OA benefits associations & is easy too

[heatherm@eln.bc.ca]

The following combines responses to Joe Esposito's theme that OA will hurt
publishers, and Peter Banks' assertion that the NIH policy adds work for
researchers.

Open Access and the Traditional Publisher

The most traditional publishers are the ones that form part of scholarly
or professional associations.  Each such organization is set up for a
reason, and has a mission.  Publishing, in this context, is one of the
activities designed to fulfill the mission of the organization.  When a
new manner of publishing appears which greatly facilitates the
organization's mission - as open access does - then changing the manner of
publication facilitates the accomplishment of the organization's misson.

As one example, let's look at the American Association of Cancer Research
(AACR).  The banner at the top of their website does not say anything
about private-sector publishing.  It says, rather, "Saving Lives Through
Research".  Their mission statement talks about accelerating research.
Open Access is completely consistent with their mission.  For details on
why I think the AACR needs to brush the dust off their mission statement
and rethink their stance on open access, see my post, "In Lieu of Flowers:
An Open Letter to the American Association of Cancer Research"", in the
SPARC Open Access Forum, at:
https://mx2.arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/Message/2117.html

On the NIH policy, my suggestion is that the complexity and extra work
arises for researchers because of publisher policies, not the NIH's Public
Access Policy. A researcher may be asked to add a warning, may be required
(by the publisher, not NIH) to impose a delay, the publisher may want to
post to their own web site, not NIH's, etc., etc.

Here is a simple solution:  require, not request, that all NIH researchers
deposit their work, immediately on completion of the research and
peer-review process, in PubMedCentral. It should be possible to automate
this process, for greatest simplicity for author and NIH alike.  Rather
than flexibility to accomodate publisher worries, the NIH should focus on
developing simple, clear policies and procedures, for the results of
research it funds.

a personal view by,

Heather G. Morrison