Study on the economic and technical evolution of the scientific ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

In medicine, it is crucial that only fully validated articles be disseminated, and consequently only post-prints are to be archived. PubMed Central (PMC), the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) digital archive of life sciences journal literature, accepts only published articles, and even directly encourages publishers to deposit all their journals contents. Means of dissemination are highly varied across disciplines, be they monographs, patent applications, journal articles, book chapters or conferences. These differences between disciplines of the researchers’ behaviour in information search and dissemination have been underlined in a recent survey of 780 UK research academics 89 ; they should be acknowledged and taken into account when setting up discipline-based archives and institutional repositories so that they meet the needs and practices of the research community. Quality of archived documents According to their purpose, discipline and origin, archives collect different types of research output that has gone through different levels of quality evaluation (working paper, thesis, conference presentation published article…), or none (pre-print). There is some concern (House of Commons 2004, PALS 2004) that the quality validation status of the documents might not be clear to the users; this uncertainty is emphasised when multiple versions of articles are deposited in an archive, and when searching across different archives. Various solutions are already being investigated to indicate clearly the document status (e.g. the House of Commons’ report recommends a “kite mark” that can be used to denote articles that have been published in a peer–reviewed journal 90 ; JISC is funding the new project “VERSIONS” investigating the issue of versions of Eprints - User Requirements <strong>Study</strong> and Investigation Of the Need for Standards 91 ). Costs OA archives are set up by researchers, libraries or IT departments in universities and research institutions. The costs of setting up and running such archives are usually being borne by the institutions, sometimes with additional government funding for national or regional initiatives. Costs estimations are provided for instance in the UK House of Commons’ report and in PALS (2004). Although installation costs are low, maintenance costs are more difficult to plan, as they will vary with the number of records and the long-term preservation purposes 92 . Some commercial companies already propose their service for outsourcing the installation and maintenance of repositories for institutions and research organisations 93 . However the costs remain in charge of the research institutions and organisations, and rely, ultimately, on public funding. In this respect, more work need to be done on the long-term sustainability of open repositories and on the cost/benefit to their founding organisations 94 . Copyright Published articles are submitted to copyright provision as stated in a contract between the author and the publisher, therefore self-archiving must be specifically authorised by the publisher. In July 2005, the JISC-funded SHERPA website registered 116 publishers’ copyright policies towards self-archiving, covering 8460 journals; 67% of these publishers allow authors to selfarchive post-prints (i.e. final draft post-refereeing), 4% permit archiving of pre-prints only (i.e. pre-refereeing), while 28% do not authorize self-archiving. While publisher policies have become more permissive over time, authors still have to check the publisher’s policy for each article to be self-archived. Many variations appear among permissions regarding the version which may be deposited (the exact usage of the terms pre-print and post-print can vary), the type of archive allowed (self-archiving may be allowed in institutional repositories but not in subject-based archives), the delay before public access can be provided to the archived article. Furthermore, the SHERPA database is covering only a proportion of the 2,000 existing publishers (though major ones) and of the estimated 17,700 scholarly journals, so that the picture is actually more complex and currently far from complete. Quantity Although the number of OA archives and their contents are globally growing, some of them contain only a small number of documents. 62
http://archives.eprints.org/index.php?action=analysis (July 2005) The success of OA archives relies on the authors’ self-archiving of their research papers. As already mentioned in some disciplines pre-print dissemination practices have definitely determined the success of subject-based archives. But the contents of institutional repositories appear to grow more slowly (PALS 2004). Indeed, two recent surveys 95 show that authors are not knowledgeable about institutional repositories or do not know whether their university has one. However it seems that a majority of researchers would be willing to deposit their articles in an open repository if they were required to do so by their employer or funding body 96 . Some research institutions have started to establish author-archiving policies in order for their institutional repositories to reach the necessary critical mass (see Section 7.4) 97 . 7.2.3. COMMENTS ON CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY PUBLISHERS Medium-sized commercial publishers seem most reluctant to authorise self-archiving “possibly due to a conscious effort to retain subscription revenue” 98 . Learned societies that make a surplus from their publishing rely on it to support their scholarly activities (conferences, bursaries, grants, public education and society organisation). They fear that open access to articles in subject-based archives might lead to journal cancellations and threaten their existence and activities. The experience in physics has however shown the contrary: the availability in arXiv of articles published by the Institute of Physics and by the American Physical Society has not brought journal cancellations 99 , but may rather have enhanced the journals visibility. As stressed in the UK House of Commons (2004) report, the academic community values several functions of the traditional journal very highly: peer review, subject-specific groupings of articles, access to research conducted around the world. “All this suggests that, in the 63
Page 1 and 2:
Community Research
Page 3 and 4:
Final Report - January 2006 Commiss
Page 5:
6. VAT ISSUES .....................
Page 8 and 9:
As of 1995, publishers started to a
Page 10 and 11:
(iii) Prices per journal or per art
Page 12 and 13:
of a single business model or the c
Page 14 and 15: RECOMMENDATION A3. ‘EXTENDED QUAL
Page 17 and 18: 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. BACKGROUND OF
Page 19 and 20: Statistical data on European librar
Page 21: Even in the face of terrorism, the
Page 24 and 25: They mean that the market for scien
Page 26 and 27: 2.3. TRENDS SINCE THE MID-1990’S
Page 29 and 30: 3. ENTRY, PRICES, COSTS AND QUALITY
Page 31 and 32: We have selected the domains in the
Page 33 and 34: TABLE 1 GENERAL STATISTICS: PRICES,
Page 35: 3.3. PRICES AND QUALITY: AN ECONOME
Page 38 and 39: These statistics also give an indic
Page 40 and 41: Note also the high market shares of
Page 42 and 43: First, there are large differences
Page 45 and 46: 4. SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING IN THE ELE
Page 47: McCabe shows that libraries buy jou
Page 50 and 51: Clearly, monopoly outcomes only giv
Page 52 and 53: In the case of libraries, this disc
Page 54 and 55: 5.2.1. CONSORTIA As stressed above,
Page 57 and 58: 6. VAT ISSUES The financial burden
Page 59: 6.2. POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS In order to
Page 62 and 63: Just like the previous Section was
Page 66 and 67: immediate term, institutional repos
Page 68 and 69: Public agencies funding such projec
Page 70 and 71: One advantage of a hybrid system ov
Page 72 and 73: In some cases, publishers offered t
Page 74 and 75: esearchers who do not have access t
Page 76 and 77: 83 EC Information Society. i2010: D
Page 78 and 79: in the preceding 12 months (US$ 0.2
Page 80 and 81: Platforms that provide electronic p
Page 82 and 83: Besides these legal provisions, som
Page 84 and 85: “stock” of knowledge, whilst op
Page 86 and 87: Besides advanced search functionali
Page 89 and 90: 10. RECOMMENDATIONS This section pu
Page 91: can be traced back to these mergers
Page 94 and 95: • Smith, A. (1776), An Inquiry in
Page 96 and 97: • Mabe, M. (2004), CAVEAT AUCTOR:
Page 98 and 99: • Swan, A. and S. Brown (2005), O
Page 100 and 101: OAIS OCLC OECD PLoS PMC RCUK RLG SI
Page 103 and 104: Contents Contents 1. COLLECTION OF
Page 105 and 106: • 20/09/2004 Fred Friend, JISC Jo
Page 107 and 108: Procurement for Libraries - UK acad
Page 109 and 110: OTHER ORGANISATIONS/COMPANIES WHICH
Page 112: LEGAL NOTICE: Neither the European
show all

Study on the economic and technical evolution of the scientific ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?