone. For details of CRIS see www.eurocris.org

Keith

Sue Avenell PA to Professor Keith Jeffery Director IT and International Strategy CCLRC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Chilton Didcot Oxon OX11 0QX

Tel: +44 (0)1235 445634 Fax: +44 (0)1235 445147

e-mail: rlitdsec@rl.ac.uk

-----Original Message----- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM@LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad Sent: Wednesday 21 March 2007 10:36 To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM@LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG Subject: Inaccessible Research Publications Versus Unpublished Research

On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Andrew A. Adams wrote:

> I think I can help clarify some of these discussions about EU research

> (Principally Framework Programme funded) and OA mandates. > > It is indeed the case that most commercial (as opposed to HE institute

> or non-profit research institute who are the other major players, in > my experience, in EU projects) are reluctant to commit to > dissemination of the results of the research of the project.

This is regrettable (and deserves to be remedied) but it is also completely irrelevant to OA, which is about providing free online access to published research for those would-be users who cannot afford paid access to the journal.

Problems with funded research not getting published are problems, to be sure, but they are not OA problems.

> However, the EU insists and in my own > area of research, we seem to be doing quite well in acting as the > dissemination partner on security-research projects where all or > almost all of the other partners are commercial companies. Of course, > Universities have the greatest experience in dissemination activities, so that isn't surprising.

Again: not pertinent to OA. Whatever does get published should be self-archived. For unpublished research, OA is moot. (Not a non-problem: a non-OA problem.)

> However, unless they have been gulled by the publishing industry (and > it may be the case with SOME commercial companies, but only until > well-informed OA advocates can make the obvious case to them). > Peer-reviewed journal articles are already revealing some of the > results of the EU-funded research. As has been stressed, it is in the > interests of those gaining funding from the EU that the already > published elements of the results of those programs are readily > available to researchers around the world, since this increases their pool of possible non-profit partners in future research.

It is indeed in the interests of research and researchers to make their published research OA, but I still cannot discern why this is being linked in any way with the red herring of unpublished research (although it is of course also in the interests of research and researchers to publish their findings wherever possible).

> As has been pointed > out, other commercial players are rarely inconvenienced by the costs > of access to research, principally because of their much narrower > interests and higher concentration on a small number of fields - it is

> rare to find a company involved in commercialising research developed > in universities that cannot fund the necessary small number of > journals necessary for it, partly because they will tend to have 50 or

> more researchers working in closely related fields. Universities are > broader within subjects and across the spectrum - oh, and typically we

> have other issues to balance our small budgets with.

Yes, R&D industries can afford paid journal access. It is not for that reason that it is in the R&D industries' interest to ally with the OA movement. It is because OA opens access (to published research) from researcher to researcher, and thus generates more research findings for R&D industries to use and apply. It is researchers' institutions (universities, mostly) that cannot afford the paid journal access. (This again has nothing to do with unpublished research.)

> In addition, not all research-intensive companies working in the EU > actually get involved directly with EU-funded research. A lot of them > work as suggested by Miradon, by taking the publicly available work of

> universities and developing it into products, sometimes in direct > collaboration with the academics involved, and sometimes by working > primarily from what the academics publish. These companies can also > afford the publications they need, but as Miradon points out they are > likely easily persuadable that their growth potential is based on the output of university researchers.

That is the same point I just made above, and it again has nothing at all to do with unpublished research.

> Better-informed university researchers will produce more useful things

> for them, and we have a lot of evidence of the improvements that will > be wrought by much greater OA of research output.

Hear hear! This is why there a strategic alliance indeed needs to be forged between the research community and the R&D industry in lobbying for OA.

(But this again has nothing to do with unpublished research. Or rather, OA has nothing to do with getting unpublished research published. The more research that gets published, the better, but that is not the burden of OA. The problem of research that is inaccessible because it is unaffordable and the problem of research that is inaccessible because it is unpublished should not be conflated. They are completely different problems.)

Stevan Harnad


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM page


Powered by LISTSERV(R) CataList - online list search Back to the LISTSERV home page at LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG.