RE: Money for OA; was, RE: fascinating question

["David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>]

I do not know why Sally said OA, as her comment is equally true for the
conventional system. Even the possibility of eliminating the need for
increases by greater efficiency is true for both systems.

As Sally notices, OA might have an influence on the flow of papers were
reduced.  In a paid-on-behalf-of =the-author OA Journal mode, authors (or
their funders or whoever subsidizes them) may see the obvious economic
advantages of not publishing multiple small papers on the same subject.

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University
dgoodman@liu.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Sally Morris (ALPSP)
Sent: Thu 12/30/2004 10:13 PM
To: Liblicense
Subject: Re: Money for OA; was, RE: fascinating question
 
David is right - the total amount of money required under an OA model
would, indeed, continue to increase with the steady growth in the number
of papers (assuming OA made no difference to the flow of papers, then we
might expect the increase to continue at around 3% per annum overall).

Sally Morris, Chief Executive
Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
E-mail:  chief-exec@alpsp.org